• ekZepp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Well, this was actually fkning concerning. Ofk is not like other Company aren’t playing to launch thousand of satellites too. There should be a serious regulation and some heavy changes in the metal alloy used at very least. I’m sure that Trump already has a plan about it…

      … ofk i’m fking kidding. Vote [everyone else] x president .

      • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        So we’re starting to look at aluminum debris in the upper atmosphere, when are we going to look at carbon fibre debris? Or rocket fuel in the upper atmosphere? We dont know what any of that shit does. Im going to hazard a guess that it does nothing good.

        If you were to light ten thousand Starlink satellites on fire in a bonfire on the ground people would put you in jail. When it happens in the upper atmosphere its called progress.

        • ekZepp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Completely stopping the launch of new satellites will simply not happen. The only realistic response is to face the problem and improve the technology.

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Just like they’re doing with the climate catastrophe.

            Reasoned, sensible change, carried out quickly and paid for by the companies responsible.

      • yogurt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Type of metal doesn’t matter, it’s any particle that leftover CFCs from the 1970s can stick to and make it more likely for them to react and destroy ozone. The ozone hole is over Antarctica and changes size seasonally because high altitude ice clouds do the same thing, smoke from forest fires also does it.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      You can criticise them for that while being glad they are a reliable astronaut transport, unlike Boeing. The world is not black and white.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I am glad of that, but this is what I responded to:

        SpaceX is nailing it. I just hope that the future will remember the terrific work that Gwynne Shotwell and many others did while “someone else” where busy tossing money away.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Aluminum is a major element of the 5200 tons of stardust per year. Sadly found no numbers.

      Elements

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ehhh needs more study. Aluminum oxides in the atmosphere actually provide a cooling effect. That being said, we don’t know much about the health implications yet.

      • Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you read the article the hazard is the Aluminum Oxide could deplete the Ozone layer. So a disruption to a different ecological process rather than the Greenhouse effect.

      • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Right on. The “cooling effect” will hopefully offset all the kerosene and methane they’re injecting into the upper atmosphere and oceans.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          They’re injecting water vapor and carbon dioxide, as well as soot (not kerosene or methane). I don’t mean to imply that it’s not an issue, but that more study is warranted (the article says the same thing).

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Do you know what those clouds are that come out of the engine at cut off and start up are? Not water vapour or carbon dioxide.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              If we’re talking Falcon 9, the ignition is using TEA-TEB, a fairly nasty hypergolic. It burns to water vapor and carbon dioxide, plus some boron oxides.

              Starship doesn’t use a chemical igniter, so yes, there’s probably a small amount of methane that escapes during ignition. Generally though the combustion for Starship is incredibly clean, with something like a 99.5% efficiency.

              • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Theres nothing to ignite unless the pumps are running full speed. The pumps keep running after after the fire goes out. What are those pumps pumping?

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Oh boy, you’d better not look at the cattle industry then.

          Every rocket launch ever done in history doesn’t make even a blip on the graph for human-related carbon emissions.

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I love that “drop in the bucket” justification. In the 1900’s car exhaust was a huge innovation because it did away with the mountains of horse shit produced by carriages.