4 ms·

Asking from a place of ignorance on my part, but does the chemical composition of the satellites versus asteroids/dust have any adverse effects?

by Y-bar 1y ago

SoftTalker 1y ago
The satellites are mostly metal and silicon I would guess, not too different from asteroids.
- bwestergard 1y ago
  If someone has the time, I'd love to see the total amount of lead added to the atmosphere by burning up satellites compared to the amount from other anthropogenic sources.
  - adastra22 1y ago
    Rough napkin math would be negligible impact. The amount of lead in a satellite is very small, if not actually zero. The amount of lead added by burning coal is about 30 tonnes per day.
    - everforward 1y ago
      There is almost definitely a small, negligible amount of lead in the solder in them. Eg NASA requires a small (single digit I think) percentage of lead to prevent tin whiskering.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > almost definitely a small, negligible amount of lead in the solder in them Emphasis on negligible. Assuming 0.07 to 0.28 ppm lead [1] in meteoroids, space is dosing us with half to 2 kg a year [2]. [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001670376090079X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001670... [2] https://earthsky.org/space/tons-of-extraterrestrial-dust-fall-to-earth-each-year/#:~:text=Bottom%20line%3A,each%20year. https://earthsky.org/space/tons-of-extraterrestrial-dust-fal...
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- cubefox 1y ago
  I guess we can just read the article: > The researchers found particles containing the rare elements niobium and hafnium. They also found a significant number of particles contained copper, lithium and aluminum at concentrations far exceeding the abundance found in space dust.
perihelions 1y ago
It's postulated that the high aluminum content of satellites (for perspective, Bennu samples are only 1% Al), as oxidized Al2O3 particles in the stratosphere, catalyze chemistry that destroys ozone. But that's far from a quantitatively meaningful problem, at the current scale. This source[0] says satellite reentries are about about 12% of the space industry's contribution to ozone depletion (the big one is chlorine from solid rockets), which in turn is 0.1% of the entire anthropogenic contribution; i.e. satellite reentries are ~0.01% of the total. https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-reentry-pollution-damage-earth-atmosphere https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-reentry-pollution-dama...
- schiffern 1y ago
  >0.01% of anthropogenic ozone depletion The sheer percentage increase in stratospheric AlO is still alarming.[0] Satellite reentries in 2022 (ie mostly pre-megaconstellation) were already raising stratospheric AlO levels by 29.5% above normal levels (with satellites adding 'only' 17 t/year), but megaconstellations could raise that to ~480% above natural levels (360 t/year). This isn't a rounding error, it's a non-trivial change in chemical composition across the entire globe, and effecting a complex and poorly-understood part of the climate system. What could go wrong? What else can this effect (as usual, discovered belatedly) beyond ozone? Hopefully it's nothing! But I guess we're gonna find out... [0] https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL10...
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Satellite reentries in 2022 (mostly pre-megaconstellation) were already raising stratospheric AlO levels by 29.5% above normal levels Those findings are simulated, not observed. Hence "potential." > it's a non-trivial change in chemical composition over the entire globe, and effecting a complex and poorly-understood part of the climate system. What could go wrong? Perhaps a lot. Perhaps not much. It's a good question to study. But if this is an issue, it's solvable--carbon composite satellite structures could use a boost in demand and funding.
    - 1y ago
svmt 1y ago
Bloomberg ran a piece about this in March: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-space-orbit-satellites-pollution/?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc1OTc3NDMzMCwiZXhwIjoxNzYwMzc5MTMwLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTVkxQME5UMVVNMFcwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiI2QzJFRUEzQjg0NDc0NjIyOThDMTA4NjFDNUExNUUwNyJ9.vCAdj_kZrKPo-a-QyGCkXFXlX-ktK3Tymu3c3qg0nNw https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-space-orbit-satellit...
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

Asking from a place of ignorance on my part, but does the chemical composition of the satellites versus asteroids/dust have any adverse effects?

by Y-bar 1y ago

Asking from a place of ignorance on my part, but does the chemical composition of the satellites versus asteroids/dust have any adverse effects?

SoftTalker 1y ago

The satellites are mostly metal and silicon I would guess, not too different from asteroids.

bwestergard 1y ago
If someone has the time, I'd love to see the total amount of lead added to the atmosphere by burning up satellites compared to the amount from other anthropogenic sources.
- adastra22 1y ago
  Rough napkin math would be negligible impact. The amount of lead in a satellite is very small, if not actually zero. The amount of lead added by burning coal is about 30 tonnes per day.
  - everforward 1y ago
    There is almost definitely a small, negligible amount of lead in the solder in them. Eg NASA requires a small (single digit I think) percentage of lead to prevent tin whiskering.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > almost definitely a small, negligible amount of lead in the solder in them Emphasis on negligible. Assuming 0.07 to 0.28 ppm lead [1] in meteoroids, space is dosing us with half to 2 kg a year [2]. [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001670376090079X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001670... [2] https://earthsky.org/space/tons-of-extraterrestrial-dust-fall-to-earth-each-year/#:~:text=Bottom%20line%3A,each%20year. https://earthsky.org/space/tons-of-extraterrestrial-dust-fal...
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
cubefox 1y ago
I guess we can just read the article: > The researchers found particles containing the rare elements niobium and hafnium. They also found a significant number of particles contained copper, lithium and aluminum at concentrations far exceeding the abundance found in space dust.

perihelions 1y ago

It's postulated that the high aluminum content of satellites (for perspective, Bennu samples are only 1% Al), as oxidized Al2O3 particles in the stratosphere, catalyze chemistry that destroys ozone. But that's far from a quantitatively meaningful problem, at the current scale. This source[0] says satellite reentries are about about 12% of the space industry's contribution to ozone depletion (the big one is chlorine from solid rockets), which in turn is 0.1% of the entire anthropogenic contribution; i.e. satellite reentries are ~0.01% of the total. https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-reentry-pollution-damage-earth-atmosphere https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-reentry-pollution-dama...

schiffern 1y ago
>0.01% of anthropogenic ozone depletion The sheer percentage increase in stratospheric AlO is still alarming.[0] Satellite reentries in 2022 (ie mostly pre-megaconstellation) were already raising stratospheric AlO levels by 29.5% above normal levels (with satellites adding 'only' 17 t/year), but megaconstellations could raise that to ~480% above natural levels (360 t/year). This isn't a rounding error, it's a non-trivial change in chemical composition across the entire globe, and effecting a complex and poorly-understood part of the climate system. What could go wrong? What else can this effect (as usual, discovered belatedly) beyond ozone? Hopefully it's nothing! But I guess we're gonna find out... [0] https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL10...
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Satellite reentries in 2022 (mostly pre-megaconstellation) were already raising stratospheric AlO levels by 29.5% above normal levels Those findings are simulated, not observed. Hence "potential." > it's a non-trivial change in chemical composition over the entire globe, and effecting a complex and poorly-understood part of the climate system. What could go wrong? Perhaps a lot. Perhaps not much. It's a good question to study. But if this is an issue, it's solvable--carbon composite satellite structures could use a boost in demand and funding.
  - 1y ago

svmt 1y ago

Bloomberg ran a piece about this in March: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-space-orbit-satellites-pollution/?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc1OTc3NDMzMCwiZXhwIjoxNzYwMzc5MTMwLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTVkxQME5UMVVNMFcwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiI2QzJFRUEzQjg0NDc0NjIyOThDMTA4NjFDNUExNUUwNyJ9.vCAdj_kZrKPo-a-QyGCkXFXlX-ktK3Tymu3c3qg0nNw https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-space-orbit-satellit...

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]