Nukes in Space - The Rainbow Bombs

[panopticon]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)
I´m afraid the video us not sensationalist at all.

I´ve been researching this issue for a while, and it´s a common agreement, among many specialists, that a nuclear weapon properly calibrated for maximum EMP effect, detonated above the atmosphere somewhere above the state of Kansas, would indeed fry everything electronic and would affect the whole continental United States.

From what I can tell, such a nuclear blast over Kansas will generate an EMP covering the continental USA. But I would not expect everything electronic to be fried. Rather I'd expect some of the weak and exposed spots to be fried. Electronics near an exposed wire or antenna, or outside of a metal container would be at greater risk.

Granted, most electronics is connected to power (long wires) some of the time, and most "interesting" electronics is connected to the Internet, the telephone wiring, the cable TV wiring, or the Cell phone network either wirelessly (using an antenna) or wired most of the time.

Just as a very close lightning strike doesn't fry all electronics, but rather stresses the weak spots, similarly with an EMP. Not every transistor gets fried; just some.

I agree that if an EMP attack took out enough transformers such that the US electrical grid could not be repaired or cobbled together, for most of the electrical consumers in the US, within a few days, then we'd be running an economy using early 1900's means, tasked to provide food, clothing, medicine and shelter for a population several times larger, and dependent on early 2000 means. That will be really nasty, for a long time. The US would never be the same again, and many, perhaps a substantial majority, depending on help from others, could die the hard way. Given the way that the US has been treating others, and given that such an EMP attack could well place us in a state of general world war, that help might be slow in coming.

In my view, that particular video was sensationalist in its manner of presenting the material, as well as in the over simplifications presented.

First it has an ominous voice over, with ticking clock and scenes of the Brooklyn bridge and a nuclear blast.

Then it has Dr. James Carafano, National Security Analyst, on the beach, telling us that a nuclear weapon detonated high over the center of the US, he "might be a casualty too" and that the EMP pulse "could incapacitate every electrical system in the United States".

Then Dr. William Graham, Chairman Congressional EMP Commission, comes on, from his living room, telling us that such an "electromagnetic pulse would effect all the electronics within the line of sight of that burst." [True "effect" ... but "effect" doesn't necessarily mean "fry". -Paul].

Immediately we cut to a "scene" as if flying just over a circuit board, with an ominous voice over telling us "an EMP produces damaging voltage and current surges burning out the semi-conductor chips of any electronic device within line of sight."

As the scene changes to an overview of the USA, the ominous voice over continues "The result of that is the complete shutdown of the electronic system. Were the blast to occur high enough, the entire United States would be left with no electrical power for the things that depend on electrical power."

Switching back to Dr. Graham in his living room, Graham states "None of those services would be available because they need electrical power. Telephones wouldn't work. Traffic lights would stop working."

Notice that the exagerations, such as an EMP would burn out all the electronic chips and cause a complete shutdown of all electrical power come from the voice over, whereas the statements from named officials are clipped out of context, so one can't tell under what conditions they intended their statements to apply. Notice also the confusion of the electrical power system and electronic devices.

The take away message that most viewers will take from that video is that officials agree ... one EMP high over Kansas and all electronics and all electricals in the US are totally fried, and we'd be back to using methods of the early 1800's with an infrastructure and population that had depended on that fried equipment.

Some of that take away is true . It's a mix of truths and half truths, bolstered by out of context clips from "experts" that presumably leave out the inconvenient complications.

G'day Paul,

I agree completely with your analysis.

It took me quite a while to decide whether to include that particular clip because of the reasons you mentioned.

In the end it came down to the fact that it was the only short clip, and I haven't come across another, in which Dr. William Graham (a leading expert in the field) talks about the effects of a high altitude detonation in a way that is accessible to most audiences. Usually he is shown in a conference setting standing at a podium and many people's eyes glaze over within the first couple of minutes (if they start the video at all).

I really didn't like the editing of the clip but in the end thought that the inclusion of him talking about the possible effects was of greater value (which I no longer think considering that the debate about it has taken over the thread and moved it from its original purpose).

The concern is not so much consumer electronics (which may well be affected to varying levels depending on a number of variables) but in the reliance of modern industrial societies on a centralised grid and infrastructure. Just as one example: Without electricity fuel can't be pumped so transportation of food would not occur (at least to the levels required in large cities). Then there's water and sewage not being pumped, what sort of health hazards would that cause?

The 1962 Soviet 'Test 184' was only 300 kilotons, detonated at an altitude of 290 kilometres, and had varying effects over a large area:

Source.

The 1989 Quebec GMD induced event melted a transformer and had a longer lasting effect (18 months at least) on many parts of the grid across the US.


Source.

The effect of the 1989 event also reached the US:

The Quebec Blackout was by no means a local event. Some of the U.S. electrical utilities had their own cliffhanger problems to deal with. New York Power lost 150 megawatts the moment the Quebec power grid went down. The New England Power Pool lost 1,410 megawatts at about the same time. Service to 96 electrical utilities in New England was interrupted while other reserves of electrical power were brought online. Luckily, the U.S. had the power to spare at the time…but just barely. Across the United States from coast to coast, over 200 power grid problems erupted within minutes of the start of the March 13 storm. Fortunately none of these caused a blackout.
Source.

Then there's the 1921 GMD event which is not well known but some estimate (slide 15) to have been 10X as intense as the 1989 and about half that of 1859.

My point in starting this thread was to have an accessible thread to send people who asked the question: "What is an EMP and why are we worried about them?"
I was trying to avoid an in depth discussions about all the variables that come into play in calculating the effect of EMP's and GMD's over a wide area.

Looks like I shouldn't have gone to sleep.

-- Pan

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by panopticon (here)
My point in starting this thread was to have an accessible thread to send people who asked the question: "What is an EMP and why are we worried about them?"
I was trying to avoid an in depth discussions about all the variables that come into play in calculating the effect of EMP's and GMD's over a wide area.

And I entirely agree with your analysis. It was my fault for distracting this thread with comments on the editing of that video.

Yes, a major EMP would be a really bad ... it would take down our infrastructure, with disastrous repercussions.