I will state again, from the reports I read, it was supposed to pose a serious health risk to anyone who would have come into contact with it had there been a land impact... that said, I assumed that the same would be for marine life. I felt that if that was the case, it was very reckless of NASA to simply toss it out to fall to earth. Again, I am new to this and do not understand all the things involved. All reports I read stated that several pieces would survive re entry and some would be up to 40-50 lbs... I may not have fully understood the issue, but I do feel some comments directed to me were very insulting. I have stated before I am newer to this and do not understand everything involved. while several of you have been polite and helpful, I am left feeling that certain ones who responded need to be more considerate of people who are new to this and still learning. Its not as if I publicly insulted anyone here and for some of the comments I have recieved I feel are totally uncalled for.
I do understand the safety issues involved with returning it to earth, and the costs... none of which was explained in the news reports... that is why I felt NASA was reckless and should be held liable - I was not properly informed and took the reports at face value. --- On Mon, 11/3/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life - shame on NASA > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, November 3, 2008, 4:11 PM > Hi Chris, Listees, > > It isn't a shade of "illegal dumping" at > issue as far as I can tell. > > The possibly crass accusations that stated this thread > might consider > that transporting the old tank in a Space Shuttle back to > earth would > present a far greater danger to occupants and American > residents in the > landing path across the USA upon reentry rather than > uncontrolled > incineration it was given. If you don't believe that, > why don't you > volunteer for a return flight with that oversized ammonia > tank strapped > in next to you in the belly of the Shuttle as the 30 year > old vehicle > starts shaking like hell in a controlled fall your life > depends upon in > reentry. Even Iron Man might get a cold sweat on that one. > > There was no safer way, unless you wanted to build a > booster for it and > blast it off from a mobile launch platform in low earth > orbit into the > Sun :). Is this a sensible? > > Best wishes and great health, > Doug > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 1:52 pm > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life - > shame on NASA > > > There is established international law dealing with legal > liability for > damage or injury caused by space debris reaching the > ground. All space > missions (in the U.S., at least) consider the likelihood of > material > surviving reentry. It's a question of statistics, and > the chance of > damage is almost always extremely small. In rare cases > where something > very large is being returned, it is usual for the object to > be scuttled > under controlled circumstances, to ensure reentry over the > ocean. This > refrigeration unit did not require a semi-controlled > reentry because it > was very unlikely enough material would survive to the > ground to > matter, regardless of where the decay occurred. > > Of course, if an object should land on a school, it's > easy to say how > much cheaper it would have been to return it. But that > logic only > applies if you return everything, and that would be far, > far more > expensive than the cost of a single object hitting a > school. In this > case, given the size of debris remaining (if any), it's > likely that > something hitting a roof would just knock off some shingles > and slide > down. > > I'll bet your risk is much greater from being hit by > something falling > off an airplane than being hit by something reentering from > space. And > neither risk is high enough to spend much time worrying > about! > > Chris > > ***************************************** > Chris L Peterson > Cloudbait Observatory > http://www.cloudbait.com > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg > Catterton" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Chris Peterson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:30 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Space junk - marine life - > shame on NASA > > > > > It is the first thing I was aware of, until reading > more about it. > > I know what ifs are really meaningless, however... if > it had landed > on a > school full of kids, Im sure the cost of > returning to earth > would have > been very cheap compared to the loss of > life. > > If it had impacted on a house or other private > property, would NASA > have > been liable? > > > > The replies about this have been really good and > informative, Thanks > to > all for your input. > > > > Greg > > ______________________________________________ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > ______________________________________________ > http://www.meteoritecentral.com > Meteorite-list mailing list > [email protected] > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list ______________________________________________ http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
