It is absolutely trash. Millions of customers at the expense of billions of people. More and more space trash comes down every year, under the blessing of international space treaties and not under much scrutiny. What it will do to our atmosphere is not studied yet and Starlink gives zero fucks.
Do the study then. We typically do not prevent people from high speed internet access on merely the suspicion of problems.
There’s some work already on this topic, mostly unclear results so far. Right now we’re seeing roughly a 2% increase in stratospheric aerosols due to anthropogenic origin. One study notes that the increased aluminum oxides in the stratosphere actually protect against global warming, while the biological effects are still being studied, possibly affecting mental health.
Obviously we need to be cautious with our planet, so I expect far more studies to clarify this effect.
Increased aluminum oxides are a very short term effect and mask the long lasting effects of CO2 and CH4 so we need to stop spouting that industry nonsense.
It’s not a short term effect if the atmospheric change becomes permanent due to increased reentry mass, obviously. The “short term” argument refers to geoengineering by direct injection. I’m not suggesting we do this however - like I said there are indicators that the extra aerosols might be affecting mental health. Besides, like you said, direct carbon reduction is a much more sustainable path to fixing climate change.
Yeah? So give up on this frivolous stuff and do… what exactly? Spend 10 years redirecting everyone’s efforts into building mausoleums and tombs so we can all hop in in 2034? What are the NASA guys, or the European space agency people, meant to do in relation to the climate crisis and looming extinction event? Rocket science isn’t biology, isn’t climate science (though launched satellites and the like do help with researching it), isn’t geopolitics.
You give me the same vibe as gamers whining about a game’s art team making assets for cosmetic dlcs instead of adding story content or fixing game bugs or something, when they literally cannot do anything about those other things because it’s outside their jurisdiction.
You’re right space agencies have no resources or skills which could be tasked with mitigating the climate crisis. Particularly any skills around creating sustainable living on the moon. Buncha liquid propulsion trigonometry nerds.
I get your point and agree but it’s worth mentioning that NASA and the ESA are very much involved in climate sciences. It’s like one of the main things they do.
Y’know we got about ten years before the extinction event we caused catches up with us, right. Moon and Mars fantasies are just that.
Yep, let’s just keep the charade up. Keep doing this and sending so much blue origin and spacex trash into low earth orbit.
Blue Origin’s rockets have never been to low earth orbit.
And Starlink can hardly be considered trash, it enables internet for millions of customers.
It is absolutely trash. Millions of customers at the expense of billions of people. More and more space trash comes down every year, under the blessing of international space treaties and not under much scrutiny. What it will do to our atmosphere is not studied yet and Starlink gives zero fucks.
Do the study then. We typically do not prevent people from high speed internet access on merely the suspicion of problems.
There’s some work already on this topic, mostly unclear results so far. Right now we’re seeing roughly a 2% increase in stratospheric aerosols due to anthropogenic origin. One study notes that the increased aluminum oxides in the stratosphere actually protect against global warming, while the biological effects are still being studied, possibly affecting mental health.
Obviously we need to be cautious with our planet, so I expect far more studies to clarify this effect.
OK I’ll just go do a study.
Increased aluminum oxides are a very short term effect and mask the long lasting effects of CO2 and CH4 so we need to stop spouting that industry nonsense.
It’s not a short term effect if the atmospheric change becomes permanent due to increased reentry mass, obviously. The “short term” argument refers to geoengineering by direct injection. I’m not suggesting we do this however - like I said there are indicators that the extra aerosols might be affecting mental health. Besides, like you said, direct carbon reduction is a much more sustainable path to fixing climate change.
We on that Kessler Syndrome speed run grind.
Yeah? So give up on this frivolous stuff and do… what exactly? Spend 10 years redirecting everyone’s efforts into building mausoleums and tombs so we can all hop in in 2034? What are the NASA guys, or the European space agency people, meant to do in relation to the climate crisis and looming extinction event? Rocket science isn’t biology, isn’t climate science (though launched satellites and the like do help with researching it), isn’t geopolitics.
You give me the same vibe as gamers whining about a game’s art team making assets for cosmetic dlcs instead of adding story content or fixing game bugs or something, when they literally cannot do anything about those other things because it’s outside their jurisdiction.
You’re right space agencies have no resources or skills which could be tasked with mitigating the climate crisis. Particularly any skills around creating sustainable living on the moon. Buncha liquid propulsion trigonometry nerds.
Dunno what i was thinking.
I get your point and agree but it’s worth mentioning that NASA and the ESA are very much involved in climate sciences. It’s like one of the main things they do.