|Could space debris be a challenge for collecting data on climate change?22-02-2021 15:45|
|Until the first satellites entered low-Earth orbit in the middle of the 20th century, we knew almost nothing about the dynamics of climate change. Now humanity can monitor many changes on the planet thanks to images and other data received from satellites. In 1985, satellites discovered the ozone hole. This data helps to combat climate change.|
Some satellites record signs of climate change: melting glaciers, rising sea levels and even rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Some satellites are capable of measuring the Earth's water surface with maximum accuracy. These data will help understand how global warming is affecting the world's oceans.
Artificial satellites play an important role in preventing natural disasters: hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, forest fires.
Satellite data is especially useful for observing hurricane winds and preventing their consequences.
But there is also a downside.
There are more than 30,000 pieces of space debris in near-earth orbit. If this debris is not disposed of, it can negatively impact satellites, flying too close and preventing the collection of information that is necessary to combat climate change.
Scientists and space companies offer many options for cleaning the orbit from space debris. Space tug, Foam debris catcher, Lasers, etc.
Which method seems to you the most successful and realistic?
TommyJ wrote: Until the first satellites entered low-Earth orbit in the middle of the 20th century, we knew almost nothing about the dynamics of climate change.
Nobody yet knows what the term even means. No human has ever unambiguously defined it. No two people can agree on it.
TommyJ wrote: Now humanity can monitor many changes on the planet thanks to images and other data received from satellites.
This is because the planet is defined unambiguously. Climate Change however, is nothing but religious theology that cannot be observed.
TommyJ wrote: In 1985, satellites discovered the ozone hole.
It took satellites to discover nighttime?
TommyJ wrote: But there is also a downside.
The completely undefined has neither upsides nor downsides.
TommyJ wrote: There are more than 30,000 pieces of space debris in near-earth orbit. If this debris is not disposed of, it can negatively impact satellites, flying too close and preventing the collection of information that is necessary to combat climate change.
Of all the hazards of space debris, you picked the harmless, imaginary one.
TommyJ wrote: Scientists and space companies offer many options for cleaning the orbit from space debris. Space tug, Foam debris catcher, Lasers, etc.
There is only one viable option for space debris, I.e. let it burn up on reentry.
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
|As for the space debris problem: scientists believe that there are now 50 objects weighing more than 2 tons. Are you sure that it will have time to burn without touching the Earth?|
The problem of small space debris is rather the safety of the ISS and other objects in orbit.
A small shard with tremendous acceleration can probably still be dangerous.
This week talked about 6 cracks on the ISS. It is uncritical. But...
As for the fact that no one yet knows what climate change is: here you have to agree. If there was a clear opinion on this, then there would be a clear program of what to do about it. Or there would be no programs and discussions in case no one considered it a problem.
|Into the Night★★★★★
Stuff heavier than this has burned up entirely without ever reaching the surface.
Not as big as you might think.
All the shards are generally moving in the same direction. Shards do not have acceleration, other than simply staying in orbit (acceleration causing a change of direction, induced by the force of gravity).
Cracks develop by wear and tear, and by exposure to unfiltered sunlight.
The Church of Global Warming, which is constantly trying to specify 'solutions', still cannot define 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
|There is a "cascade effect" that in the medium term may result from mutual collisions and "space debris" particles. When extrapolating even the conditions of contamination of low Earth orbits (LEO), taking into account measures to reduce the number of orbital explosions (42% of all space debris) and other measures to reduce technological contamination, this effect can, in the long term, lead to a catastrophic increase in the number of orbital debris objects by LEO and, as a consequence, the practical impossibility of space exploration. It is assumed that "after 2055, the self-propagation of the remnants of space activities will become a serious problem."|
|Darwin Airport homogenizing of temperature data||36||20-10-2020 20:28|
|80 year moving average data||88||13-05-2020 01:32|
|Headed For A New Ice Age? Latest Data Says Yes!||18||11-02-2020 18:00|
|SCIENTISTS: 30 Years Of Data Show The 'Godfather' Global Warming Was Wrong||17||11-02-2020 17:42|
|The Data Mine||284||19-07-2019 04:56|