Abstract from the paper in the article:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280

Large constellations of small satellites will significantly increase the number of objects orbiting the Earth. Satellites burn up at the end of service life during reentry, generating aluminum oxides as the main byproduct. These are known catalysts for chlorine activation that depletes ozone in the stratosphere. We present the first atomic-scale molecular dynamics simulation study to resolve the oxidation process of the satellite’s aluminum structure during mesospheric reentry, and investigate the ozone depletion potential from aluminum oxides. We find that the demise of a typical 250-kg satellite can generate around 30 kg of aluminum oxide nanoparticles, which may endure for decades in the atmosphere. Aluminum oxide compounds generated by the entire population of satellites reentering the atmosphere in 2022 are estimated at around 17 metric tons. Reentry scenarios involving mega-constellations point to over 360 metric tons of aluminum oxide compounds per year, which can lead to significant ozone depletion.

PS: wooden satellites can help mitigate this https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01456-z

  • @SynAcker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    535 months ago

    So… Let me get this straight… The satellites burning up are essentially creating aluminum chemtrails that my mother-in-law keeps going on about?

  • @CosmoNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    285 months ago

    You would think space engineers would‘ve run those numbers before sending tens of thousands of them in orbit. It‘s really annoying that we can only hope for the best at this point.

    • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      195 months ago

      Why would you think that?

      When I fire up the grill, I don’t do calculations on how much weight in CO2 I’m putting into the air and then extrapolate that to find the total mass of CO2 that grills generate globally. I usually just make burgers.

      That space engineer made sure that they were on the right side of the rocket equation and they made it to orbit (which is hard on its own).

      I agree that thorough environmental studies really ought to be happening, but I’m not surprised that aspects got missed.

    • @Gsus4@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      125 months ago

      I was just worried about Kessler syndrome and just felt relaxed that their orbits were low enough to naturally decay and never become a permanent problem. What this research seems to show is that the aluminum oxide dust does not settle in days/weeks, but it is fine enough to stay there for decades :/

  • @chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    415 months ago

    Before anyone jumps on the Anti-Musk train, read the article, please. They admit that they don’t understand the complications that could arise and that they don’t have any hard figures for the damage being caused. I’ll be the first to jump in and say that it’s probably a bad thing to just let metals burn in in atmo, but let’s make sure we discuss the facts, and not just the politics of the potential polluter.

    • @nevemsenki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      305 months ago

      Ah yes, the usual method of waiting until the issue becomes confirmed and also way too severe to fix instead of acting on precaution and harming profits of private companies. What could go wrong?

      • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -25 months ago

        As opposed to acting before you understand the effects of your actions? Neither seem like good choices.

        Probably the best option would be to research harder. Make the polluter fund a much larger scale research program to understand the problem and viable solutions as quickly as possible.

      • @chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -115 months ago

        Nah, this is a different method. It’s the one where we get all of the facts before we take action. Maybe you aren’t up on it, but knee-jerk is so 1700s.

        • @OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          125 months ago

          We don’t have to wait until it’s “fully confirmed” to start being concerned about it. Remember climate change denial? We were in the “we don’t know if humans are causing it” phase for a while.

          I also agree, let’s not jump on the anti-Musk team for this, but satellites burning up has always been a rather obvious source of pollution, and it’s good to see more discussion on it

        • @nevemsenki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          45 months ago

          Sure, PFAS were also considered a nonsignificant issue until they weren’t, only it’s too late to unfuck it now. Well, no harm in generating more potential ticking time bombs I guess.

        • @gaael@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Like maybe wait a few years and finance some science to check that your mega constellation of satellites (built to fail after only a few years to make sure your rocket company never goes out of work) won’t be a fucking nuisance on so many levels before you actually launch them ?
          This “get all the facts before taking action” ?

          Edit: I think I knee-jerked

          • @chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -25 months ago

            Oh, you mean a study on the Satellite Internet Constellations that have been in orbit since the 1990s, a full 30 years before Starlink launched? As with nearly everything else, Musk isn’t the first to do whatever he does, he’s just the loudest. If Starlink hadn’t launched we would still be facing the same problems. Thankfully, he’s a big enough ass that he makes a easy target for these kinds of things.

            • @gaael@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              Maybe I didn’t get my facts straight, but iirc there are around 7.5k satellites up there, with starlink current count about 5.5k. And I think I read they got the greenlight for the 7.5k gen 2 sats launches.
              That looks like a scale change to me. Associated with the short lifespan (which contrasts with the situation 30 years ago, where launches were more expensive), it’s kind of a new situation and should have warranted a more careful approach.

              So musk isn’t the first one to launch satellites, I agree. But the way it’s done is kinda new, and mostly on the worse side. And I’m not saying the old way was good, and not absolving previous actors from responsability in the pollution.

      • gian
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Ah yes, the usual method of waiting until the issue becomes confirmed and also way too severe to fix instead of acting on precaution and harming profits of private companies.

        No, but as even them don’t understand what the complications are and how much the damages could be, maybe to wait to have at least some hard number looks like a good idea.

        What could go wrong?

        And what could go wrong if we start to fight a problem that we don’t understand how big it is, maybe using the wrong solution on a wrong scale ?

        • @dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Perfect is the enemy of good.

          If it is worth doing, it is worth getting it done, even if we aren’t 100% certain or ready on a lot of things. Doctors don’t wait for the worst before starting treatment. Specially if corrections carry none or way less risks than what is currently being done.

          • gian
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -15 months ago

            Perfect is the enemy of good.

            I agree on this.

            If it is worth doing, it is worth getting it done, even if we aren’t 100% certain or ready on a lot of things.

            From the article it seems we are not even 10% certain. In summary, we don’t understand (yet) the problem, we have no clue on how complex is, we have no hard number to tell us how big it is.
            I agree, something need to be done. But for now the “something” is just to try to understand better the problem, or at least how big it is.

            Doctors don’t wait for the worst before starting treatment.

            True, but they start treatment when they know what they need to cure or at least they have solid evidence that indicate something, not before.

            Specially if corrections carry none or way less risks than what is currently being done.

            Hard to decide that corrections carry lower risks of something we don’t understand.

      • @nialv7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        55 months ago

        There is a line somewhere I think. Like people weren’t 100% sure the atomic bomb won’t ignite the atmosphere (it’s only very unlikely), but they still tested it. Similarly the probability of creating micro blackholes at LHC is not zero either, yet they still ran it.

        If we have to make sure everything is 100% safe before we can do anything, we will be stuck with the status quo.

    • @Gsus4@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I was actually reviewing the O3 depletion process https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine_monoxide and Cl only stops reacting with O3 when it ends up as ClO2, but that is rare, because ClO usually is too short-lived to react with another Cl into Cl2O, so it may be possible that a catalyst like Al2O3 could actually clean up Cl interfering with the ozone layer along with the effect of speeding up the nefarious reaction with O3 :D

    • @dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -25 months ago

      Guys, let’s not jump into conclusions. I’d say that it is not a real issue until at least a billion people have died from it.

  • ugjka
    link
    fedilink
    English
    135 months ago

    I hate Elon, but he ain’t the only one trashing the LEO

  • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    385 months ago

    Quite possible. Let’s fix our ISPs so that all of humanity has access to bandwidth priced to a value that they can afford for their area. A huge project that means lots of union jobs and an economic payoff for decades. If we pull this off Starlink won’t have any customers except very marginal cases.

    Fix the problem directly instead of fixing the solution unintended side effects

    • @Gsus4@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There was the scientific article and the abstract in the body of the post if you wanted to read it, wtf more do you want?

  • @Lutra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    One thing to note - The science is still calculating. Yet. SpaceX (and presumably others) are allowed to continue and increase what they’re doing. This is the bass ackwards way to protect future us.

    Its the same mentality as driving in a random direction for 20 minutes while someone looks in the car for the map on the off chance that when you get the map open you’ll be where you wanted to be anyway.

    It has the potential (and at this point, just the potential) for planet level changes, and is being done by one group. Should I, a random dude, be able to do something that might possibly affect the entire planet, and the planet as a whole just have to wait and see how it turns out?

    The hopeful thought that its probably nothing, before anyone can prove that it’s probably nothing, makes a bet where the short term wins are mine, but any long term losses are everyone else’s.

  • partial_accumen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    45 months ago

    Its good to keep an eye out for new sources of pollution, but the possible ozone depletion from satellites burning up is a tiny tiny fraction of what we’re doing on Earth right now for pollutants.

  • @tyler@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55 months ago

    The roughly 10-centimetre-long cube is made of magnolia-wood panels and has an aluminium frame, solar panels, circuit boards and sensors. The panels incorporate Japanese wood-joinery methods that do not rely on glue or metal fittings.

    When LignoSat plunges back to Earth, after six months to a year of service, the magnolia will incinerate completely and release only water vapour and carbon dioxide

    Huh? I’m confused.

    • @Gsus4@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      heh, yea, the satellites are not just wood for sure, they goofed. But it’s less metals, which helps.

  • @rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    So they take 17 tons of emissions (from all satellites, not just starlink), which are basically nothing on an atmospheric scale, then extrapolate that to 360 and start freaking out. Peak quality journalism.