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

[Michael Farmer]

Can we take this to a NASA or SPACE JUNK list. This has nothing to do with meteorites, though interesting, has run its coarse and filled my inbox. 
Michael Farmer


--- 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: "Del Waterbury" <paseclipse at yahoo.com>

> Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com

> Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 12:21 PM

> why could they not have returned it to earth on a shuttle

> that was going to be returning to earth anyway?

> No extra cost involved there.

> 

> --- On Mon, 11/3/08, Del Waterbury

> <paseclipse at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 

> > From: Del Waterbury <paseclipse at yahoo.com>

> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life

> - shame on NASA

> > To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com,

> star_wars_collector at yahoo.com

> > Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 2:14 PM

> > 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

> 

> 

>       

> 

> ______________________________________________

> http://www.meteoritecentral.com

> Meteorite-list mailing list

> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list