[ogig]

I hear 10% increase on a global constant and that doesn't sound like peanuts. If we increase 10% each few years that might be a problem? I don't know anything about whatever field studies this but given that LEO constellations born yesterday even that 2% increase in stuff coming from the skyes sounds significant to me.

[JumpCrisscross]

Short answer is we're still theorizing. Models suggest we might see accumulation. But we might not, or it might not accumulate at relevant altitudes. (Current LEO satellites burn up before hitting the ozone layer.)

[SecretDreams]

The same could have been said about pollution from the industrial revolution compounding and hurting the atmosphere, but that never played out, right???

[shizcakes]

edit: okay I misunderstood what everyone meant

[lxgr]

> please recall that the mass of de-orbiting man-made satellites came from the earth in the first place.

Then again, so are CFCs, CO2, radioactive materials...

Just because some elements naturally occur on Earth doesn't mean we're completely insensitive to where they end up. (That said, I have no idea if atmospheric Aluminium is actually a problem or not.)

[VBprogrammer]

I was watching a video the other day which happened to mention that sodium lasers are used to create artificial stars, used for calibration of adaptive optics in ground based telescopes. This works because one particular layer of the upper atmosphere is rich in sodium due to impact with sodium rich debris.

Obviously it requires a more scientific analysis but it does seem to me that burning a lot of shit on the atmosphere might be problematic.

[organsnyder]

I don't see anyone worrying about planetary mass. I'd be more concerned about atmospheric effects.

[palata]

Is that what you say when you litter? "I don't see a problem with plastic in the ocean, it came from the Earth in the first place".

[dylan604]

Is that really what people are concerned about though?