ABC NEWS: Biodiesel rocket fuel offers advantages

California-based Flometrics said commercial biodiesel fuel delivered nearly the same amount of thrust as conventional RP-1 fuel in test involving a RocketDyne LR-101 engine. The results are promising because biodiesel fuel is denser and less flammable than kerosene, but questions still remain whether it would have a positive impact on greenhouse gases.

Note! Nothing is mentioned or compared about the temperature of heat that the biodiesel would produce versus the temperatures from each of the two current rocket boosters that are 6,400 degrees F. , 12,800 degrees F total. That temperature is what the current liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen fuels emit on every launch. The 50 foot wide by 100 feet long flames from the two booster rockets on the shuttle are the reason why the ozone layer is being demolished.
Reduce the amount of launchings from NASA and the other 45 Space Agencies and that would surely have a positive effect on greenhouse gases being reduced significantly.

Opinion: Time for NASA to focus on environment.

With 21 satellites observing the Earth and the world's largest civilian supercomputer, scientists say NASA could be a major player in the fight to control climate change. Writing in Scientific American, two of those scientists outline nine steps NASA could take, including partnering with "green tech" companies; launching inexpensive spacecraft to monitor Earth's climate; and spearheading efforts to make civil avation carbon-neutral.

Do these scientists actually believe NASA is going to monitor the Earth's climate when NASA and 45 other space agencies are the culprits that are responsible for climate change, ozone depletion and global warming? I don't think so. Also mentioned today in the St Petersburg Times newspaper an article on page 4A read: "Study: Bottom of globe warming too". Ozone depletion is at a record size of 16 million square miles. Does anyone believe NASA is going to conduct a study to expose themselves and the other space agencies to their destructive measures? Also why did NASA remove the past monthly launches from their website, 2009 in spaceflight-Wikipedia the free encyclopedia? Is it probable that my book contained the references between launch dates,
locations and climatic weather disasters? I personally think that was the reason the past monthly launch dates were removed, so no one could track them and correlate any current or past weather disasters!

For Future Manned space flights, every option has pros, con.

Current plans to replace the space shuttle with Ares 1 rocket provide both safety and flexibility, though it would leave U. S. astronauts dependent on Russian rockets for five years, according to an analysis by Todd Halvorson, a 20-year veteran space journalist. Halvorson also examines the pros and cons of three other options, including extending the shuttle mission to 2015 and using military rockets to launch astronauts into space. This article came from Florida Today (Melbourne)

Hopefully NASA will put the safety of the astronauts first as well as emergency evacuation plans, if they should decide to extend the shuttles missions another six years or decide to use other military rockets to launch astronats into space. Did NASA not learn anything from the Challenger and Columbia tragedies?

NASA puts price tag on extending shuttle's life.

An Associated Press article stated that if the incoming administration wants to keep the shuttle flying beyond 2010, the price tag will be about $3 billion a year, NASA Administator Michael Griffin said Thursday. Scheduling 10 additional missions, as some have suggested, would come with another cost as well: "We would have a one-in-eight chance of losing the crew in one of the 10 flights," Griffin said.
The 5 year total cost would be $15 billion along with the risk of losing another shuttle as well as the 7 astronauts. Michael Griffin is the same NASA Administrator that submitted his resignation that becomes effective next Friday, January 16. How can this individual even contemplate extending the life of the 3 shuttles as well as the safety of the astronauts when he has no clue as to the circumstances that will be involved when he departs? As usual NASA and everyone involved with their future space flights need to be retrained. Hopefully president-elect Barack Obama seems to be leaning toward selecting Charles Kennel as the new NASA chief. Kennel is a distinguished scientest. I believe we also need a distinguished aerospace engineer to work along side Michael Kennel in order to provide safety measures to the crew and its craft.

Top 10 space stories to watch for in 2009.

With president-elect Barack Obama poised to take the oath of office in just two weeks, the future of NASA's human spaceflight program will soon take shape. Obama has pledged to reduce the five-year gap between the retirement of the current shuttle program and the first launch of the shuttle's replacement. "The exact course the new president charts will be the biggest space news story in 2009," says Florida Today (Newspaper in Melbourne, FL), which goes on to list nine more stories to watch in the upcoming year.
Let us hope that that the new President-elect will investigate all areas and aspects of NASA's programs. Number one should be the safety of the astronauts and the spacecrafts that they pilot. Number two should be a new fuel that will not emit the emence heat and flames that continue to destroy the ozone layer. Number three should be a consolidation of all forty six space programs throughout the world to mandate an order to reduce the number of space flights. Number four should be that the forty six countries deplore more satellites on fewer launches so as not to enlarge the areas of depleated ozone already damaged and possibly subside the current size of the ozone layer.

Details of Space Shuttle Columbia crash exposed.

Columbia crew had no way to survive. This was the headline in Wednesday's, December 31, 2008 St. Petersburg Times newspaper. The 400 page report was issued by NASA after almost 5 years after the disaster that occured on February 1, 2003. In short, Columbia's astronauts were quickly doomed and most likely never knew what was happening. The report stated that if certain safety measures had been taken, the crew could haved lived longer, but ultimately the accident was not survivable, the report concludes.

Why weren't the astronauts instructed to take a space walk around the shuttle when it was docked to the International Sace Station and look for any type of damage to the heat absorbing tiles? Wouldn't that safey measure have been more important than the one stated above? When will NASA put the astronauts safety first, ahead of all the other procedures that they conduct? How many more accidents and lives must happen before NASA realizes what Dr Jonathan Clark, a former NASA flight surgeon stated; "I praise NASA's leadership for the report, even though it says, in some ways, you guys didn't do a great job." Incidently, astronaut Laurel Clark, one of the 7 astronats that lost their lives on the Columbia disaster was Dr. Jonathan Clark's wife.

$3.5 billion in NASA contracts sparks private industry.

In a Florida Today article; NASA has awarded $3.5 billion in cargo contracts to two companies in a continued effort to encourage development of a private-sector commercial space industry cabable of providing the agency rockets that can carry passengers to the International Space Station and, eventually, to the moon. Space Exploration Technologies Corp. of Hawthorne, Calif., and Orbital Sciences Corp. of Dulles, Va., will provde a total of 20 flights to the space station.

Wonderful! NASA has just wasted another $3.5 billion of our taxpayers money along with encouraging two more space agencies to continue expanding the ozone hole beyond the cureent 16 million square miles. When will NASA and the other 45 countries space agencies realize that they are aware of ozone depleation, disastrous climatic weather and global warming? They know what they are doing to this planet, but their greed for money is more important than the conservation of this planet. GREED on their part will be the devastation of this planet if we the people don't put a stop to what they are doing. Comment, and I will tell you what we can do to stop them.