Most of them, there was a link in the article about one starlink satellite that didn’t completely burn up. But their biggest concern atm is what effect it will have on the atmosphere. From the article.
“What that means, though, is that all the mass of the satellites — the solar panels, plastic, metal, batteries — it’s all getting melted and deposited in the upper atmosphere. So, that’s not a good thing”
falling from the the sky and burning is a good thing
Jury is still out on this one.
“We’re really changing the composition of the stratosphere into a state that we’ve never seen before,” said John Dykema, an applied physicist at SEAS, who warns that scientists today poorly understand many of the impacts.
communication satellites are low earth orbit to reduce latency, that means +25000 km/h velocity to sustain orbit, and would also have a very shallow entry angle, that combination means total vaporization
The vaporized materials themselves are a problem. When we’re building these mega-constellations, we’re putting some real mass up there. We’re introducing all sorts of exotic materials into the stratosphere that would not naturally occur there at those concentrations. And remember, this is a very sensitive environment. The actual volume of CFCs we introduced into the stratosphere wasn’t that large. The volume of all our AC refrigerant and hair spray cans was nothing compared to the atmosphere. We may actually not be that far from the sheer volume of satellites affecting the ozone layer as they decay.
The stratosphere is an environment like any other. It has a finite ability to absorb and process any form of pollution without noticeable and significant effects. I’m not qualified enough to estimate the number of satellite reentries to damage the ozone layer or to have other deleterious effects, but at least from that study featured in that video, we may not be far off. The story of civilization has been repeatedly realizing that what we once considered infinite dumping grounds were anything but. And the stratosphere is no different.
We would be pretty lucky if it impacted something like the ozone layer in a noticeable way as that’s something that can be seen and could be acted on and repaired as we’ve done before.
It’s the effects that we don’t know that are probably going to be the bigger problem.
i mean, with that many satellites what are the odds (i have the smoked 2 joints stupids) something fucks up and it doesn’t come in at that shallow entry angle?
falling from the the sky and burning is a good thing, bigger concern is them staying up there for too long
Falling from the sky a good thing?
Ok well hope neither you nor a loved one is standing under it then. Cuz you sure aren’t hoping so. Go learn some humanity in the meanwhile.
You do know that it’ll just burn up in the atmosphere?
Most of them, there was a link in the article about one starlink satellite that didn’t completely burn up. But their biggest concern atm is what effect it will have on the atmosphere. From the article.
“What that means, though, is that all the mass of the satellites — the solar panels, plastic, metal, batteries — it’s all getting melted and deposited in the upper atmosphere. So, that’s not a good thing”
Jury is still out on this one.
https://salatainstitute.harvard.edu/burning-satellites-in-the-stratosphere-emerging-questions-for-climate/
falling from the sky onto things is a problem tho
communication satellites are low earth orbit to reduce latency, that means +25000 km/h velocity to sustain orbit, and would also have a very shallow entry angle, that combination means total vaporization
Low earth orbit is most survivable reentry trajectory… coming in at a higher angle significantly increases the heating.
The vaporized materials themselves are a problem. When we’re building these mega-constellations, we’re putting some real mass up there. We’re introducing all sorts of exotic materials into the stratosphere that would not naturally occur there at those concentrations. And remember, this is a very sensitive environment. The actual volume of CFCs we introduced into the stratosphere wasn’t that large. The volume of all our AC refrigerant and hair spray cans was nothing compared to the atmosphere. We may actually not be that far from the sheer volume of satellites affecting the ozone layer as they decay.
The stratosphere is an environment like any other. It has a finite ability to absorb and process any form of pollution without noticeable and significant effects. I’m not qualified enough to estimate the number of satellite reentries to damage the ozone layer or to have other deleterious effects, but at least from that study featured in that video, we may not be far off. The story of civilization has been repeatedly realizing that what we once considered infinite dumping grounds were anything but. And the stratosphere is no different.
We would be pretty lucky if it impacted something like the ozone layer in a noticeable way as that’s something that can be seen and could be acted on and repaired as we’ve done before.
It’s the effects that we don’t know that are probably going to be the bigger problem.
[Go outside at dawn, breathe deep]
Ah, nothing like the taste of fresh satellite in the morning!
Nothing quite like that aluminum oxide! So refreshing!
What does that have to do with orbits and reentry angle?
That’s a good question!
i mean, with that many satellites what are the odds (i have the smoked 2 joints stupids) something fucks up and it doesn’t come in at that shallow entry angle?
Due to the physics and orbital mechanics, near impossible thankfully