Big, dead satellite's crash was a space-junk wakeup call, experts say

[Admin]

The uncontrolled reentry of the European Space Agency's defunct ERS-2 satellite was a reminder that operators should plan out the safe demise of their spacecraft.

Big, dead satellite's crash was a space-junk wakeup call, experts say : Read more

 

[Pogo]

I’ve often thought “What about all the material that vaporizes in the atmosphere, now we have many elements and compounds as vapors in what we’re breathing that was not intended to be there.
Early in the Shuttle program, it was noted that they have found micro spheres of aluminum oxide in the atmosphere from the solid rocket boosters.

 

[Nammy]

They didn't even take into consideration animals, particularly mammals, living in the oceans who could get hit and injured or die by said debris, nor they mention how much that junk is contaminating the waters. This pollution will only get worse.
They need to design a robot ship or drone that they can launch like a satellite into orbit, and as each piece of junk gets decommissioned, that drone will go to the junk, tow it away from Earth, and push it towards the moon, where it can crash without harm. Then the drone can return to orbit and wait till next month before it needs to repeat that mission.
If someday, any metal or chemical was in the junk that can be salvaged, they can do so.

 

[billslugg]

Space travel is extremely costly, sending trash to the Moon would damage it for any future scientific studies. The cost of moving things around is proportional to the changes in velocity needed to get it there. Dumping things into the atmosphere is the cheapest way to get rid of satellites. Here are the delta V numbers:
- Launch into orbit at 250 km takes 9256 meters per second

- Slowing it down enough to re-enter takes 20 meters per second off of that.
- Sending an object to the Moon and landing it takes adding 5661 m/s.

The cost of sending to the Moon is 283 times more than de-orbiting into the ocean.