3 ms·

I still think a slew of independent satellites is the best idea. Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. You can’t undo a volcanic explosion

I still think a slew of independent satellites is the best idea. Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. You can’t undo a volcanic explosion.

seanhunter 11mo ago
> Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. Not necessarily. All the junk could kickstart Kessler Syndrome[1] and make earth’s orbit completely impossible to traverse. Then when you want to sweep them up, your shuttle would just get shredded by debris. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
- squigz 11mo ago
  > However, even a catastrophic Kessler scenario at LEO would pose minimal risk for launches continuing past LEO, or satellites travelling at medium Earth orbit (MEO) or geosynchronous orbit (GEO). The catastrophic scenarios predict an increase in the number of collisions per year, as opposed to a physically impassable barrier to space exploration that occurs in higher orbits. Kessler Syndrome has always struck me as a problem that, should it become an actual issue, we should be able to solve. There is even mention of a couple potential solutions on the Wikipedia page.
goku12 11mo ago
How does that work? You need a combined reflective area equivalent to the amount of radiative power you want block. So let's say that you want to block just 0.001% of the Sun's incident power on Earth. According to my calculations, that represents a total reflective area of approximately 1275 km^2. And those have to be directly in between the Sun and Earth at any given time. If you're on an orbit around Earth, the best that you'll get is in the LEO, where only half of those satellites will be in that condition on average at any given time. So, how many satellites (of any size class) will you need for that?

3 ms·

I still think a slew of independent satellites is the best idea. Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. You can’t undo a volcanic explosion

by firsttome 11mo ago

I still think a slew of independent satellites is the best idea. Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. You can’t undo a volcanic explosion.

seanhunter 11mo ago
> Worst case, just send up a shuttle and sweep them all up. Not necessarily. All the junk could kickstart Kessler Syndrome[1] and make earth’s orbit completely impossible to traverse. Then when you want to sweep them up, your shuttle would just get shredded by debris. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
- squigz 11mo ago
  > However, even a catastrophic Kessler scenario at LEO would pose minimal risk for launches continuing past LEO, or satellites travelling at medium Earth orbit (MEO) or geosynchronous orbit (GEO). The catastrophic scenarios predict an increase in the number of collisions per year, as opposed to a physically impassable barrier to space exploration that occurs in higher orbits. Kessler Syndrome has always struck me as a problem that, should it become an actual issue, we should be able to solve. There is even mention of a couple potential solutions on the Wikipedia page.
goku12 11mo ago
How does that work? You need a combined reflective area equivalent to the amount of radiative power you want block. So let's say that you want to block just 0.001% of the Sun's incident power on Earth. According to my calculations, that represents a total reflective area of approximately 1275 km^2. And those have to be directly in between the Sun and Earth at any given time. If you're on an orbit around Earth, the best that you'll get is in the LEO, where only half of those satellites will be in that condition on average at any given time. So, how many satellites (of any size class) will you need for that?