Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).
See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Scientists estimate that about 48.5 tons (44 tonnes or 44,000 kilograms) of meteoritic material falls on Earth each day. Almost all the material is vaporized in Earth's atmosphere
There's been 44 tons of material swept up by earth each day since time immemorial. Let me know once we're up to 20 tons of sats a day ( about 25 starlink sats ), and then I'll start to worry about the effects.
Unlike meteorites, which are small and only contain trace amounts of aluminum, these wrecked spacecraft are huge and consist entirely of aluminum and other exotic, highly conductive materials.
Meteorites carry plenty of metals, including aluminium and other highly conductive materials. Also, aluminium does not get anywhere near superconductive in space temps, which the author claims happens. That alone should tell you how much credence to give the rest of their claims.
Orbital space is really incredibly empty.
What we have much more to worry about is the magnetic polar reversal which will happen soon. While this is happening the magnetic field is erratic and may even diminish significantly. That will have a huge effect on both sats and life on earth, though we still have the atmosphere to protect us too.
PS: I really wonder what will happen with all the radioactive particles trapped in the van allen belts, I assume they will run amok all over the place then.
This article isn't just about random raw materials entering the atmosphere, it's specifically about the potential dangers of pollution of the magnetosphere and ionosphere with magnetic metal dust. The author claims to be the only one out there studying this but isn't the only one who has expressed such concern. From the conclusion:
“Our technical civilization poses a real danger to itself,” Carl Sagan warned in his 1997 book Billions and Billions: Thoughts on Life and Death at the Brink of the Millennium. The magnetosphere is our first line of defense against an otherwise lethal solar system, and any pollution of it should be intensely studied and monitored. Indeed, if an asteroid the size of a Starlink satellite was headed towards Earth, it would activate planetary defense monitoring. But since it’s a human-made object impacting the atmosphere, we don’t monitor it at all.
Space companies need to stop launching satellites if they can’t provide studies that show that their pollution will not harm the stratosphere and magnetosphere. Until this pollution is studied further, we should all reconsider satellite internet.
The earth sweeps up tons of space dust, including metal dust, on a daily basis. Why is there any reason to think satellites burning up behave any differently?
This was thoroughly torn apart in another thread.
Some of the top results:
“Meteors only contain trace amounts of highly conductive metals” Solter-Hunt said. “Satellites, on the other hand, are basically entirely made of superconductive metals.” 7% of meteorites that strike Earth are either entirely metal or partially metal. Additionally, the metallic ones are usually larger than the stony ones. I’m sure a PHD knows this, so I’m guessing the author of the article didn’t include some context.
The link in that passage says that the newer, bigger Starlink satellites are only 800 kg in total mass. I’m not entirely sure how an 800kg object leaves 1300+ kg of “charged dust” upon re-entry.
“Satellites are mostly made of aluminum and aluminum is a superconductor,” Solter-Hunt said. "Superconductors are used for blocking, distorting or shielding of magnetic fields.
“Though 100 Kelvin is still pretty chilly – that’s about -280 degrees Fahrenheit – this is an enormous increase compared to bulk aluminum metal, which turns superconductive only near 1 Kelvin (-457 degrees Fahrenheit)”
It doesn’t get that cold in LEO or GEO, so I’m not sure why the author of the paper is bringing that up. This paper and its author are looking more suspect by the minute.
Ah, nice, some actually good criticism. I wasn't 100% sold on the claims but it seemed like there's some merit to it, but the "superconductor" stuff really does make the whole thing seem a bit iffy
Wait... I think we are due for a pole reversal.We could blame it on space junk.
Good to know. We’ll get right on it. Just like we did with climate change when scientists noted an increase in carbon dioxide could be contributing to a warmer global temperature 90 years ago.
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
A dead spacecraft the size of a truck ignites with plasma and pulverizes into dust and litter as it rips through the ionosphere and atmosphere.
There are currently nearly 10,000 active satellites and companies are working as fast as possible to get tens of thousands more into orbit – for a projected 1m in the next three to four decades.
Those satellites power hyper-connected internet services and may turn some billionaires into trillionaires – at the cost of shrouding the planet with toxic trash.
Upon investigating just how much dust in the form of satellite and rocket debris the space industry has dumped into the ionosphere during re-entry, I was alarmed to find that it is currently multiple Eiffel Tower’s worth of metallic ash.
Our ozone is mere pennies thick, and soon we will be putting at least an Eiffel Tower’s worth of metallic ash a year directly into the ionosphere.
Low Earth orbit is being promoted as a “destination and economy” for satellites and even low-gravity space hotels (which seem to be perpetually “coming soon” and then canceled).
Saved 82% of original text.