this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
355 points (96.6% liked)

World News

55668 readers
2247 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The debris will be microscopic. It won't "land" anywhere noticeable.

The fine particulate matter may not be great for the ozone layer, but it's actually pretty negligible compared to all of the other pollution that we're not addressing either. That doesn't justify the pollution, but hopefully it helps contextualize it.

[–] gnate@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Per the article, sometimes they burn up, sometimes they don't.

The big culprit I was remembering isn't Starlink, but SpaceX, with the debris being potentially lethal (over 6 feet, too heavy for one person to move.)

From the same professor: https://wlos.com/news/local/professor-spacexs-lack-of-accountability-for-space-debris-frustrating-nasa-samantha-lawlwer-university-of-regina-saskatchewan-canada

Musk's companies are notorious for lack of responsibility. At least Cards Against Humanity held they're get to the fire for a minute.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

SpaceX has made changes in the past so the dishes break up better. That could have been one of the earlier dishes, but maybe it was also one of the ones that failed to properly insert into orbit which changed the re-entry characteristics?

The big things like you mentioned wouldn't be starlink. That'd be from something larger like a 2nd stage that came back down and didnt fully burn up. Thats a risk with everyone, mega constellation or not.

Luckily, starship will be fully reusable which will prevent that, but the trade off is, if starship is successful, a failure during re entry is going to risk having a vehicle designed not to burn up, land somewhere it shouldn't.

Similar risks to the shuttle if it blew up, but these will be flying much more frequently

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 7 points 1 day ago

I ran into this dramatization for media hits before, with the complaint about rocket launches and their contribution to pollution. People were all about getting out the pitchforks, especially since it was mainly about Elon Musk, but when the actual numbers were mentioned (very small), suddenly, I was the bad guy. No one likes real facts.

Now, should we be launching so many things that are designed to fall back down so soon? Probably not, that's the mark of a disposable society in high gear. But how we're doing things, and why, should be the focus, not a headline that makes it sound like things are falling out of the sky to hit people.