It’s a shame that such an important topic is being covered by such a shitty article.
Yeah, I kind of agree. Sometimes the Guardian seems determined to disappoint.
googles
Try this:
https://www.space.com/satellites-re-entering-magnetosphere-effects-study
EDIT: I also went and submitted it as a separate article.
Why is it shitty?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A dead spacecraft the size of a truck ignites with plasma and pulverizes into dust and litter as it rips through the ionosphere and atmosphere.
There are currently nearly 10,000 active satellites and companies are working as fast as possible to get tens of thousands more into orbit – for a projected 1m in the next three to four decades.
Those satellites power hyper-connected internet services and may turn some billionaires into trillionaires – at the cost of shrouding the planet with toxic trash.
Upon investigating just how much dust in the form of satellite and rocket debris the space industry has dumped into the ionosphere during re-entry, I was alarmed to find that it is currently multiple Eiffel Tower’s worth of metallic ash.
Our ozone is mere pennies thick, and soon we will be putting at least an Eiffel Tower’s worth of metallic ash a year directly into the ionosphere.
Low Earth orbit is being promoted as a “destination and economy” for satellites and even low-gravity space hotels (which seem to be perpetually “coming soon” and then canceled).
The original article contains 983 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 82%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
