5

update: CNN's November 7, 2023 Japanese scientists want to send a wooden satellite into space links to October 16, 2023 NOAA scientists link exotic metal particles in the upper atmosphere to rockets, satellites

“Two of the most surprising elements we saw in these particles were niobium and hafnium,” said Chemical Sciences Laboratory research chemist Daniel Murphy, who led a team including scientists from CIRES, Purdue and the University of Leeds. “These are both rare elements that are not expected in the stratosphere. It was a mystery as to where these metals are coming from and how they’re ending up there.”

[...]

While Murphy and his coauthors estimate that 10% of stratospheric sulfuric acid particles currently contain traces of metals from rockets and satellites, they say that could grow to 50% or more based on the number of satellites being launched into low-earth orbit, and efforts to eliminate space debris at end-of-life by directing it into the atmosphere to burn up.

“There will be a lot of work to understand the implications of these novel metals in the stratosphere,” Murphy said.

As of October 4, the tracking website Orbiting Now lists 8,697 satellites currently in orbit, 7,892 of which are in low Earth orbit and are destined to burn up on reentry.

“At 10%, the current fraction of stratospheric aerosol with metal cores is not large.” said co-author Martin Ross of The Aerospace Corporation. “But over 5,000 satellites have been launched in the past five years. Most of them will come back in the next five, and we need to know how that might further affect stratospheric aerosols.”

Credit: Chelsea Thompson/NOAA

Credit: Chelsea Thompson/NOAA

This in turn links to the published results in October 16, 2023 PNAS: Metals from spacecraft reentry in stratospheric aerosol particles


Weighing 2.9 tons... this heap of old batteries is now the heaviest single piece of garbage to be jettisoned from the International Space Station.

begins Gizmodo's ISS Ditches 2.9-Ton Pallet of Batteries, Creating Its Most Massive Piece of Space Trash

Digital Trends' What was inside the space station pallet jettisoned into space on Thursday says:

On Thursday, March 11, mission controllers in Houston commanded the space station’s Canadarm2 robotic arm to jettison an external pallet containing old nickel-hydrogen batteries into Earth orbit.

The nickel-hydrogen batteries were once used for the ISS’s power system but have since been replaced with newer lithium-ion batteries featuring improved power capacity, smaller size, and lighter mass.

Fortunately, the pallet and the batteries inside it won’t remain as space junk indefinitely (there’s enough of that already orbiting our planet), as the whole lot will burn up when it enters Earth’s atmosphere in several years’ time.

I suppose that it's fortunate for other spacecraft in LEO that they won't stay in orbit for even longer than "several years' time" but without taking any measures to increase drag like attaching some Terminator Tape or equivalent it's still a non-zero risk.

But for those who breathe all that nickel doesn't just go away, it becomes a long term resident of Earth's atmosphere.

Scientific American's Some airborne particles pose more dangers than others; New evidence suggests that breathing nickel and other metals can lead to lung and heart damage, and even death is from 2009, and the science of the effects of PM2.5 and smaller particles on human heath is rapidly evolving.

Questions:

  1. Considering all of the Nickel Hydrogen that were ever on the ISS that have now all been replaced, what fraction were incinerated in the atmosphere we breathe, and how many total kilograms of nickel does this represent?
  2. Were there any estimates as to what fraction would end up as nickel-containing PM2.5 particles? (the size at which particles tend to remain in our lungs and can sometimes move into the bloodstream and lodge in different organs)

Related:

uhoh
  • 148,791
  • 53
  • 476
  • 1,473
  • 14
    Each day, roughly 43.3 (metric) tons of meteoric matter enters the Earth's atmosphere. That material is ~1.72% nickel. So we get ~740 kg of nickel per day from natural sources. (FWIW, there's a fairly wide range of values for the total meteoroid flux on the Net, ranging from 10⁷ to 10⁹ kg/year, but the value I used seems to be the one most frequently used in recent work). – PM 2Ring Mar 13 '21 at 12:13
  • Possibly too broad, parts 1 and 2 seem very different. I could probably answer part 1 but no clue on 2. Not the downvoter though. – Organic Marble Mar 13 '21 at 16:51
  • @PM2Ring but the altitudes and vaporization processes for micrometeorites and for a pallet full of batteries are probably very different, and so their yields of PM2.5 class particles might differ greatly. I don't know which way, thus the question as asked. – uhoh Mar 13 '21 at 20:03
  • Sure. When micrometeorites are small enough, their terminal velocity is so small that they don't burn, they just slowly settle. Whereas a pallet of stuff is guaranteed to burn, and to do so at a high temperature. – PM 2Ring Mar 13 '21 at 20:51
  • 1
    @PM2Ring that might be the case, but "guaranteed to burn" doesn't necessarily mean stoichiometric combustion down to the molecular level. "Burns up in the atmosphere" is just a nice sounding phrase, but a good answer here will find a source where the process is addressed and particulate formation has been estimated. – uhoh Mar 14 '21 at 01:59
  • 3
    Note that the batteries on ISS were nickel-hydrogen, not nickel-metal-hydride. They contained gaseous hydrogen. – Tristan Mar 14 '21 at 06:04
  • @Tristan thanks, yes I've updated accordingly. I'd never heard of them but wow they've a long heritage of powering spacecraft, including Hubble. – uhoh Mar 15 '21 at 01:31
  • 4
    Wait. So let me get this. We're getting Nickelback? No, somebody stop the music :D –  Mar 15 '21 at 02:59
  • 4
    I actually worked with Nickel in the lab in grad school. The pure metal oxidizes super fast in the atmosphere at high temperatures (e.g., if it's burning like a meteorite). We'll get lots of Nickel oxide, but probably no metallic nickel is my guess. –  Mar 15 '21 at 03:02
  • @user39728 Thanks for the info; I've never actually seen a clean, pure nickel surface. I'm wondering; the surface may oxidize in a few minutes but to what depth? Atmospheric entry happens pretty fast, things melt, boil, explode sometimes, so if the nickel plates can be turned into tiny particles quickly then much more surface will be exposed to oxygen molecules. – uhoh Mar 15 '21 at 03:35
  • 2
    It actually depends on the oxide film that forms. If it were aluminum, the film would block the diffusion of oxygen through the metal, so the oxidation would stop and the rest of the metal would be protected and stay pure. If it were iron, the oxide would form porous scales through which oxygen would diffuse to keep eating away at the iron inside until eventually only iron oxide was left. I think Nickel is more like iron than aluminum, but I don't remember. –  Mar 15 '21 at 03:44
  • 1
  • 1
    Interesting questions! I did fuel cells and learned about oxides only for corrosion, so unfortunately I know nothing about aluminum mirrors. Al2O3 is very stable, but I suppose it can grow enough over time to degrade the reflectivity of the mirror... You seem to know way more about this than I do :D –  Mar 15 '21 at 17:28
  • 1
    Regarding oxide film formation on flying molten aluminum droplets, I just ran into an article about just that (in the context of aluminum arc spraying): https://inldigitallibrary.inl.gov/sites/sti/sti/3169832.pdf Apparently the airflow causes the liquid aluminum in the droplet to circulate, which breaks up the oxide layer and mixes it into the droplet, constantly exposing new molten aluminum to air (which produces heat that keeps the droplet molten). While the air pressures and velocities in the paper probably differ quite a bit from re-entry, I'd still expect at least qualitative similarity. – Ilmari Karonen Nov 09 '21 at 14:32
  • @uhoh the nickel would break to pieces due to a low melting point, it might even vaporise fully, seeing as NASA and the ESA generally don't like whole pieces of anything getting back down unless there's people on them! They probably build the batteries to be easily broken into pieces that vaporise or become plasma on the way back through atmo. – AnarchoEngineer Jan 08 '23 at 23:19
  • I would think that the batteries would not make it down in any large solid state, merely as dust, after cooling. – AnarchoEngineer Jan 08 '23 at 23:20
  • @RegenerativelyCooledAstronaut and yet nickel meteors make it to the surface in one piece. – uhoh Jan 08 '23 at 23:20
  • @uhoh And that's because the meteors are fairly large, fully solid, and not designed to break apart... – AnarchoEngineer Jan 08 '23 at 23:21
  • A nickel meteor making it to the surface is unusual, compared to the number of them that reach the upper atmosphere, as is the case with most fast-moving space objects that aren't either made to make it down or are just really thick metals. – AnarchoEngineer Jan 08 '23 at 23:22
  • Also, the faster you go the hotter it gets, and the faster the meteor would break apart. However there is a point where you go fast enough that you get to the surface before you can melt... That's what makes really fast medium-sized objects dangerous. – AnarchoEngineer Jan 08 '23 at 23:24
  • @RegenerativelyCooledAstronaut meteors come in all sizes! From planet-killers to boulders to something you can pick up to dust. If you have a source that confirms that the batteries were designed to break up upon reentry, then that could be the basis of at least a partial answer. They don't get particularly hot, even though atmospheric entry is a lot faster than that from low Earth orbit. See also Have "frosty meteorites" ever been observed soon after landing? Are there photos? – uhoh Jan 08 '23 at 23:24

0 Answers0