Discussion
Any journalists want to write an article about all the environmental costs of the more than 10,000 Starlinks that are now in orbit? All I'm seeing are breathless articles mindlessly worshiping That Awful Billionaire for crossing the 10,000 satellite mark.
Every single one of those will come down in an uncontrolled reentry. That's a lot of metal in the atmosphere, and a lot of dice-rolling to see if any more pieces will make it to the ground.
SpaceX is truly awful.
@sundogplanets @distinctdipole Not to mention the way it screws up astronomical observations. Companies run by philistines rarely improve the human condition without cost.
now add to the radio noise pollution problem too.
@sundogplanets
Once SpaceX causes Kessler Syndrome, making LEO unusable, that will put an end to their Starlink business model for a while.
The good thing about Starlink satellites is that they don't stay up there long.
The bad thing about Starlink satellites is that they don't stay up there long.
@sundogplanets It is not the metal elements that pose a problem when entering the atmosphere, but the lenses and laser elements that were supposed to provide communication via optical path are resistant to the temperatures generated during atmospheric entry.
@sikorski Do you have a reference for that? Would be extremely useful if you can share!
@sundogplanets would that also measurably reduce the efficiency of solar panels?
@sundogplanets been wondering about Kessler with regard to low orbit objects. It seems to me that any collision is likely to induce elliptical orbits for the debris. Would this cause substantially increased drag as junk dips into the atmosphere - thus speeding the process of decluttering?
@sundogplanets not only that. It starts with the launch of the rocket:
Lots kerosine is burnt.
The second stage burns up in the atmosphere.
All that burns up in the atmosphere stays there for quite some time and influences the atmosphere.
@sundogplanets like throwing a boxful of knives and axes high in the air and hoping they don't hit you on the way back down. With the added joy of the pollutants liberated when many of them burn up on re-entry
@sundogplanets I'd do it in a heartbeat but I'm a freelance writer and would have to pitch it to newspapers. Still, I'll consider it. I've seen the night sky up in the mountains 15 years ago and quite recently and it is such an awful contrast already.
@sundogplanets When satellites reenter, they don't cleanly vaporize, they ablate, releasing aluminum oxide and other metallic compounds into the upper stratosphere. Research has found measurable concentrations of satellite-derived metals at altitudes where they didn't previously exist. The long-term effects on stratospheric chemistry, ozone dynamics, and potentially cloud formation are not well understood and critically, they're not being studied at anything close to the pace of deployment.
Not to forget the pollution! Burning up in the athmosphere does not mean disappearing.
@sundogplanets Try https://theconversation.com/ca. "The Conversation is an independent source of news and views, from the academic and research community, delivered direct to the public." URegina is a member. They have science writers work with academics to write accessible science communication pieces.
@sundogplanets
Hey @rohan_p is this something your magazine might run?
@sundogplanets thank you for keeping saying so. I ahve to make a concerted effort every morning to remember I'm not the crazy one.
@sundogplanets would you be willing to act as an interview partner? I think it's a very interesting subject
@sundogplanets Sure. Ill write it. Headline will be:
"Starlink: From Space to Your Face"
@sundogplanets I do wonder how much research/consideration typically goes into the impact of orbital structures burning up in the atmosphere when a company or organization is designing something to be put into orbit.
@sundogplanets What are you talking about?!😁 During bombings in ground wars, there are far more pieces of metal!
@sundogplanets maybe @georgemonbiot.bsky.social is interested (Topic Environment and starlink pollution)?
I assume you saw the article that said the US government had listened to the richest man on earth when he said cleaning up his space junk (in this case, rocket stages abandoned in decaying orbits) was too expensive and he couldn't afford it, and now the proposed regulations to make billionaires clean up after themselves has gone back to the drawing board?
@sundogplanets I am worried that at some point it could create a Kessler Effect
I remember those passing scenes in Wall-E with Earth literally covered in space trash. Little me found the surface wasteland plausible but space junk—couldn't be that bad, right?
@sundogplanets SpaceX - or rather #Starlink - is my lifeline, and the lifeline of many thousands of others living in a rural location with no proper broadband service. #Spacex may be "awful" but it has improved my quality of life immeasurably.
@drewtowler Absolutely understand that. SpaceX could provide internet access without destroying the night sky and the atmosphere if they would focus on providing service with fewer satellites that have longer operating lifetimes. That is the engineering challenge they need to rise to.
@sundogplanets Not going to argue - but that's out of my control.
@sundogplanets donald is the son of perdition donald is the anti-christ the beast... elon is the devil incarnate, lucifer walks among Humanity. maga is a mark of the beast. Wake Up Humanity... WAKE UP!!!
elon is the devil incarnate, he Is lucifer.
@sundogplanets I nominate @clive ! ✨
@sundogplanets I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately it’s really sad
@sundogplanets Apparently this is why the Ozone hole is back. And the buggers are only just getting started.
@sundogplanets It's not even that fast of service.
@sundogplanets
I always ask myself: Why so many?
@Becovich That is a question no one has ever made SpaceX answer.
What percentage of those articles were generated by "AI"? 50%? 80?
@sundogplanets but they increased the price for aviation customers from $65/month to $250 and decreased the allowance to 20GB. That’s over 3.5x shareholder value! And if you want to go >300MPH, it’s $1,000. That’s >15x! Line go up means they should be allowed to dump as much metal into the atmosphere, no matter what unknown consequences might occur.
@sundogplanets There's also the ozone layer issue. Holes in it used to be a bad thing. I guess not anynore. Musk is destroying the planet and no one stops him.
His really big spaceship is a flaming mess too. Flawed system concept. Years behind schedule. Unlikely to every work.
@mastodonmigration @sundogplanets He just needs a good supplier of Rearden Metal and everything will be fine
( /s in case you don't remember minutia of Atlas Shrugged )
@sundogplanets Recommend adding #journalism #media #space #science for reach on groups
@sundogplanets well soon we will inject some burned satellites into the atmosphere on a daily basis. This will scale up material like aluminium dioxide in the upper atmosphere by factors like a million?
Well anyway. It will be the biggest environmental experiment since burning fossil fuels for 400+ years.
Wish your kids good luck, they will need it!
@sundogplanets Yes, I would love to. It's on my to do list.
@Tantvnews I've co-authored two in the last few weeks about satellite pollution in general that can be reprinted CC-BY, and I am writing another one. I don't have time to write one specifically for you, sorry.
This is a bonfire demo instance for testing purposes. This is not a production site. There are no backups for now. Data, including profiles may be wiped without notice. No service or other guarantees expressed or implied.
