It's crazy to me that people largely consider it safe as long as the unspent fuel or nuclear debris is dumped into the ocean.

(Not a direct comment on your opinion specifically, just building of the general idea)

Because it largely is? It ends up on the sea bed, covered in sediment, then eventually recycled into the Earth’s mantle some millions of years from now. It doesn’t enter the biosphere.

Oceans, marine fauna and marine flora are part of the biosphere.

None of those exist in the regions where these satellite renter. These are natural dead patches.

Any evidence/reference to back this up?

Oceans are the cradle of life and are still populated by fishes, mammals, zoo and phytoplancton even away from coastlines.

http://comlmaps.org/gallery/footprints/

Not these areas.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/programmes/datelinepacif...

Abyssal zones of the ocean are only populated by creatures that feed on hydrothermal vents, or dead creatures falling down from the surface. But the mid pacific has no hydrothermal vents and the surface is a dead zone due to human activity. So there is no source of food for life to exist here, and outside of the occasional whale fall it is truly dead.

Terrifying, didn’t know there’s a second patch on the south. The census map in my parent post show this area populated by “predators” but not much zooplankton, so not sure what lives there. There’s also probably a bunch of debris from nuclear tests in this region.

Not soon. Most of these other rorsat reactors have been put in a parking/disposal orbit where they'll last a long time (I forgot how long bit I think it was in the order of thousands of years)

I'm kinda surprised the soviets even thought of the environment in that way.