LEO is not a permanent orbit. There’s atmospheric drag. I believe Starlink satellites deorbit in 5 to 10 years. Oldest ones are already falling back to earth (burning in the atmosphere)
While true, they continuously replenish the ones that fall back to earth. I wouldn’t be surprised if their current launch pace is higher than the amount falling out of orbit. That’s not even mentioning the impact they have on ground-based astronomy.
Did I say anything to argue otherwise? Since you brought it up, internet infrastructure grants should go to fiber PUDs and not a billionaire nazi. Then, there’s no need to have satellites. He’s polluting the skies for profit.
This is a problem as well. As the satellites deorbit they vaporise, leaving aluminium oxide nanoparticles (and other metallic gases, volatiles etc) in the atmosphere, destroying ozone and building up over decades.
So it’s not just the light pollution, or the ruining of ground based astronomy. Or even the dangerous amount of clutter polluting LEO, making spaceflight even more risky. Starlink is bad news for the environment, but it’s to be expected since we’ve seen how carelessly spacex have destroyed the ecosystem in Texas.
Whoa, 200 meters is a close call for sure!
On a related topic, SpaceX is littering the low earth orbit space in a major way. From the link above:
Get off our LEO Elon! <shakes fist in air>
Feel like launching stuff into space by private companies should he illegal/heavily regulated.
It is heavily regulated
LEO is not a permanent orbit. There’s atmospheric drag. I believe Starlink satellites deorbit in 5 to 10 years. Oldest ones are already falling back to earth (burning in the atmosphere)
While true, they continuously replenish the ones that fall back to earth. I wouldn’t be surprised if their current launch pace is higher than the amount falling out of orbit. That’s not even mentioning the impact they have on ground-based astronomy.
Satellites are obviously needed for satellite internet.
deleted by creator
And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?
deleted by creator
The discussion is about satellite orbits.
deleted by creator
Did I say anything to argue otherwise? Since you brought it up, internet infrastructure grants should go to fiber PUDs and not a billionaire nazi. Then, there’s no need to have satellites. He’s polluting the skies for profit.
This is a problem as well. As the satellites deorbit they vaporise, leaving aluminium oxide nanoparticles (and other metallic gases, volatiles etc) in the atmosphere, destroying ozone and building up over decades.
So it’s not just the light pollution, or the ruining of ground based astronomy. Or even the dangerous amount of clutter polluting LEO, making spaceflight even more risky. Starlink is bad news for the environment, but it’s to be expected since we’ve seen how carelessly spacex have destroyed the ecosystem in Texas.
This is what I’ve become. 😄