this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
570 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

59429 readers
2671 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Starlink will never be orbital trash in any meaningful way. If everything failed today, they'd all deorbit within 5 years. It's only in higher orbits where shit gets stuck for decades or hundreds of years.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Starlink will never be orbital trash in any meaningful way

You're right. They'll be atmospheric pollution. That's what "burn up on reentry" means.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Well in that case, 100% of things that we've launched into space are either

1: Space trash

2: Atmospheric Trash

3: Ocean Trash

Except for the 1st stages of F9 and it's fairings, and one or two first stages of some other small start ups.

Edit: sorry and the shuttle. In retrospect with the amount of refurbishment it required it wasn't really "reusable" per say, but it did avoid being ocean trash.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 4 points 4 months ago

That does seem to be the point this thread is making: Going to space is really bad for Earth's environment. SpaceX and starlink are just accelerating that.