[meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life - shame on NASA

From: Del Waterbury <paseclipse_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:14:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <891628.15378.qm_at_web51304.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

I don't think the taxpayers would be to happy to hear NASA spent millions of dollars to remove a piece of space junk. Letting it enter back into the atmoshphere is the safe and cheapest way to go. Of course we could just let it stay up there and add to the many pieces of space junk already floating around putting astronauts lives in danger.

Del


--- On Mon, 11/3/08, Greg Catterton <star_wars_collector at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Greg Catterton <star_wars_collector at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life - shame on NASA
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 11:06 AM
> If that is the case, why was such a big deal made about not
> going anywhere near the debris if it had impacted on land
> becouse of toxic hazards?
>
> I agree about the scuttled destroyer, but at the same time,
> I dont think that is right to do also.
>
> Perhaps the toxic nature that has been reported has mislead
> me to think that it was more of a big deal then it is, but
> it is troubling to think that this was the best thing they
> could come up with.
> Surely it could have been returned to earth on a shuttle
> and disposed of properly.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Mon, 11/3/08, Chris Peterson
> <clp at alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
>
> > From: Chris Peterson <clp at alumni.caltech.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life
> - shame on NASA
> > To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 1:57 PM
> > Hi Greg-
> >
> > It is inaccurate to say that this object
> "splashed
> > down". In fact, much of
> > it burned away during reentry, leaving much smaller
> debris.
> > It would seem
> > extremely unlikely that any ammonia was left by the
> time
> > pieces hit the
> > water. So there was only a bit of scrap metal,
> probably
> > nothing of
> > significant toxicity. The impact of this debris on the
> > ocean ecology is
> > likely to be near zero.
> >
> > Returning junk from low earth orbit is not currently
> > practical in most
> > cases. The only option is to allow it to reenter and
> > (mostly) burn up. I
> > suspect that the sum total of all the debris from
> space
> > that has reached the
> > ground doesn't add up to one scuttled destroyer
> (with
> > far more toxics in the
> > latter case as well). And ships are scuttled all the
> time,
> > along with
> > thousands every year that are simply lost at sea.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > *****************************************
> > Chris L Peterson
> > Cloudbait Observatory
> > http://www.cloudbait.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Greg Catterton"
> > <star_wars_collector at yahoo.com>
> > To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:41 AM
> > Subject: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life -
> shame
> > on NASA
> >
> >
> > > ""The junk was a tank full of ammonia
> > coolant on the international space
> > > station that was no longer needed. Astronaut
> Clayton
> > Anderson threw it
> > > overboard during a spacewalk in July 2007.
> > >
> > > Space station program manager Mike Suffredini
> said
> > Monday that the debris
> > > splashed down somewhere between Australia and New
> > Zealand Sunday night""
> > >
> > >
> > > Am I alone in the idea that Nasa should be held
> > criminaly liable for the
> > > polution of our waters?
> > > If an ordinary person was to dump toxic material
> into
> > the ocean, surely we
> > > would be in alot of trouble... just becouse they
> are
> > Nasa does not make
> > > them above the law. Ammonia is highly toxic to
> marine
> > life!
> > > It is my opinion that this was an outright
> disrespect
> > to the enviorment
> > > and a potential hazard to the marine life in the
> area
> > of impact.
> > > I am very upset about this and feel Nasa was
> totally
> > wrong for the actions
> > > they have done.
> > > This could have been handled in a much better
> fashion,
> > and I for one would
> > > like to see Nasa held accountable for this.
> > > I am really upset about this whole situtation.
> > > surely if it had fallen on someones propery NASA
> would
> > be in alot of
> > > trouble...
> > > Shame on you NASA. Shame on you Clayton Anderson.
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


      
Received on Mon 03 Nov 2008 02:14:29 PM PST