[JumpCrisscross]

> If we wanted to subsidize internet for rural and low-income communities responsibly, we could invest in fiber and other solutions, and control the externalities

Running cables across out land is less impactful than lofting satellites?

[dweinus]

Per the article, Starlink runs 8k satellites with an average life of 5 years. They launch in payloads of 20-40 satellites. That's 50+ launches per year if everything goes perfectly. About a million pounds of kerosene per launch. Plus everything else that goes into the rockets and satellites. Then the pollution impact from the launches and reentries. Then the eventual need to clean up LOE to avoid Kessler Syndrome. So yeah, well understood ground tech may be cheaper over the lifecycle. At a minimum, it should be a reasoned choice, not environmental debt pawned off by the richest man in the world.

[JumpCrisscross]

> About a million pounds of kerosene per launch

Quarter of a million pounds kerosene per Falcon 9. Zero for Starship, which burns methane. (And thus emits pure methane, CO2 and water vapor.)

> the eventual need to clean up LOE to avoid Kessler Syndrome

Not a thing. (Search this comment thread for the term. There are good answers on the current state of research.)

[dweinus]

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2024/09/12/spacex-launches-...

...but sure, for the sake of argument, maybe it's only a quarter million lbs of kerosene 50 times a year, upper atmospheric pollution, and LEO crowding that gets solved by HN comments. ...instead of a dumb cable that doesn't come with a side of funding a billionaire neo-nazi. My bad.

[inemesitaffia]

You'd have no problem with Kuiper if SpaceX owned Corning, Ciena and Nokia and was running Fiber.

To the left with your nonsense.

The big very visible clue is SpaceX launched over 100 times in 2024 and 2025.

Why estimate when you can count?