4 ms·
Perhaps it would just move the problem from the earth to the moon? If we're going to the effort to build "satellite movers" to get unwanted/dead satellites to a
by vosper 6y ago
Perhaps it would just move the problem from the earth to the moon? If we're going to the effort to build "satellite movers" to get unwanted/dead satellites to a moon orbit, then perhaps we would be better of just sending them into the sun, or on a path out into deep space?
- kempbellt 6y agoIt would be better to glob them together for a space station to repurpose the materials. A lot of time, energy and money is spent getting material into orbit. No sense wasting it, unless it's completely useless. Then de-orbiting in the Earth's atmosphere is the cheapest solution.
- dogma1138 6y agoI would say having shit in lunar orbit might be a bigger problem since they will not burn on reentry. Sure it’s not a problem now but by the time we can push junk into a lunar orbit the moon might be quite a bit more populated.
- dave_4_bagels 6y agoI thought about that too, but the benefit of an orbiting "globule" of satellite waste is that in time it would have it's own micro-gravity and require less energy to "commit" waste to a mini-moon than pushing out of earth's orbit to the sun? I haven't done the napkin math but maybe I'm sorely mistaken in terms of the physics involved. Could be interesting to lower the cost by pushing into a huge mass and then once it was too large pushing that mass into the sun?