Solar Flare and EMP Could Unleash Nuclear Holocaust [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Solar Flare and EMP Could Unleash Nuclear Holocaust


Glock30Eric
09-14-2011, 11:22
Hello,

I think you guys would want to read this and be aware of the Nuclear power plants' risk with the solar flares and EMPs.

http://theintelhub.com/2011/09/13/solar-flare-could-unleash-nuclear-holocaust-across-planet-earth-forcing-hundreds-of-nuclear-power-plants-into-total-meltdowns/


It is scary and I think we should go back to the coal power plants.

cowboy1964
09-14-2011, 11:33
The biggest risk is all the spent fuel sitting in hundreds of ponds across the world. Even if we shuttered all the nuke plants today those pools would still be there. But NOOO, we can't have a permanent storage facility in Nevada. Freaking short-sighted idiots we have running things.

That article is just plain wrong though on one thing. Chernobyl was far worse than Fukushima, in every aspect.

Bilbo Bagins
09-14-2011, 12:41
I hate to say it but that Japan Nuclear meltdown may have been a wake up call. Remember the Floods in Nebraska, we had close to similar problems in PA during recent flooding. Just simple long term power outages, flooded Generator rooms, and contaminated cooling water supply, could put a Nuke plant into deep trouble. I never realize before Japan that a Nuclear plant that makes electricity could have a meltdown simply because of a lack of electricity.

The NRC is calling on all 104 US nuclear power plants for updated SHTF plans.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-government/nrc-staff-report-says-nuclear-plants-should-update-plans-for-earthquakes-floods/2011/09/12/gIQAjzHMNK_story.html

A country wide long term blackout could cause major problems. If you live anywhere near a Nuclear power plant, it might be a good idea to figure out a bug out location that is far enough away.

racerford
09-14-2011, 15:28
All of these problems with uranium fueled reactors, which are not nearly the problem with Thorium reactors, why are we not going in that direction?

AK_Stick
09-15-2011, 00:41
Hello,

I think you guys would want to read this and be aware of the Nuclear power plants' risk with the solar flares and EMPs.

http://theintelhub.com/2011/09/13/solar-flare-could-unleash-nuclear-holocaust-across-planet-earth-forcing-hundreds-of-nuclear-power-plants-into-total-meltdowns/


It is scary and I think we should go back to the coal power plants.


EMP is not the boogyman. It is not going to end the world, 1 second after the EMP, power will be back on, across the grid.

People who freak out about EMP, generally know very little about it. Those who do, aren't nearly as worried about it.


Something to be concerned/aware about? YES.

Something to worry about? NO.

Should we go back to coal? **** NO. just recommending that shows you don't know what you're talking about.

Glock30Eric
09-15-2011, 07:29
Should we go back to coal? **** NO. just recommending that shows you don't know what you're talking about.

I see your point. I don't really think it is good idea to keep running the nuclear power plants, so I thought maybe it is good idea to fall back to coal power plants. We got tons of coals in our lands, so why don't we use it.

I don't care about the global warming and it's joke. Anyway, do you think we should keep running nuclear power plants or what?

LongGun1
09-15-2011, 09:01
EMP is not the boogyman. It is not going to end the world, 1 second after the EMP, power will be back on, across the grid.

People who freak out about EMP, generally know very little about it. Those who do, aren't nearly as worried about it.



Really!! :rofl:

My educational background is Electronics Engineering, have worked in the electrical/electronics career field specialties in one capacity or another all of my adult life & have studied CME and previous Cold war era HEMP events fairly extensively for years, as well as the research of scientists & engineers working in this area..

..and frankly your statement has got to be one of the most bogus I have ever seen uttered online! :whistling:


Please enlighten us with solid scientific research that will back up your claims!!


Let me start...


Though I could fill up pages with links..

..I will start with this one to Congress...

http://www.empcommission.org/docs/empc_exec_rpt.pdf

Functional collapse of the power system is almost definite over the entire affected region, and may cascade into adjacent geographic areas.

Net result is recovery times of months to years, instead of days to weeks.



Or from IEEE..

http://www.todaysengineer.org/2007/Sep/HEMP.asp


HEMP-induced functional collapse of the electrical power grid risks the continued existence of U.S. civil society

The national electrical grid is not designed to withstand near simultaneous functional collapse

Procedures do not exist to perform a “black start” after an EMP attack, as restart would depend on telecom and energy transport, which depend on power

Restoration of the national power grid could take months to years





Or from the military scientific community
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA009208

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1931/1487/1600/High%20altitude%20EMP2.gif


Above: the masters degree thesis by Louis W. Seiler, Jr., A Calculational Model for High Altitude EMP, report ADA009208, computes these curves for the peak EMP at ground zero for a burst above the magnetic equator, where the Earth's magnetic field is far weaker than it is at high latitudes (nearer the poles) where magnetic field lines converge (increasing the magnetic field strength). The discoverer of the magnetic dipole EMP mechanism, Longmire, states in another report that the peak EMP is almost directly proportional to the transverse component of the Earth's magnetic field across the radial line from the bomb to the observer. Seiler shows that the peak EMP is almost directly proportional to strength of the Earth's magnetic field: the curves above apply to 0.3 Gauss magnetic field strength, which is the weak field at the equator (the 1962 American tests over Johnston Island were nearer the equator). Over North America, Europe or Russia, peak EMP fields would be doubled those in the diagram above, due to the Earth's stronger magnetic field of around 0.5 Gauss, which deflects Compton electrons more effectively, causing more of their kinetic energy to be converted into EMP energy than in the 0.3 Gauss field over Johnston Island in the 1962 American tests. If you look at the curves above, you see that the peak EMP is only a weak function of the gamma ray output of the weapon (the peak EMP increases by just a factor of 5, from roughly 10 kV/m to 50 kV/m, as prompt gamma ray output rises by a factor of 10,000, i.e. from 0.01 to 100 kt); it is far less than directly proportional to yield. Seiler also shows that large two-stage thermonuclear weapons will often produce a smaller peak EMP than a single stage fission bomb, because of "pre-ionization" of the atmosphere by X-rays and gamma rays from the first stage, which ionize the air, making it electrically conductive so that free electrons and ions almost immediately short out the Compton current from the larger secondary stage, negating most the EMP that would otherwise occur.




And if 50 kV/M was not enough to negate our modern technological society..

..the Russians have stated they have developed HEMP weapons capable of generating a field strength of 200 kV/M!

But extrapolating from the above research...a crude fission bomb (Iran or NK) detonated high above the central USA could have devastating results!!

psk1
09-15-2011, 10:43
Really!! :rofl:

My educational background is Electronics Engineering, have worked in the electrical/electronics career field specialties in one capacity or another all of my adult life & have studied CME and previous Cold war era HEMP events fairly extensively for years, as well as the research of scientists & engineers working in this area..

..and frankly your statement has got to be one of the most bogus I have ever seen uttered online! :whistling:


Please enlighten us with solid scientific research that will back up your claims!!


Let me start...


Though I could fill up pages with links..

..I will start with this one to Congress...

http://www.empcommission.org/docs/empc_exec_rpt.pdf







Or from IEEE..

http://www.todaysengineer.org/2007/Sep/HEMP.asp





Or from the military scientific community
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA009208

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1931/1487/1600/High%20altitude%20EMP2.gif


Above: the masters degree thesis by Louis W. Seiler, Jr., A Calculational Model for High Altitude EMP, report ADA009208, computes these curves for the peak EMP at ground zero for a burst above the magnetic equator, where the Earth's magnetic field is far weaker than it is at high latitudes (nearer the poles) where magnetic field lines converge (increasing the magnetic field strength). The discoverer of the magnetic dipole EMP mechanism, Longmire, states in another report that the peak EMP is almost directly proportional to the transverse component of the Earth's magnetic field across the radial line from the bomb to the observer. Seiler shows that the peak EMP is almost directly proportional to strength of the Earth's magnetic field: the curves above apply to 0.3 Gauss magnetic field strength, which is the weak field at the equator (the 1962 American tests over Johnston Island were nearer the equator). Over North America, Europe or Russia, peak EMP fields would be doubled those in the diagram above, due to the Earth's stronger magnetic field of around 0.5 Gauss, which deflects Compton electrons more effectively, causing more of their kinetic energy to be converted into EMP energy than in the 0.3 Gauss field over Johnston Island in the 1962 American tests. If you look at the curves above, you see that the peak EMP is only a weak function of the gamma ray output of the weapon (the peak EMP increases by just a factor of 5, from roughly 10 kV/m to 50 kV/m, as prompt gamma ray output rises by a factor of 10,000, i.e. from 0.01 to 100 kt); it is far less than directly proportional to yield. Seiler also shows that large two-stage thermonuclear weapons will often produce a smaller peak EMP than a single stage fission bomb, because of "pre-ionization" of the atmosphere by X-rays and gamma rays from the first stage, which ionize the air, making it electrically conductive so that free electrons and ions almost immediately short out the Compton current from the larger secondary stage, negating most the EMP that would otherwise occur.




And if 50 kV/M was not enough to negate our modern technological society..

..the Russians have stated they have developed HEMP weapons capable of generating a field strength of 200 kV/M!

But extrapolating from the above research...a crude fission bomb (Iran or NK) detonated high above the central USA could have devastating results!!


And one more http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/10mar_stormwarning/

hackinpeat
09-15-2011, 10:58
I facepalm. EMP on the small level we already see them on a regular basis is no big deal.. EMP on a catastrophic level would absolutely be insane. When solid state electronics all fry, and every starter and lock solenoid in everyones cars fry, there is no "power outage for a few seconds." The lights go out, and they stay out for a very long time. Imagine every transformer in your neighborhood going up at once. It would also lead to a lot of fires. At any rate.... The article makes some valid points, but weren't a bunch of liberal hippies protesting nuclear power all along? It's always been unsafe, but the article is really written from a hyper paranoid standpoint. It's rather hard for an emp to get through a cooling tower, and the assumption of how every nuke plant is wired.... Well... How did the author get a tour? Sounds to me like the article was written by someone who is about as expert on the subject as ak_stick is on emp.

LongGun1
09-15-2011, 11:58
but the article is really written from a hyper paranoid standpoint..


That I agree....

..and stopped reading when they claimed..

The solar flare will fry all automobiles that rely on ignition electronics, which means probably 98% of the vehicles on the road today will be instantly rendered scrap metal (or plastic, as it turns out).


While damage to vehicles is definitely a possibility..

..that claim is both wild & unsubstantiated with even a major CME.



That being said..

What they stated was far less ludicrous than ak_stick's remarks on emp...IMHO! ;)

cowboy1964
09-15-2011, 12:34
While damage to vehicles is definitely a possibility..

..that claim is both wild & unsubstantiated with even a major CME.

Yep. The only reason CMEs affect power lines is because they act like a big generator. It's the same principle as a motor or a generator having lots of lots of wound copper.

Which would be stronger: a high-altitude nuke EMP or a major CME? I would think the EMP would be.

G29Reload
09-15-2011, 16:19
And if 50 kV/M was not enough to negate our modern technological society..

..the Russians have stated they have developed HEMP weapons capable of generating a field strength of 200 kV/M!

But extrapolating from the above research...a crude fission bomb (Iran or NK) detonated high above the central USA could have devastating results!!

It has nothing to do with whether EMP is real or not. The question is, will it cause permanent and lasting damage, or is it a transient event?

Melt everything, or go down in the basement and just flip the breakers back?

Will varying levels of shielding or happenstance limit effects or deflect?

Car in basement garage = ok, nothing wrong
Car in the open = fried temporarily, or permanently?

SOOOOO many variables...

LongGun1
09-15-2011, 17:44
It has nothing to do with whether EMP is real or not. The question is, will it cause permanent and lasting damage, or is it a transient event?

Melt everything, or go down in the basement and just flip the breakers back?

Will varying levels of shielding or happenstance limit effects or deflect?

Car in basement garage = ok, nothing wrong
Car in the open = fried temporarily, or permanently?

SOOOOO many variables...


The experts in the threads I linked to are obviously in the "permanent and lasting damage" camp..

..and so am I!

Transformers blown to pieces and/or turned into slag..

..do not repair themselves! :whistling:

If you have ever seen/heard a line transformer 'go south' due to a lightning strike or shorted line..

..multiply that singularity coast to coast! :shocked:


Basically....If some entity goes to the time, trouble & expense..

..not to mention the risk of detonating a HEMP over the CONUS..

..then I would expect their scientists & engineers to have done their homework....well!


The Grid is then nothing more than a giant EMP collector..

..and anything connected to it is at extreme risk!


Even unplugged electrical/electronic items are at risk..

..as a 1 meter power cord is just another "EMP collector".


Personally....I would not want to be using an IPOD..

..or even a cell phone during an HEMP event..

..as Lithium-Ion Batteries have a tendency to explode violently under certain conditions!

AK_Stick
09-16-2011, 03:09
Thats funny, the very same EMP commission you use as a link tested 37 vehicles from 86-2002 and only managed to fail 3 running motors, damaged 1 beyond repair, and 25 suffered nuance level malfunctions.


Kirtland AFB, had a very large EMP generator, that has been used on everything from EVERY military aircraft, and tank, to things like locomotives and government COTS vehicles. If they weren't able to shut down the vehicle/fail it, they would progress up to the limit of the generators simulation capability (+/- 50 kV/m) ( the outdoor acft testing facility is known as the "TRESTLE" possibly the largest all wooden construction in the world) Though its now shut down, there are a few other EMP generator testing facilities left.

If a COTS pickup or 15 pack van can survive 50 kV/m without exhibiting a complete or catastrophic failure. I have little fear of the great boogyman than EMP has been made out to be. Nationally, power, and telephone systems have been hardened. Are they perfect? No. Are they as susceptible as people seem to think? Absolutely not.


I work with EMI/EMP at work. Directed, and high power RF signals and their effects on aircraft are long known and dealt with.

At the end of the day, YMMV, but it doesn't make EMP any more realistic of a boogyman.



I'll leave you with the words of one of the former chairman of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection:

"I do not see any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructure. [...] There are many easier, less costly, and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude. Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this time. The administration's policy is to prevent proliferation and unauthorized access.”

LongGun1
09-16-2011, 12:38
Thats funny, the very same EMP commission you use as a link tested 37 vehicles from 86-2002 and only managed to fail 3 running motors, damaged 1 beyond repair, and 25 suffered nuance level malfunctions.

Exactly what does this have to do with your ridiculous statement about the national power grid not failing for even one second after a HEMP..

.. & my wanting scientific proof to back up your claim??


BTW....the testing you refer to maxed out at 50 kv/m, not the 200 kv/m field strength capable of being generated & did not use all of the destructive components that an HEMP will generate. And since that time period, generated EMP testing field strengths have increased & vehicles increasingly are more technologically advanced...which tends to translate into being more EMP susceptible.

For example ...An EMP test in 1993 at Eglin AFB accidentally fried the alternators & electronic engine controls of non-running vehicles in a parking lot 300 meters away!
http://cryptome.org/jya/emp-merkle.htm




Kirtland AFB, had a very large EMP generator, that has been used on everything from EVERY military aircraft, and tank, to things like locomotives and government COTS vehicles. If they weren't able to shut down the vehicle/fail it, they would progress up to the limit of the generators simulation capability (+/- 50 kV/m) ( the outdoor acft testing facility is known as the "TRESTLE" possibly the largest all wooden construction in the world) Though its now shut down, there are a few other EMP generator testing facilities left.

No...not EVERY....especially since the Reagan-era Cold War facility has not been used in OVER 20 YEARS!! :rofl:

Post Cold War EMP "testing" is now (for the most part) performed with computer simulations!



If a COTS pickup or 15 pack van can survive 50 kV/m without exhibiting a complete or catastrophic failure. I have little fear of the great boogyman than EMP has been made out to be.

Again....we were not discussing "vehicles" 20 years ago...

..but today's "power grid"!

Great attempt at a diversion though! :upeyes:




Nationally, power, and telephone systems have been hardened. Are they perfect? No. Are they as susceptible as people seem to think? Absolutely not.


And exactly how have all those thousands upon thousands upon thousands of miles of HV Transmission Lines been hardened?? Again, I call BS! I would like to see you post anything supporting your claim!

If anything, the grid has actually become more susceptible since the Cold War due to aging, increased grid interdependence & increased demand! In fact, grid interconnectivity & interdependence is one of the reasons previously minor localized events can cascade into regional failures...like occurred recently ....aka...The Great Southwestern Blackout of 2011. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44449688/ http://gcn.com/articles/2011/09/12/cybereye-southwestern-blackout-smart-grid-lessons.aspx



I work with EMI/EMP at work. Directed, and high power RF signals and their effects on aircraft are long known and dealt with.

There is a saying that goes..

"If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with BS"!! :wavey:

Soooo....Instead of [utter BS]EMI/EMP[/utter BS]..

..could you possibly mean EMI/RFI instead! :rofl:


At the end of the day, YMMV, but it doesn't make EMP any more realistic of a boogyman.

So many experts disagree with your position..

..but I have yet seen you produce any evidence to the contrary??




I'll leave you with the words of one of the former chairman of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection:

"I do not see any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructure. [...] There are many easier, less costly, and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude. Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this time. The administration's policy is to prevent proliferation and unauthorized access.”


Comprehension......some get it.....others do not! :whistling:

Key word here is "Terrorists' (potential capacity to produce/deliver)...

..not the reality of a 'nuclear weapons (induced HEMP)'!


So...you miss the gist of his comment...

..either through a elementary lack of comprehension..

..or due to an deliberate attempt at nefarious misdirection...

..neither helps your position!

AK_Stick
09-16-2011, 13:09
Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. Much like when we discussed dragon skin.


But it doesn't matter what I say, even if I'm right, you're so convinced you're the lord of SHTF preps your mind won't be changed. Seen it when we talked about IR lasers and NVG's seen it when we discussed body armor, this won't be any different.

LongGun1
09-18-2011, 16:21
Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. Much like when we discussed dragon skin.


But it doesn't matter what I say, even if I'm right, you're so convinced you're the lord of SHTF preps your mind won't be changed. Seen it when we talked about IR lasers and NVG's seen it when we discussed body armor, this won't be any different.



Do you mean the Dragonskin that had thousands of units in theater for years..

..worn by generals, VIPs & high-risk security operators without a history of catastrophic failures..

.. even while stopping multiple rifle rounds....including API..

..unlike the Point Blank Interceptor OTV that has approx 40% less rifle coverage..

..even when wearing the front & back SAPI.


Concerning NVD & IR Lasers...I have owned, used & sold both since the early 1990's..

..& any info I provide there has a long proven track record.


Anything I post is rock solid info..

..can be relied upon in good times & bad..

..and if it is just my (admittedly informed) opinion...then I state IMO..

..unlike the unfounded, blatantly incorrect & uninformed opinions you are posting as irrefutable fact! :whistling:


I have posted links on multiple occasions to back up what I know to be true..

..wish we could get the same courtesy concerning the "facts" you have posered!


Ooops....Freudian slip of the tongue! :supergrin:



Concerning your accusation that I am the "Lord of Preps"..

..that title would go to the member-in-absentia "Myth"..

..who now spends his time in more pleasurable pursuits..

..instead of jousting at internet trolls!


Me.....I am just a working man doing what I can! :supergrin: