From a distance the world looks... surrounded by a huge cloud of trash

a reply to: namelesss

lol

Space penal colony 1...

A great idea, with the prison population running rampant...

Get Musk on it right away!

BT

Of course it will become a resource. It will likely be a certain few decades vintage that will be worth the most, and it would be best used in space again through re-cycling. Shipping's already been paid...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AstralAvenger

As much trash is in orbit, there is a lot more empty space there than not.

So keep piling, and piling, and piling and piling until snip starts raining down on everyone.

Interesting that climate change folks hasn't addressed this issue.

a reply to: beetee

I've personally adopted the "trash chic" look so I wouldn't mind if Earth just wrapped all that junk around it into a pretty trash belt so we can compete, aesthetically, with Saturn and his rings.

originally posted by: neo96
Interesting that climate change folks hasn't addressed this issue.

We're all secretly counting on it being our back-up ozone layer post-Trump. We just need more of it.

a reply to: beetee

a reply to: neo96

So keep piling, and piling, and piling and piling until snip starts raining down on everyone. Interesting that climate change folks hasn't addressed this issue.

I was thinking close to what you where thinking, but my mind went to how much graveyard metal does it take before it starts to interfere with the magnetosphere, or with reflections of the sun.

We had a fire in our house when I was a kid, because my brother left a magnifying glass on the window sill.

Maybe all that global warming is coming from the debris heating up the atmosphere.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AstralAvenger

As much trash is in orbit, there is a lot more empty space there than not.

So keep piling, and piling, and piling and piling until snip starts raining down on everyone.

Interesting that climate change folks hasn't addressed this issue.

That'd be ok, I've seen Defiance. As long as we don't encounter any Irathients, we could go scavenge fallen debris for booty !!

But yeah, I think most of the debris would burn up in the atmosphere should it's orbit deteriorate. ?

a reply to: Abysha

Hehe.

Beauty, they say, is in the eye of the beholder. I guess spacetrash can be pretty, in the right light, but personally I must confess to preferring it to be removed when practical.

And think of the job opportunities...

Besides, this is ESAs moment to shine, which we should not deny them.

BT

a reply to: beetee
It does get shiny and sparkly.




hippies

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I must admit to being a bit mystified by your comment. I like Mr. Hawking as much as the next man, but am at a loss to determine if you are using him to confirm or deny the ESA report.

Would you care to elaborate?

BT

a reply to: Phage

Yes, pretty nice.

The commentary is also great, by the way :-)

BT

What are the odds of getting killed by space debris while living 1 year on the International Space Station? I would think that they are less than the odds of being killed in an accident here on Earth.

a reply to: carewemust

Death by shark.
Death by lightning.
Hell, you could get killed by space junk while sitting in your jacuzzi on your back deck.

a reply to: Phage


Lighting kills 51 people in the U.S. every year. (20 year average)


Space debris has killed 0 people on Earth, or in orbit.

You're right Phage. Lots more ways to die on the planet, than above the planet.

Still, I'd feel LESS safe on the ISS than here in my office on Earth.

What about you?

a reply to: carewemust

I'd get over it.

If I get a corner office.
upload.wikimedia.org...


a blast from the past

a reply to: beetee

Just so you know, that isn't to scale. If that graphic were accurate, those pieces would be the size of entire cities/towns, which clearly isn't the case. Instead, our good but only somewhat reliable friend wikipedia says the following (HERE):

As of 5 July 2016, the United States Strategic Command tracked a total of 17,852 artificial objects in orbit about the Earth, including 1,419 operational satellites. However these are just objects large enough to be tracked. As of July 2013, more than 170 million debris smaller than 1 cm (0.4 in), about 670,000 debris 1–10 cm, and around 29,000 larger debris were estimated to be in orbit.

While that 170 million figure may seem impressive at first glance, let's put that in perspective. A study in North Carolina showed that there are roughly 124 million animals per acre there, with the vast majority being insects that are also smaller than half an inch (HERE). And that study was only testing 5 inches in depth in the soil, as opposed to the roughly 300 miles of depth in our atmosphere!

In other words, there's so much empty space between the individual pieces floating around Earth that they don't even show up on real video footage. And the vast majority of tiny sized particles are no different than the tiny sized insects that are also flying around the Earth right now, though the insects are obviously flying much closer to the Earth's surface.

In other words, the only ones I think we really need to worry about are the large pieces that are already being tracked.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AstralAvenger

As much trash is in orbit, there is a lot more empty space there than not.

Yes odds of you being hit are 70 trillion to 1. Odds of being struck by lightening 960,000 to 1. So the odds of a satellite strike is extremely low. meaning not alot makes it through orbit. In space docking is the big threat.

The doomed Progress supply ship that spun out of control right after launch is a model that has a very long and reliable service record. They have been delivering supplies to space stations since the 1970s. One of them did crash into the Russian space station Mir, causing considerable damage, but that was because the automatic docking system was turned off so a cosmonaut could practice manual control. That didn't turn out well.

www.cbc.ca...


Nasa has built in shielding on things like the ISS

Spacecraft must be designed to withstand hypervelocity impacts by untrackable particles. Conducting hypervelocity impacts on spacecraft and satellite components assesses the risk of orbital debris impacting operating spacecraft and satellites. Developing new materials and designs from hypervelocity impact data provides a better understanding to protect spacecraft and satellites from the debris in the space environment. One type of spacecraft shielding, termed multishock, uses several layers of lightweight ceramic fabric to act as “bumpers,” which shocks a projectile to such high energy levels that it melts or vaporizes and absorbs debris before it can penetrate a spacecraft’s walls. Lightweight shields based on this concept are used on the ISS.

www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yes, I realise it is an illustration, of course, as you rightly point out.

But it is an illustration of a very real and serious problem. As the video points out, the worst case scenario is a "cascade" type effect where one collision might trigger more collsions and so forth.
While the first collision, provided it is caused by a tracked object hitting another, is predictable. But the resulting changed trajectories/orbits of whatever is left are not, and might create new collisions, also with unpredictable new trajectories. And so on.

The statistical probability of this happening will only go up if we keep dumping debris in orbit.

Add to that foreign objects, coming into orbit from outside, like meterorites, and which "might" hit something and change its trajectory ever so slightly..

A lot of effort and money being spent keeping an eye on our own rubbish, which we put up there.

Just seems a bit short sighted.

BT

a reply to: beetee

Sure! Sorry, I should probably have commented below the image....As Mr Hawking says (just like the wisest sages): "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

We can't keep trashing this place as though it will have no consequences just because we can't see it with our own eyes. Space junk is real -- so are islands of plastic floating out in the ocean. Allowing rocket boosters to just crash into the sea is irresponsible.

Have you see Idiocracy?