cratercracker

The science behind Kerbin ecology!

Recommended Posts

We are launching rockets, planes, rovers and all kinds of different stuff.
But how does this affect ecology on kerbin?
I can purely say it affects it drastically! Debris form space falling into oceans, forests, lakes and rivers. That may pollute them and destroy ecosystem. This will heavily backfire kerbin’s society. Poisonous liquid fuel may evaporate and mix with atmosphere. This may cause acid rains and a lot more catastrophes.     Plastic, metals from fuselages may decompose and spoil the soil it will lead to horrifying consequences like extinction of species. 
Danger in and from space may appear. Despite that lots of debris burns up in the atmosphere some stays in space. It may fall down on the surface due to orbital decay. That would cause a metal rain. As a result- a lot of casualties. But for now, it makes even more danger in space. Debris clouds form in orbit. They may strike and you won’t even notice how quickly your spaceship blends with all debris.
Kerbals launch rockets every day. But how does this influence Kerbin? Because rockets are not made of nothing, Kerbals may face lack of resources on Kerbin.

So, after you’ve read the article I may suggest you 3 things.
1.Terminate all debris lying on kerbin (boring)
2.Launch manned mission to destroy orbital debris (cool)
3.Download BD armory or any other mod that adds lasers and shoot down all debris from ground (AWESOME)

I hope you liked this article!
But can I take a bit of your time? If, yes
Are those informative for you?
Kessler syndrome- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

TX8X2jj.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very unlikely to have a noticeable dent in life due to debris because of the sheer amount it would need. I mean, most burn harmlessly in the atmosphere, and even those like RTGs and NERVs would probably have a fairly nnegligible radiation share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MinimalMinmus said:

It is very unlikely to have a noticeable dent in life due to debris because of the sheer amount it would need. I mean, most burn harmlessly in the atmosphere, and even those like RTGs and NERVs would probably have a fairly nnegligible radiation share.

The problem that the only ife on kerbin is kerbals, trees and grass. Such ecosystem can be destroyed not by big debris though. But chemicals that are released into the atmosphere. The other thing that like first stage boosters sometimes even survive and fall down to the surface. If not, it is a fair dose of plastic, metals and everything that was put into the booster.

Of course radiation or chemical danger won't rise from a nuclear engine blasting in flames though the atmosphere... Even if the rocket stages are burning in the atmosphere harmlessly not getting even close to the surface there is nasty small debris is getting to the surface. I checked my debris section and you know what? Small parts like decouplers, heatshields and even scientific instruments were lying on the surface in noticeable amounts. I found 32 decouplers, 4 heatshields , 21 small boasters(SRB) and even a full package of instruments.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that with every launch, you are also pushing Kerbin picometers backwards due to Newton's third law. Please remember to alternate launch directions as close a year and 12 hours after the first one to correct for this and preserve the delicate balance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming the rest of Kerbal society is rather green, despite frequent rocket launches Kerbin would still be in a better position than earth by a fair amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2017 at 2:16 AM, cratercracker said:

1.Terminate all debris lying on kerbin (boring)

Technically, if debris is landed on Kerbin (in parts if not in whole) you can actually recover it, rather than just terminate it like you would in any other situation.  You even get some credits back for doing so!  

I think of this as a recycling problem.  Melting existing aluminium is cheaper and environmentally cleaner than going through the Bayer process to extract more (it only takes a fraction of the energy requirements.)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skylab during its first manned mission deployed a parasol-like sunshade through a small instrument port from the inside of the station, bringing station temperature down to acceptable levels and preventing overheating that would have melted the plastic insulation inside the station and release poisonous gas.

Plastics are invading all spheres of life wreaking havoc with our health. Even the kerbal space is not spared. Heat, repeated washing, acidity and alkalinity cause the BPA in plastics to leach.

It has become an inseparable part of life. So the solution left is to recycle plastic or reduce the usage of plastic (3Rs). Refer this article (http://www.gorillabins.ca/blog/12-facts-about-recycling/) which says plastics take between 100 and 400 years to break down in the landfill. Using recycled material utilize only two-thirds of the energy needed to manufacture them from raw materials. 

Edited by Will Donati

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.