SpaceX's growing Starlink megaconstellation could be hindering the Earth's ozone layer from healing itself, researchers find.

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

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
    693·
    6 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

    • postmateDumbass@lemmy.worldEnglish
      441·
      6 months ago

      Gee, where are the boatload of billions that the US congress passed for nationwide broadband?

      Fucking ripoff telecon companies.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        11·
        6 months ago

        They should just pay people to lay the cable directly instead of awarding it programmatically to companies.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          4·
          6 months ago

          That’s what my city is basically doing. They’re contracting with a local installer to lay cable, then selling service on that network. No money is being awarded, in fact the contract states that they get paid with part of the subscription fee, so they are motivated to get people connected quickly so they can start collecting. The city owns the network and ISPs compete over customers on that network. They claim it’ll take 2 years for everyone to be connected, which is pretty quick (but the proof is in the pudding).

          Seems like a decent system to me. We’re being promised 10gbps available, but pricing details aren’t finalized yet (and my router only handles 1gbps anyway, and I’m too lazy and cheap to upgrade everything).

          AFAIK, this plan was in the works before the infrastructure bill was passed, so I don’t think we’re taking money from that, but I could be wrong.

        • KnightontheSun@lemmy.worldEnglish
          8·
          6 months ago

          Whereas we are smack dab in the middle of cities, but just far enough out of reach to be stuck with 20Mb DSL that will never improve.

          • oatscoop@midwest.socialEnglish
            6·
            6 months ago

            I’m a 7 minute drive from downtown and my options are satellite, cellular, or fixed wireless. Everyone around me has gigabit ethernet, but due to costs involved in running fiber and the fact my little community is mostly old folks (and thus likely not going to buy in) ISPs don’t want to “invest” in us.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            6 months ago

            I don’t know how much has changed, I did an internship with a major ISP while I was a student, at the time I was told that the stronger the local government the less fiber there was. And it came because of the tax code.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      4·
      6 months ago

      Why not both? I kinda want Starlink for road trips and camping. As in, pull into a national park, set up camp, do normal Internet things, then go hike the park the next day or whatever. I could even work from a national park if I really wanted to, which would be really cool.