Trash from Intl Space Station, tank of toxic ammonia coolant,expected to strike earth on 11/2. No other way?

Yes, I really need to spell check my replies properly. Anyway. I was merely
saying that we seem to nearly always say that if its only a small amount of
rubbish, it is fine, but never re assess things as quantities grow. I mean,
eventually, the iss will be beyond economic use and if its left there will
plummet down somewhere. Has anyone thought about this?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On Nov 1, 1:27 am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
So what is the difference between this and normal ammonia? I'm not saying
this is what they should have done, I thought at the time it was a bit
silly, but was told then that no fixings were available to secure this
tank
into a shuttle.
In this case are we saying it will make it through interact? I'd doubt it
personally, and in the grand scheme of things, the small amount of gass
when
taken against the volume of the atmosphere is hardly any concern. Of
course, like anything, I have felt that using the heat of re entry to get
rid of junk was a risky and short sighted business, as this is how we
ended
up with rubbish mountains in the plare stations and indeed contaminated
the
environment generally. IE we start small and get bigger and nobody
rethinks
it until something bad happens.

Brian

As of decades ago we've trashed our environment anyway, so what's the
difference? (is that what you're saying)

~ BG