http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_RUSSIA_FALLING_SPACECRAFT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
A Russian space probe launched on November 9th and destined for one of Mars' moons, Phobos, became trapped in Earth's orbit and crashed crashed across a large portion of the Earth, centering around Brazil and the Pacific Ocean. According to the article, this $170 million craft is reported to be "one of the heaviest and most toxic pieces of space junk ever to crash to Earth". However, researchers claim that much of the probe dissolved in the atmosphere during its descent. (When I read this portion of the article, a red flag went up immediately. Sounds like a massive understatement to me.) Who knows what type of long term damage space debris will cost the planet.
My questions are, how will space technologies affect the quality of life on Earth in the future?/What are the long term effects of space crashes on the environment? And are space programs really worth the time, effort, and resources we allot to them? Just food for thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think that space programs are worth the effort since they discover so many new things-the Phobos was supposed to bring back some of Mars' largest moon to be studied, and boost the nation's pride. It just happened to be chance that the space probe crashed- following a successful launch from Russia’s Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan its own engine failed to generate two impulses which were necessary to direct the spacecraft onto a path to Mars, so as a consequence, the probe became stuck in a low transitory orbit above Earth. No one really knows what the exact problem was though, thus creating a space craft or not their is always a chance something unexpected can go wrong. Some say a problem with the probe’s software is what caused the crash, while others speculate that it was the hardware. Regarding the long term affects though, hopefully it won't be too bad. I disagree with Keaton's red flag idea, although the probe contained a lot toxic waste as Keaton said it could potentially be the most toxic falling satellite, re-known scientists say the toxic rocket fuel on board and most of the craft's structure would burn up in the atmosphere high above the ground. In addition, the Phobos-Ground also contained a tiny quantity of the radioactive metal Cobalt-57 in one of its instrument. Hypothetically though given that is almost impossible to predict the exact area where the spacecraft might fall, and other scientists say it could be anywhere between 52 degrees North and 52 degrees South (which is consequently a vast amount of land) and unfortunately, it is exactly where our planet’s most-densely populated areas are located-long term affects can be catastrophic.
What with the nature and difficulty of rocket science, it's to be expected that the occasional projects crash and burn to the ground. However, I am optimistic for the future. Given our ever-advancing technology, as well as an international effort to cooperate, spaceflight safety seems to have improved-- at least since the days of the Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union. While it's true we have been lucky that space debris has yet to kill any person, our luck remains relatively high. Approximately 70% of the Earth's surface is water, and of the 30% land, much is uninhabited desert, forest, glaciers, or wasteland; and much of objects burn up during reentry into the atmosphere. Thus, I believe space debris poses a much larger threat to aerospace missions. Hopefully, due to the vastness of space, they will not be as large a problem. All the same, we should definitely focus on preventing more incidents such as these by examining projects more carefully before launch.
Post a Comment