Now we can blame spacecraft for polluting the atmosphere

A group of scientists studying the effects of rocket and satellite reentry vaporization in Earth's atmosphere have found some startling evidence that could point to disastrous environmental effects on the horizon.  The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that around 10 percent of …

[Lurko]

Who'd have thunk it?

Maybe all these commercial mass satellite fleets weren't such a good idea after all. Everytime the subject of space junk comes up, somebody pops up in the comments to prattle on about "safely-deorbiting LEO satellites into the atmosphere where they'll harmlessly burn up".

And that's without worrying about the actual rocket emissions injected directly to all levels of the atmosphere on the way up.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: Who'd have thunk it?

and to think that's not even a rocket science...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who'd have thunk it?

As long as all the risks are socialised, I don't see a problem.

[b0llchit]

Re: Who'd have thunk it?

And that is the problem.

[KarMann]

Re: Who'd have thunk it?

Well, that, and people who don't recognise sarcasm and downvote away.

That was sarcasm, wasn't it? Stoopid Poe's Law.

[Flocke Kroes]

Re: Who'd have thunk it?

I know. It is hard to believe but you actually get people clutching their pearls about rocket emissions injected directly to all levels of the atmosphere on the way up. Given years of optimistic growth this could eventually turn into an utterly insignificant issue. It is as if they decide to be angry first and never bother to check the current state of research.

[Roland6]

Looks like these boffins are going to see their research funding boosted

Good piece of research, leaving the door wide open for further research, if only to build a larger dataset of readings and find out where these particulates disperse to. [Aside: In some respects NASA probably did us a favour in collecting the Ozone data and not analysing it for several decades as the larger dataset presents a more compelling picture than the individual snapshots. ]

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Looks like these boffins are going to see their research funding boosted

Yeah, we;ll need a load more sounding rockets reaching the very edge of space to collect 1000's of samples from all altitudes all over the planet. :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Random thought - tell me ime bonkers (and why)

There should be an international agreement (dificult I know but non the less worth aiming for) that agrees a mechanism for old satalites to move into a cluster with some sort of teathering mechanism. This then allows for the posibibility of either retreaving the cluster and returning this to earth, or using a space refuse collector that slings the cluster at the sun.

Clustering the disused satalites has the benifit of keeping space relativly clear of thier debris, which is a growing problem.

The sooner the collection process starts the better.

[phuzz]

Re: Random thought - tell me ime bonkers (and why)

Ok, you're only slightly bonkers ;)

Having an international agreement on removing defunct satellites is a good idea. Either sending them down into the atmosphere to (mostly) burn up, or punting them up higher into a 'graveyard orbit'.

Clustering old satellites is less of a good idea, as they will bump against each other, and bits of solar panel etc. will break off causing more space junk.

Sending them into the sun is really difficult. It seem like it would be easy, because the sun is very massive, and consequently has a large gravitation attraction. The thing is, the Earth, and everything on or around it is already orbiting the Sun (at over 100,000km/h). To 'drop' something into the sun, first you'd have to burn enough fuel to get it out of the Earth's orbit, but then it would still be going mostly the same speed as the Earth, so it would still orbit the sun, just in a slightly different orbit to the Earth. To get it down to the sun you'd then have to slow it right down from ~100,000km/h to zero*.

* Well, probably you wouldn't need to get the velocity all the way to zero, and you could use some gravity assists, but you'd still need to slow it down a lot.

[Catkin]

Re: Random thought - tell me ime bonkers (and why)

Assuming that treaty were signed, it would probably increase the amount of space debris. The amount of fuel needed for station keeping, even on something that sails almost inside the atmosphere (like Starlink) is insignificant compared to what would be required for the manoeuvres to get satellites clustered together. This would lead to satellites with plenty of life left in them being replaced sooner. The safer bet seems, to me, to be passive return systems for the very low orbits (essentially, deploying a ribbon that increases drag, which automatically deploys even if all contact is lost).

Incidentally, actually getting a satellite into an escape orbit is a massive undertaking for something in LEO. Getting it to hit the Sun is at least another order of energy. On the other hand, lowering one part of the orbit to skim the atmosphere so that it harmlessly re-enters is quite trivial for the very low orbits that are becoming more common as access to space becomes cheaper and antennas become better able to track those fast moving (from the PoV on the ground) satellites.

edit: sorry, the above comment explains the solar re-entry issue better

[hoola]

Re: Random thought - tell me ime bonkers (and why)

Sadly it is unlikely to happen because of the cost.

Everything to do with space focuses on getting the stuff up and not giving a toss about what happens with the leftovers.

Reusing the boosters that were dumped in the sea is a help but the majority of the stuff is just left to expire as it is dragged into the atmosphere.

When Cassini was disposed of by deorbiting into Saturn I raised the same question and was ridiculed.