Space Debris: Is It a Crisis?

I heard StarLink satellites eventually re-enter the atmosphere when they are not orbit-stable. Thus this technology is bad for life on earth when it is lauched into space and again when decommissioned.

Here an article on that:

https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/are-starlinks-satellites-...

Quite a crazy example of how costs are externalized, while profits are accumulated at the top.

Why is it bad ? Like compared to lets say a car or any number of industrial products ?

Satellites comprised mainly of aluminium burn up in the upper atmosphere. This likely reduces the ozone layer, as that's where the chemical reactions take place, unlike industrial activity on the ground. A certain amount of aluminium gets injected into the upper atmosphere by meteorites without any human activity involved, but the quantities burned up by modern satellite constellations will significantly exceed that. Nothing different about Starlink satellites compared with anyone else's operating in LEO, but they do operate more than anyone else.

There's considerably more aluminum oxides in the stratosphere from solid rocket motors than satellite reentires, and that's been going on since the 1970's. The 135 Space Shuttle launches burned 160 tons of aluminum powder, per launch, in their SRB's. (22 kilotons in total?) An Ariane 6 launch burns 55 or 110 tons (2 or 4 boosters).

The largest satellite payloads are 20 tons in a launch.

(Al2O3 isn't even the highest-impact ozone depletor within the space industry; that's chlorine. Also from solid rocket fuel).