Plasma Tunnels Reveal How Dying Satellites Fall to Earth(spectrum.ieee.org)
37 pointsby marc__14 hours ago5 comments
  • marcosdumaya few seconds ago
    So... We still don't know if aluminum on satellites can be a problem or not.

    Yes, it's nice that failed experiments get reported. But why another press article claiming the problem that this one research has been failing for a decade to show that exists?

  • fastball4 minutes ago
    [delayed]
  • bolangi2 hours ago
    Satellites have many chlorinated and florinated chemicals, so being vaporized means introducing large volumes to the upper atmosphere where they can catalyze the destruction of ozone molecules. I'd be interested how the volume compares to other sources of atmospheric halogens. They could hardly match the quantity of refrigerant gases released, but being deposited directly in the upper atmosphere may make them more potent.
    • TeMPOraL2 hours ago
      Good catch. I doubt it's even a rounding error right now, but with the space market undergoing a rather rapid growth (good thing!), it's a good time to start tracking this and hopefully address before it turns into a problem.
      • Loughla2 hours ago
        >hopefully address before it turns into a problem.

        Ron Howard's voice "They didn't."

        But in all seriousness, there will be zero stomach for limiting launches for the ozone layer. I'm calling it now. Group 1 won't believe it's a problem. Group 2 will say it's just lefty elitists trying to ruin the economy. Group 3 will say there's no such thing as satellites.

        Check back in 40 years. I bet I'm right.

        • cwmoore33 minutes ago
          Well… did they or didn’t they?
        • bozo16an hour ago
          New Zealand will be back to the top of the skin cancer list. We'll be getting the 10 minute exposure sunburns in winter too!
  • piskov2 hours ago
    What would be the number of reentries in the near future?

    5-20 satellites daily?

    At first glance, it seems negligible.

    On the hand, given the intentional nature if disposable low-orbit, 20 more than ideal.

    • EA-3167an hour ago
      SpaceX wants their Starlink constellation to crack 100,000, and there are plenty of competitors lining up who will surely want to have "the biggest and the best" at some point. None of those sats stay up terribly long, so you'll have a constant cadence of launches and reentries, both of which are a risk for their impact on the climate system, atmosphere, etc.

      A largely unstudied risk, and once which will almost certainly be strenuously ignored for as long as possible.

      • teklaan hour ago
        100 tons of whatever enter the Earth every single day. Are you freaking out about that?
        • konmok7 minutes ago
          Those are rocks, which are not made from the same stuff as satellites. (Also, the article says it's 44 tons, and other sources suggest around 50 at most.) In any case, I don't think anyone here is "freaking out", I just think this issue merits investigation.
  • sscaryterry2 hours ago
    Waste of fucking money. The X that fall per year is nothing compared to the millions of tons of other pollution.
    • konmok16 minutes ago
      This kind of thinking is exactly what led to the ozone hole in the first place. Let's actually investigate our assumptions this time.