In the past few weeks, there has been one subject that caught the attention of every media outlet, tweet, and post; Space. It seems as if every tech mogul on the face of the earth has now found a way to leave it. First it was Sir Richard Branson, who flew aboard his Virgin Galactic rocket plane on July 11th, reaching the "edge of space”, approximately 90 km above ground. He was soon followed by Jeff Bezzos, who flew with his New Shepard rocket that took him and 3 other members to just above the "edge”.

The new space race, catapulted by Elon Musk’s SpaceX, has been gaining exponential traction, as more and more influential business figures spend vast amounts of their fortunes to make space travel a commercial experience for the masses. And while space tourism is becoming a real trend among the multi-billionaire crowd, a very important question arises: how will it affect climate change?

Chicken, beef, or GHG emissions?

Reaching space, or more accurately, the space edge, requires various capabilities that these privately held companies have been perfecting for decades. They also require a vast amount of fuels. Blue Origin’s rockets, The Blue Engine 3 (BE-3) launched into space using liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants.

The VSS Unity, on the other hand, used a hybrid propellant comprised of a solid carbon-based fuel, hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB), and nitrous oxide, while the SpaceX Falcon series of reusable rockets will propel using liquid kerosene and liquid oxygen.

Burning these propellants provides the energy needed to launch the rockets into space, while also generating an absurd amount of greenhouse gases and air pollutants. Large quantities of water vapor are also produced in the process, while the nitrogen-based oxidant used also generates nitrogen oxides, compounds that contribute to air pollution closer to Earth. Roughly two-thirds of this propellant exhaust is released into the stratosphere (12 km-50 km) and mesosphere (50 km-85 km), where it can persist for at least two to three years. Basically, no matter which fuel is used, all launches emit a lot of heat that agitates nitrogen in the atmosphere to create disruptive nitrogen oxides.

So what does this all mean in more relatable terms? Well, the emissions of a typical commercial flight to space are roughly equivalent to driving a typical car around the Earth, and more than twice the individual annual carbon budget recommended to meet the objectives of the Paris Climate Accord. It also takes a lot of steel and aluminum to build a rocket. For every ton of steel produced, 1.9 tons of carbon dioxide is emitted. That number increases to 11.5 tons for aluminum. An empty Starship is made of about 200 tons of steel alloy. That doesn’t include the rocket, which weighs an estimated 300 additional tons.

The environmental price is astronomic

For most of us, the only possible comparison point would be that of air travel, which is the only common type of flying humans partake in. Today, there are 80,000 to 130,000 flights per day, and The United Nations’ aviation body forecasted that airplane emissions of carbon dioxide, surpassed 900 million metric tons in 2018, and will triple by 2050. It also contributes to the production of nitrogen oxides in the atmosphere, and when compared to massive, round-the-clock industries like transportation, energy, and agriculture, commercial space travel might not seem like that big of a deal. Yet.

But with hundreds of millions of dollars already pledged to future space travel, rocket launches will no doubt become more common. Virgin Galactic for example, announced it is striving to reach 400 yearly flights. Since research on the field is only now blooming, we are not yet aware of the full consequences of this budding industry.

Let’s take the Virgin Galactic rocket as an example. The flight carried six passengers and reached an altitude of 85.3 kilometers, and from information provided by the company, estimations show that carbon emissions per passenger mile are about 60 times that of a business class flight from London to New York. And that is only one estimation. Others show that CO2 emissions for the four or so tourists on a space flight can reach up to 100 times more than the one to three tonnes of emissions that are generated per passenger on a long-haul airplane flight.

According to Business Wire, the global market for Space Tourism estimated at US$651 Million in 2020, is projected to reach US$1.7 Billion by 2027, growing at a CAGR of 15.2%. And according to multiple papers, it is also set to emit hundreds of millions of tons of GHG emissions. In a world frantically looking for sustainable measures to offset its growing climate crisis, one must think - are a few minutes in zero gravity really worth it?

The writer is an  entrepreneur and investor, leading sustainability-driven companies in Africa and the Middle East