Prof. Sam Lawler

Updating talk slides so you all get to be horrified along with me at the current Starlink numbers.

There are now 7,652 Starlink satellites in orbit (>500 more than there were in February, when I last updated these particular slides).

2-3 Starlinks per day are burning up in the atmosphere. That's a lot of weird metal in the atmosphere (and undoubtedly lots of random bits getting to the ground too).

Starlink is a stupidly wasteful and dangerous way to use orbit.

Jun 3 at 6:10pmWeb
Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3
And before you explain to me that there's 50 tons of meteoroids burning up in Earth's atmosphere every day, remember that meteoroids mostly rocks, not metal, and have an extremely low fraction of aluminum (~0.3 tons aluminum "naturally" burning up per day). Satellites are ~50% aluminum by mass, and Starlink satellites are several hundred kg to ~1200 kg in mass. Yes, it's bad.
Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3

Satellite numbers from https://planet4589.org/space/con/conlist.html and https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/table.php?GROUP=active&FORMAT=tle

Meteorite aluminum mass fraction from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1010.2746

Satellite mass fraction is totally guesswork because SpaceX doesn't share any useful information publicly ever.

Jonathan's Space Report | Space Statistics

Jonathan McDowell's new homepage

Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3
Now that I've gotten myself nice and grumpy about Starlink, it's time to go talk to kids at an elementary school, and try not to be too horrifying...
Show threadLauren WeinsteinJun 3
@sundogplanets The 21st century "drop drill" -- not covering up from a nuclear explosion, but avoiding being hit by pieces of Starlink birds.
Show threadJeffreySmith 🌻🍉🇨🇦Jun 3

@sundogplanets

Just don't tell them their bicycle helmets can do double duty protecting against starlink debris. 😁

Show threadRaphael DürscheidJun 4
@sundogplanets
Ahh, they are for #geoengineering, not communication.
Show threadKoboldJun 3
@sundogplanets 50 tons of meteoroids every day? I never thought about it tbh, but this is a number I would never have guessed.
Show threadMichael BuschJun 3

@kobold

It depends a bit on when one measures; but that's about right - nearly all as millimeter-scale grains.

Which, as @sundogplanets wrote, are less of a problem per unit mass than the Starlinks are: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 .

Show threadKoboldJun 3

@michael_w_busch @sundogplanets I was just blown away by the sheer amount of material burning up within earth's atmosphere.

No challenge to #starlink being prototypical #musk

Show threadTirrimas Jun 3
@kobold @michael_w_busch @sundogplanets we owe a lot to our atmosphere
Show threadlizzzzardJun 3
@kobold @sundogplanets same here.
Show threadCome On Giant Asteroid!Jun 3

@sundogplanets

That, and meteorites have been burning up in the atmosphere since, approximately, for ever - SpaceTwitter's StarJunk has only been raining down for what? 10 years? That long? No, not the first satellites, obvs, but the first stupidly big constellation.

Show threadcitcJun 3
@Prof. Sam Lawler

Until that aluminium is implicated in some sort of detrimental health impact (a la' DDT, ozone layer, etc.), doubtful anything will be done
Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3
@citc It likely does deplete ozone.
Show threadBruce HeerssenJun 4

@sundogplanets @citc

Have there been any studies on this? Are any being done now? That you know of off hand, of course. I'm not asking you to look anything up.

Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 4
@bruce @citc https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280
Show threadBruce HeerssenJun 4

@sundogplanets @citc

Thanks so much!

Show threadhelpsterTeeJun 3
@sundogplanets https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10139039/

"Despite poor absorption via mucosa, the biggest amount of Al comes with food, drinking water, and inhalation."

Yeah…we need environmental studies now regarding this…
Aluminium in the Human Brain: Routes of Penetration, Toxicity, and Resulting Complications

Aluminium (Al) is the most ubiquitous metal in the Earth’s crust. Even though its toxicity is well-documented, the role of Al in the pathogenesis of several neurological diseases remains debatable. To establish the basic framework for future ...

PubMed Central (PMC)
Show threadsimonbpJun 3
@sundogplanets The emission spectra from a deorbiting Starlink that someone showed at COSPAR last year was wild. All sorts of wacky heavy metals getting ionized enough to be seen (and probably enough to stick around).
Show threadElon Muksis 🇺🇦 🇪🇺Jun 3
@sundogplanets It's only a matter of time before the Starship explodes in orbit and destroys the satellites.
Show threadFan of Shared Truth & EmpathyJun 3

@sundogplanets I’m old enough to remember when people sprayed Aluminum in deodorant propelled out of cans using chlorofluorocarbons which helped punch a hole in our ozone layer ruining it’s ability to shield humans from radiation that could eventually kill them.

Seems humanity won’t be fixing the problems caused by our wealthiest who now call all the shots for ever more profit - life on earth in the future be damned.

Show thread𝓐𝓷𝓭𝔂𝓣𝓲𝓮𝓭𝔂𝓮 𓀤Jun 4

Launching stuff into space is EXPENSIVE.
Better to reuse what is already up there.

They should collect them, refurbish them, and reorbit them.

@sundogplanets

Show threadFight Fascism #RESISTJun 4
@sundogplanets
Starlink/SpaceX needs to be nationalized
Show thread🟥 Eveline Sulman 🇳🇱🇪🇺🇺🇦Jun 4
@Yogiomm @sundogplanets that wouldn't make any difference with this government...
Show threadVon XylofonJun 4
@Yogiomm @sundogplanets To be run by whom, exactly? The stable genius?
Show threadOpen RiskJun 5

@Yogiomm @sundogplanets

In a world that nation states can go rogue but existential problems are global we need the (currently non-existing option) of something becoming *internationalized*, namely being operated for the common good, irrespective of national borders.

If it sounds quaint its because the notion of national state being the only legitimate expression of governance has been burned into our collective nous. But its a mere social convention reflecting a certain era.

Show threadKolja3d ago
@sundogplanets Not disagreeing but trying to steelman here: is 3 satellites * 1.2 t * 50% aluminum = 1.8 t „just“ six times as much, ie. the same order of magnitude as the meteoroids? Really don’t want to downplay it, and there are still a lot of damaging related effects, but are the Starlink satellites really the important thing to focus on here?
Show threadProf. Sam Lawler3d ago
@kolja At full capacity they'll burn up 23 per day
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 3
@sundogplanets That is an astonishing number. Wow.
Show threadPetra van CronenburgJun 3
@sundogplanets Shocking, especially the number of burning trash.
Show threadEric LawtonJun 3

@sundogplanets

It's stealing orbit from the whole planet, rather like the enclosures in Europe as it industrialized.

@bonaventuresoft

Show threadquixoteJun 3

@EricLawton @sundogplanets @bonaventuresoft Stealing orbit is actually the whole point, from what I read. There are a limited number of trajectories in low earth orbit. Tens or hundreds of thousands. (Don't remember.)

That's so many, in the days when we had Sputnik and two other spacecraft up there it seemed ridiculous to worry about. So nobody thought about regulation or international agreements about how to divvy up orbits among countries.

But once an orbit is occupied, nobody else can get in there. So Musk is trying to own as much as possible by getting gazumpteen hundred thousand satellites up before anyone stops him.

(You can see the future: competitors will decide 'the hell with it, we can squeeze one more in,' and a couple will collide, with ricocheting pieces exponentially expanding debris fields and we'll have full Kessler Syndrome.)

Show threadCogito Ergo DisputoJun 3
@sundogplanets could this weird metal reflect back some solar radiation helping reduce the greenhouse effect?
Show threadgahlordJun 4
@Disputatore @sundogplanets no.
Show threadSteven LiptonJun 3
@sundogplanets @mattblaze So if there are no more launches, there is no more Starlink in about 8 years for 100% failure fo satelittes. There is no long term stability in the system - the satellites are consumables to the system. What's the point of critical failure, or at what percentage of satellites does the system go non functional? It must be shorter than 8 years.
Show threadsiderealJun 4
@MakeAppPie @sundogplanets @mattblaze What you see as "lack of long term stability" SpaceX sees as job security. An endless need for launching more satellites...
Show threadSteven LiptonJun 4
@sidereal @sundogplanets @mattblaze Yes, satellites as consumables
Show threadSteven LiptonJun 4
@sidereal @sundogplanets @mattblaze however, customers pay for the service of internet access , not the satellites. The satellites are not a profit center, but a cost center to SpaceX. SpaceX has to pay for the creation of new satellites and their delivery, which takes away from the profit center of scheduling other payloads. The customer for the satellites is SpaceX itself, which seems a bad business model.
Show threadKevin Karhan Jun 3

@sundogplanets Yes, and that's a reason why #Megaconstellations like it (and others as well as predecessors like #ICO) are garbage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendrell_Corporation

Compare that to say #Iridium which launched with 77 satellites and those lasted 25 years, way longer than scheduled, and got recently replaced with a new generation instead...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_Communications

  • Granted even Iridium required bailouts and basically catering to the #US military & intelligence market with their #PTT offerings that unlike #UHFSATCOM at least have #encryption on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQhE8ylRj00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OONzbJ2tbhA

Not to mention #Starlink is a #SpectrumPollutant and can only serve as means to #sabotage #Fiber deployment #ROI espechally in rural areas, thus increasing #DigitalDivide further by making #FTTB & #FTTH buildups (even with government subsidies) harder to justify.

Pendrell Corporation - Wikipedia

Show threadAI6YR BenJun 3
@sundogplanets Why am I not at all surprised by this coming from the folks there in charge? Sigh.
Show threadClaraBlackInkJun 4

@ai6yr @sundogplanets They're not even in charge. That would imply a certain amount of vision and accountability.

They're just holding everyone hostage like Earth is a giant bank.

Show threadFinitumJun 3
@sundogplanets its a large number but is it all worth it if people can access the internet (porn) in their RVs, yachts & armageddon mansions in the boonies? Is there any other purpose Starlink serves?
Show threadChris HutchinsonJun 3
@Finitum @sundogplanets NSW rural fire service (Australia) will be deploying starlink terminals on fire trucks. Quite useful because there’s so many remote areas with no phone coverage and poor line of sight for radio
Show threadgdtrfb57Jun 3
@sundogplanets Grifters gonna grift.
Show threadErinJun 3
@sundogplanets Prof Lawler, do you know if, after part of a Starlink got found on the ground, SpaceX aims to reenter them in a specific place? I don't recall that and suspect they still come down wherever they come down, but if it was just one patch of sky the atmospheric effects seem like they could be much worse
Show threadDeath by LambdaJun 3

@ChateauErin they come down wherever. @sundogplanets has multiple threads on the adventures of finding parts of Starlink on the ground.

https://tenforward.social/@AlsoPaisleyCat/113782031431932661

AlsoPaisleyCat (@AlsoPaisleyCat@tenforward.social)

Today, my #Fanuary shout out is to @sundogplanets@mastodon.social. An astronomer and champion of satellite regulation, she’s also sharing her joy in Saskatchewan farm life with goats and a llama. Here’s an interview with her from Physics Magazine last summer: https://physics.aps.org/articles/v17/97 #Physics #Astronomy #WomenSTEM #WomenInScience #Satellites #Starlink #Musk #Saskatchewan #Canada #Astronomie

Ten Forward
Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3
@xdydx @ChateauErin Starlink uses uncontrolled reentries, which means anywhere along their orbit.
Show threadSiv JonesJun 3
@sundogplanets finally those #chemtrail conspiracy people can have something real to freak out about.
Show threadBob JonkmanJun 3

@sundogplanets

> Starlink is a stupidly wasteful and dangerous way to use orbit.

I never thought of 'orbit' this way before: Orbits are a scarce, non-renewable resource. One Kessler-style incident, and the whole orbitable sphere is wiped out for decades, possibly centuries.

Can't launch new satellites into a debris field. Kinda iffy to send a spacecraft through a debris field to a higher orbit, certainly not with people on board.

Show threadChad BakerJun 3

@bobjonkman @sundogplanets

It would be hilariously ironic if starlink debris has been damaging the SpaceX rockets that keep failing.

Show threadAskoldJun 3
@sundogplanets it was created only so Ukraine could use it as a power multiplier and that it would fall into historic obscurity as american taxpayers caught up to elonizoni muskovich little schemes
Show threadMichael WestergaardJun 3
It's not a problem if they burn up in the atmosphere, and it's not even a huge problem if they fall down. The problem is they leave tons of crap up there, leading to Kessler syndrome. Elon Musk's companies are the biggest threats to humanity being able to leave Earth.
Show threadDustin LangJun 3
@michael @sundogplanets Actually the burning up in the atmosphere IS a LARGE problem.
Show threadProf. Sam LawlerJun 3
@dstndstn @michael Yeah, the atmospheric pollution is WAY scarier than Kessler syndrome.
Show threadpLJun 3
@sundogplanets yeah but he's rich so it's ok
Show threadWulfyJun 3

@sundogplanets

So you saying the good news is, if we stop Felon Muscovite right now,
It will only take 8.3 years to clear the sky !

Show threadMike Jun 3
@sundogplanets kinda funny RFK is worried about flouride in the water and chemtrails but doesn't seem concerned about this