Oh hey cool, an op-ed I wrote is now published!
TLDR: we need *fewer* satellites, each with *longer* operational lifetimes. Engineers: that's your challenge.
Thousands of satellites with incredibly short lifetimes are being sent up into low Earth orbit. When they fall back down they're fireballs of pollution — and what doesn't burn up hits the ground.
Higher needed too. Tax low orbit satellites a lot. UN money.
Degrading low orbit satellites are changing the chemical make up of the upper atmosphere.
Life is possible, for example, because of the ozone layer, cutting damaging radiation. But the Ozone layer is just oxygen molecules far apart, and peaks at 8 to 15 parts per million.
https://www.space.com/starlink-satellite-reentry-ozone-depletion-atmosphere
I am MUCH more concerned with the atmosphere than lost satellites, crashes or missing services.
And no, its not just an argument for more low earth orbits, its a call to everyone to notice the people responsible for space are mostly jackasses now, putting us in danger in increasing numbers of ways.
Responsible, not interested in, or working in, and the "not jackasses" are being fired.
Satellites should be taxed by the UN and a "Permit to Orbit" purchased, after guaranteeing de-orbit systems and safety, including bonds to cover costs should contracts be broken.
Imagine if we lived in a world where cooperation and collaboration were the norm, instead of competition and rivalry.
We could do so much more, especially with the trillions we'd save on weapons and armies.
@EricLawton @sundogplanets @PhoenixSerenity
Marie shared the solution a long time ago - problem? Our culture is the antithesis of this
@Disputatore @sundogplanets @PhoenixSerenity
I know what there is to work with.
The question is, what do we do with that, and how can we do it.
Simply accepting the status quo isn't acceptable.
@Disputatore @sundogplanets @PhoenixSerenity
Those systems need not resemble the ones in eurocentric countries.
Other cultures have done things differently.
And they don't need to be on the scale of, for example, spending $trillions per year on the military.
@EricLawton @sundogplanets @PhoenixSerenity they may not need to, but that doesn't mean that they won't. The borders of the countries in Africa and the Middle East were all artificially designed by the colonial powers. There are loads of ethnic and religious tensions that now and then explode into conflict.
Then there is the fact that military spending isn't necessarily for war. It can also be to avoid it.
China isn't an Eurocentric country and yet...
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-currently-at-war
@sundogplanets Just spitballing here.
The satellites would be larger and more expensive. They'd still want thousands of them to create a worldwide network. Then we'd have thousands of larger satellites occasionally firing thrusters while crisscrossing the sky and interfering with ground-based observations.
Not sure.
A solution would be to stop doing this and to pay for ground-based relays. We can do that, too. We don't have a billionaire strung out on drugs funding it.
The places where ground-based coverage is impossible could be serviced by drones. They don't stay in the air as long, so there would be expense there, too, but no costly launch vehicle, so it's a short-term win, I think. But Elon can't monetize it all for himself, so I figure it won't happen.
@sundogplanets The lag time is significant. Ukraine uses it in war. They won't downgrade.
There would be a way to use fewer of them, targeting areas of conflict, while ground-based and drone systems could be used everywhere else.
Elon's DOGE hacked the nation. He can set his own price now. Hm. It might work.
@steter @sundogplanets I vaguely remember Alphabet having a project to make extremely-high-altitude balloons to provide internet access, what happened with that?
Lower latency than satellites, they can hold still or move slow and have much less disruption to switching signals from one to the next. Balloon-to-balloon relaying might be harder or less effective, but still doable. Intact recovery and refurbishment would be possible. Sounds like a better option to me
@sundogplanets @steter yep, you can't beat the speed of light. Lower orbits give lower latency, higher orbits give higher latency. People demanding shorter delays will keep paying for those lower orbits.
Using balloon-lofted relays seemed like a pretty good idea, but you can't rely on them in warzones. And they probably can't stay aloft for decades at a time either. There's really not a lot of great alternatives, if you want wide coverage and low latency.
Congrats on your publication! 👍
"...we need *fewer* satellites, each with *longer* operational lifetimes. Engineers: that's your challenge."
Seems to me that it could also be a #governance challenge. The #Space near #Earth is basically a village green. Putting junk up there willy-nilly could be considered a form of #pollution. We know that pollution CANNOT be controlled by #free_markets.
Just sayin'...🤷♂️
Edit: Above responding to your TLDR. Reading deeper you end with...
"Without far-reaching, international #regulation or self-imposed limits from satellite companies, current practices in LEO threaten the planet, and our ability to explore beyond it."
Agreed!
Thank you! Not quite as cute as goat photos, but very interesting.
Have an orbital garbage collector, or better yet catch them and relaunch them back into proper orbits.
@heislertecreator2049 For bigger objects, yes. For micro stuff, perhaps aerogel.
Yeah, this seems more like a regulatory challenge than an engineering one, but IAmNotAnAstronomer so 🤷♂️
@sundogplanets
Space debris by the numbers ☹️
https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers
https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/ESA_Space_Environment_Report_2025
https://www.sdo.esoc.esa.int/environment_report/Space_Environment_Report_latest.pdf
That's a really nice article!
Incidentally, this morning I came across a writeup about the state of SpaceX in general. I used to grudgingly accept that they at least seem to know their rocketry.
Not so much it turns out.
https://www.planetearthandbeyond.co/p/starship-was-doomed-from-the-beginning
@DanielEriksson @sundogplanets That's a good analysis, and I agree up until the last point.
You absolutely can make a reusable upper stage work, but it requires a very different design philosophy to the one that Starship has used so far. That means either wings, which Musk has an irrational hatred of*, or a plug aerospike.
Stoke is actually building the latter, and my personal bet for a company that will eat SpaceX's lunch.
*After SpaceX's deal with Stratolaunch to make a Falcon with wings fell through in circa 2011, Musk banned wings. The stub wings on Starship thus have to be called "flaps", even though they are strictly speaking wings.
@simonbp @DanielEriksson @sundogplanets people have been arguing about what to call starship’s appendages, but I’m in the “not wings” camp. They have more in common with air-brakes on fighter jets or the top surface spoilers many jets have in their wings. There is never flow from leading to trailing edge, it is always from root to tip.
Stoke has a neat approach. It kinda is an aerospike but also functions as sort of gas cooling for the heat shield in re-entry, which is probably more important.
@DanielEriksson @sundogplanets In short, Capitalism's N1. Seems to be coming apart for similar reasons (pogo, exploding turbopumps, control problems, desperate weight-shaving, in-flight fires) too.
A Methalox nine-Raptor first stage with RVac high energy upper stage (with a lifting body for crew) really would have made more sense, even if it was just an interim.
Probably the greatest core flaw of Starship is that it tries to do everything.
The low earth orbit of metallic chaff poses a risk to future space travel & research.
The scary part is how it may impact the functions of NORAD and early warning systems for ICBM's.
Are radar systems at risk?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaff_(countermeasure)
https://satelliteobservation.net/2018/03/08/contested-space-ii-countermeasures/
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/apme/57/5/jamc-d-17-0191.1.xml
The fossil fuel interests funding Musk & Trumpism are preparing for war & getting it via cheap real estate bribery.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/11/middleeast/trump-visit-gulf-arab-states-saudi-uae-qatar-intl
ktyl
Prof. Sam Lawler
Ms. Que Banh
Bruce_Ak
Mike P
Kevin Russell
Michael Gemar
Sammi
Antiqueight
Eric Lawton
Sharon McCarthy
ShadSterling
Cogito Ergo Disputo
Steve's Place
Howard Chu @ Symas
Alida Antonia
Richard Rathe
Luna chan
Looking for explanations…
𝓐𝓷𝓭𝔂𝓣𝓲𝓮𝓭𝔂𝓮 𓀤
Tim
Martin Vermeer (not Jesus)
Stumpy The Mutt
Bill Zaumen
My camera shoots fascists
AkaSci 🛰️
l'empathie mécanique
Dr Daniel, Photon Shepherd🇸🇪🇦🇺
simonbp
Aaron Sawdey, Ph.D.
Stege 🐜
Garrett Latimer
Cycling_Liz
Nicole Parsons
Paul W. He/Him 
fmc01
Mira