Beehaw
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) M to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · 2 years ago

Please Do Not Let Elon Musk Destroy the Ozone Layer

lock

www.splinter.com

external-link
message-square
23
link
fedilink
140
external-link

Please Do Not Let Elon Musk Destroy the Ozone Layer

lock

www.splinter.com

silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) M to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · 2 years ago
message-square
23
link
fedilink
Splinter is your home for news and opinions that challenge power in our political and economic system that's becoming more unhinged each and every day.
alert-triangle
You must log in or register to comment.
  • FiveMacs ( Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    2 years ago

    Good luck…we can’t even get companies to stop poisoning drinking water for entire cities…you won’t stop Elon from doing whatever he wants when he and his buddies can just buy new laws.

    • silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) OP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 years ago

      Ozone is something where we’ve gotten big changes like that before.

      • Ænima ( mjhelto@lemm.ee ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 years ago

        That was before Fox “News” and the GOP made cooperation, or the pretense of cooperation, a mortal sin.

  • CameronDev ( CameronDev@programming.dev ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 years ago

    How about we wait until the science is actually in before kneejerking around? We have had the science equivalent of a shower thought, actual work and analysis needs to be done before jumping to conclusions.

    • llii ( llii@discuss.tchncs.de ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 years ago

      How about we wait until the science is actually in before sending hundreds and thousands of satellites into LEO?

    • ValenThyme ( ValenThyme@reddthat.com ) deleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      deleted by creator

      • CameronDev ( CameronDev@programming.dev ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        There will be a lot of work to understand the implications of these novel metals in the stratosphere,” Murphy said

        I don’t see anything in that article about them being “alarmed”.

        So far all the scientists appear to be saying “heads up, we need to investigate this further”, not “stop launching, this is bad”. We should listen to the scientists.

        • ValenThyme ( ValenThyme@reddthat.com ) deleted by creator
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          deleted by creator

    • BruceTwarzen ( BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      Let’s fire some shit in the atmosphere first and then let scientists figure it out when it’s too late anyway. Absolute boomer shit

    • Sidyctism II. ( Sidyctism2@discuss.tchncs.de ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Urm i think the rocket needs to wait instead of us

  • pewgar_seemsimandroid ( pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 years ago

    or bezos, or anyone else.

    • FiniteBanjo ( FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Especially fucking Bezos.

      Natural Gas rockets? What a small step for man, massive step back for mankind.

      • thegreenguy ( thegreenguy@sopuli.xyz ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Methane is CH4. When it burns, it turns into Carbon (NOT carbon dioxide) and Hydrogen.

  • AwesomeLowlander ( awesome_lowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    Have yet to see any of these ‘studies’ take into account and compare with natural meteorite effects, which are orders of magnitude larger than the satellites.

    • ValenThyme ( ValenThyme@reddthat.com ) deleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      deleted by creator

  • Jack ( JustJack23@slrpnk.net ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    I find it funny that even the problems he “invents” are not new.

  • Ragnarok314159 ( Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Best be hoping Tesla collapses and Elon gets his with the SEC. When TSLA falls, he will lose his connections and no one will be willing to protect him, just another loser millionaire white guy and sometimes the government does go after them.

    Elon will likely be fried at that point because he will have committed the worst crime in America: messing with rich people’s money.

  • Rozaŭtuno ( Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    But it’s going to make him slightly richer! How could you be so selfish?

    • BruceTwarzen ( BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Omg imagine elon having 100billion dollars, that would be so lit fam

  • MagicShel ( MagicShel@programming.dev ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    Wow. I read that as ozone laser and was super confused.

  • Soundhole ( Soundhole@lemm.ee ) deleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator

  • rbesfe ( rbesfe@lemmy.ca ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Of all the valid reasons to hate elon for, this is not one of them. The emissions from the entire world’s satellite re-entries are basically nothing on an atmospheric scale.

    • Hirom ( Hirom@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      The article cite a peer-reviewed scientific paper which indicate satellites reentry has a significant effect.

      Have you published (or know of) a better research paper that show this is incorrect?

      the population of reentering satellites in 2022 caused a 29.5% increase of aluminum in the atmosphere above the natural level.

      […]

      As aluminum oxide nanoparticles may remain in the atmosphere for decades, they can cause significant ozone depletion.

      Source: Potential Ozone Depletion From Satellite Demise During Atmospheric Reentry in the Era of Mega-Constellations

    • silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) OP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      There article is about a paper showing that there’s a significant increase in aluminum oxide in the atmosphere. The particulates from that are part of how the small amounts of chlorine in the atmosphere are able to destroy ozone.

  • MonkderDritte ( MonkderDritte@feddit.de ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    How much do you think (micro)metoerites bring in daily?

    • Deme ( Deme@sopuli.xyz ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      https://phys.org/news/2024-06-satellite-megaconstellations-jeopardize-recovery-ozone.html

      When old satellites fall into Earth’s atmosphere and burn up, they leave behind tiny particles of aluminum oxide, which eat away at Earth’s protective ozone layer. A new study finds that these oxides have increased 8-fold between 2016 and 2022 and will continue to accumulate as the number of low-Earth-orbit satellites skyrockets.

      Those micrometeors aren’t mostly aluminium.

  • GoodEye8 ( GoodEye8@lemm.ee ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    And how do you know it’s magnitudes higher if you haven’t seen any studies taking it into consideration?

Climate@slrpnk.net

climate@slrpnk.net

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !climate@slrpnk.net

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 56 users / day
  • 79 users / week
  • 1.01K users / month
  • 3.44K users / 6 months
  • 172 local subscribers
  • 9.08K subscribers
  • 13.2K Posts
  • 22.1K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) 
  • BE: 0.19.21
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code