Worse than Y2K - EMP

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

EMP THREAT COULD DWARF Y2K PROBLEM

House Small Business Committee June 1, 1999 congressional hearing Committee Chairman Roscoe Bartlett's opening statement

Good morning. Let me call the Subcommittee to order. It is a pleasure to welcome you to this hearing of the Subcommittee on Government Programs and Oversight of the House Small Business Committee. I would especially like to thank those of you that have traveled some distance to participate in this hearing.

This hearing is being held because the damage to our economy - businesses large and small - not to mention national security from Electro-Magnetic pulse (EMP) could dwarf anything associated with the well known Y2K problem. Yet, the EMP threat is virtually ignored by our government and is practically unknown to the public.

Concerns about the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the possession of such weapons by rogue nations, make the discussion of problems associated with EMP and the magnitude of those problems a most timely topic. However, few Congressional hearings have been devoted to this topic, and there is little, if any, public awareness of EMP.

When I was recently in Vienna, Austria, a member of the Russian Duma candidly told me, "you know if we really wanted to hurt you, we would set off an atomic weapon at high altitude above your country and produce an EMP that would destroy your entire electrical power grid, computer, and telecommunications infrastructure."

This statement did not surprise me, but unfortunately it would come as a surprise to most Americans. I believe it is imperative that our government take steps to defend against EMP. As with Y2K, the public and businesses need to be informed about what steps they could take to prevent or minimize damage from EMP.

It would appear that the number of contracts awarded to small businesses by the federal government for EMP research has diminished in the last five years. Is the federal government placing the correct priority on the problems associated with EMP and with the possibility or probability that they may occur? Is the public being correctly informed by the federal government as to what EMP is, the magnitude of the threat and the problems associated with it?

It is hoped that the testimony today will answer some, if not all of these questions. Also, it is hoped that the hearing and the permanent record available to the public after the hearing, both in hard copy and in an abridged form on the internet, will provide heightened awareness of what EMP is and the problems it could create.

Again thank you all for participating in this hearing. And thank you in the audience for attending this hearing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------emp

-- Count Vronsky (vronsky@anna.comt), June 10, 1999

Answers

Since the thread started with a statement, I would like to follow up with 2 questions: (1) Do you think the EMP discharge would be lethal to humans in a direct sense? (2) Would the discharge of the EMP do damage to solar panels: (A) On rooftops? (B) Stored in boxes?

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 10, 1999.

A strong EMP would take out your solar power system. What you have to understand is that a strong EMP basically melts the gate interface on semicondutor transistors, so all the "solid-state" electrics in ANY device get fused and no longer work. EMP causes the mother of all electronic failures.

That is why I remain concerned about the upcoming solar flare cycle. Documentation I have read suggest this cycle will be the most intense since the 1940's. We didn't have electronics of a "solid state", i.e. semiconductors, in the 1940's.

You have to understand that the interface between the source and the drain of a semiconductor transistor, or "electronic switch" if you will, is very thin. It is measured in microns. Static electricity will destroy it. A higher voltage than what it requires will destroy it. An EMP will definitely destroy it.

A immense EMP can be created by an aerial detonation of a nuclear device over the area you want "suppressed".

Get it?

Got relays?

watchin' the boy eat,

The Dog

-- The Dog (cmpennell@juno.com), June 10, 1999.


Would the EMP detonation Kill humans? Would the EMP detonation destroy solar panels in a shelter or basement?

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 10, 1999.

The EMP would not directly kill anyone that was not attached to an electrical device (ie Life Support, etc.).

DJ

-- DJ (reality@check.com), June 10, 1999.


No, EMP won't kill himans, directly --- although I suppose it might be theoretically possible if you were directly under a huge blast --- but chances are almost non-existant.Panels, other items should be safe in basement, unless exposed to huge direct blast.

You need to read up on EMP to understand it --- its purpose and greatest effect is against what has been described, other "possible" effects are to small to worry about.

-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), June 10, 1999.



EMP detonation wouldn't kill anyone directly. (Anyone looking at the sky where the nuke went off 60 miles or so up might get wounded eyes). It induces large currents in electrical wires, which burns things out, especially microelectronics.

But longer term: if it took down all the electrical infrastructures in the way that (IMHO) Y2K won't, you might really have an Infomagic collapse and the greater part of the population dying as a result. To say nothing of the obvious: it might be the first nuke of WW3, it would almost certainly not be the last.

BTW Solar Flares are rather different. They're a lot less concentrated and won't affect local wiring. But because they're on a planetary scale, they can push a lot of almost DC current into long electricity transmission lines, damaging the transformers on the end. Long here means hundreds or (especially) thousands of miles.

Solar flares can also damage satellites, but by a different mechanism. Above the earth's atmosphere, they are vulnerable to the storm of energetic particles (radiation) that a flare can generate and which the atmosphere will block. Satellites are "hardened" against this, but some fear that the estimates of how energetic the sun can get might have been over-optimistic.

And solar flares do things to the ionosphere (like northern lights!) and generally louse up radio transmission.

-- Nigel Arnot (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), June 10, 1999.


So what you're saying is that any terrorist that gets his hand on one nuke can simply fly it over the US, detonate, and viola -- Infomagic.

This is just about the scariest thing I have ever heard.

BigDog, I think we're back to the 1-in-20 IM odds..

-- a (a@a.a), June 10, 1999.


There's a reference to "old high-frequency radios" in this article:

http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/business.pat,business/30dab190.122,.h tml

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 10, 1999.


a, you are a funny duck! Yea, any terrorist can simply "fly" a nuke. You think they can use those remote control thingies used with model airplanes!? "Computers can do that!" (in the words of Homer Simpson)

-- flying (launch@rocket.wellmaybe), June 10, 1999.

Visions of Dr. Strangelove are dancing in my head.

Methinks Vronsky may want to contact Mr. Greenspun. A whole new EMPire awaits him at the EMPirically EMPowering EMP Forum!. EMPty EMPathizers need a post-y2k hangout!!

-- regular (zzz@z.z), June 10, 1999.



flying: since you are the aeronautical genius on this forum, please explain why this would be a difficult endeavor. It's clandestinely done with equivalent weights of cocaine on a routine basis. We'll assume that we're talking pre-2000, so the FAA is still functional.

-- a (a@a.a), June 10, 1999.

a, you first make the assumption that a nuke can be flown around like any cargo. Drug runners usually fly low to avoid being picked up by radar. Further what does the FAA got to do with flying a nuke? I assume they will not want to take off at any airport but on some long stretch of road. Next you're also assuming a suitcase type nuke, small compact and easy to detonate. This type will not have any EMP effects at the altitudes you reference.

For the rest of the posters, EMP has never been tested anywhere. No one really knows what the effects are at high altitudes. But government computer systems are hardened and to avoid a majority of the effects, simply turn off your computer. It's thought to be much like electrical storms.

-- flying (launch@rocket.wellmaybe), June 10, 1999.


flying said, [a says]:

a, you first make the assumption that a nuke can be flown around like any cargo. Drug runners usually fly low to avoid being picked up by radar.

[you have still not explained why bringing a nuke in country would be extraordinarily more difficult than smuggling one into NY harbor on a ship. Modern nukes with yields producing sizeable EMP weigh a fraction of the ones used and tested in the old days.]

Further what does the FAA got to do with flying a nuke?

[that was satirical]

I assume they will not want to take off at any airport but on some long stretch of road.

[the technical term is "small airstrip". 1000's of them in US, Canada, Mexico.]

Next you're also assuming a suitcase type nuke, small compact and easy to detonate. This type will not have any EMP effects at the altitudes you reference.

[No, see above.]

For the rest of the posters, EMP has never been tested anywhere. No one really knows what the effects are at high altitudes.

[EMP has certainly been tested, just not in the scenario of which we speak.]

But government computer systems are hardened

[SOME systems USED TO BE hardened. Due to the proliferation of more advanced non-GA (gallium arsenide) chips, and their extremely low cost, most are now non-hardened.]

and to avoid a majority of the effects, simply turn off your computer.

[er, you mean we'll just turn off the Iron Triangle until the danger has passed? LOL Good one! Besides, even if the concern was to save our measly home computers, what makes you think we will have even a moment's notice?]

It's thought to be much like electrical storms.

[yeah right. And y2k is thought to be much like a three day blizzard.]

-- a (a@a.a), June 10, 1999.


For anyone who has read the "Left Behind" series of books on the recent market, this sounds extremely familiar to what the Antichrist, in the story says caused the disappearance of millions of people all over the world all at once. Actually it is the Rapture of Christians, but when it does occur this will be one of the theories that will be used to explain the disappearances. Psychobabble or Reality?

-- Diane (prepare@highlandtraders.com), June 10, 1999.

I'll try to find the similar threads on this issue, but I'ld like to make one quick point. Getting a nuclear bomb a few miles in the air will NOT generate much EMP. Getting around 80-120 miles up, now we are talking about frying everything from Maine to California. The large EMP bursts comes from the interaction of the prompt radiation from the bomb and the inosphere, NOT from the bomb itself. Therefore the EMP comes from directly over head, not in at an angle from the bomb.

Theoretically if you were holding on to several miles of insulated wire and had a ground through your heart, EMP could kill you. Nigel has it right. EMP will kill your infrastructure, and lacking that you die. However, EMP does not generate large currents, but potentially large voltages. The thing that makes EMP so dangerous is it's risetime which is extremely short. It's voltage increase is much more rapid than lightening. If you have some item protected against lightening, it might help, but most lightening protectors are way too slow to protect against EMP. EMP like lightening is a sum of multiple frequencies which add up to a violent pulse. Since it is a sum of frequencies, the EMP can flow over and around surfaces just like microwaves. Please note that power is measured over time. A slight voltage for several minutes might have the same wattage as a huge voltage (with very little current at all) over just a fractions of a second. As I said in that posting I can't find, EMP is static electricity with an attitude.

So much for making one quick point......

-- Ken Seger (kenseger@earthlink.net), June 10, 1999.



Ken: You're right about the altitude, I stand corrected.

-- a (a@a.a), June 10, 1999.

I have to disagree about NEMP destroying solar panels. I don't have the literature handy at the moment, but tests were conducted a few years ago by the NBS (now NIST) on the resiliency of varoius devices to NEMP. Results were that a typical solar power system could withstand any probable NEMP event with little or no damage to the junctions of the crystal cells. The system charge controller, as well as any sensitive electronics connected to the system, e.g., radios, lights, etc., would bear the brunt of any damage. The cells and batteries were practically immune from any disruptions. Placing overvoltage transient suppressors on the wires from the panels helped protect the controller and equipment.

-- klm (klm@nwhre.not), June 10, 1999.

thanks klm. any reassurance to know a solar powered water well (dc) will withstand y2k and emp is what I need right now. The driller just walked away after our roll over discussion. He's has a few people wanting water wells drilled so they could install their d.c. powered water well pumps. That may be the only way to survive all this mess. 4 solar panels for the well and 2 solar panels to pressurize the house. Our govt. needs to get on the ball and get some wells drilled!

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 10, 1999.

Some earlier threads about EMP:
January 14: Y2K vs NEMP Event - Parallels at http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000O6g

March 30: Understanding and protecting against EMP at http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000fOX

March 31: More EMP info at http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000faY



-- No Spam Please (nos_pam_please@hotmail.com), June 10, 1999.

First, I can't imagine (regardless of what BC has tried to induce with regards to launch on impact senario)that an incoming ballistic missile won't be answered immediately. Ergo TS*H*HTF!! and I won't be too worried about my microwave, or television.

Also, I am a bit concerned, ( as if I needed anything else to be concerned about) that a solar flare of the *Planet Buster* catagorie see post below, could knock one of "who knows whos" orbiting devices of MADD into the atmosphere and cause the EMP type disaster.

Proof of devices in orbit? Get a Grip!! High ground and all that, you gotta give it a better than average chance of high probability. Still just a guess, I admit.

-- unspun@lright (mikeymac@uswest.net), June 10, 1999.


Flying asserted that a high-altitude EMP event had never been tested. It most certainly has been. It's how the phenomena was discovered in the first place.

Back in the fifties there was a high-altitude nuclear test of a device launched from Johnston Island and detonated over the mid- Pacific. It knocked out electrical systems and equipment from the eastern Marhall Islands to as far away as Hawaii. Footage of some of the test series is shown in the movie "Trinity, and Beyond".

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), June 10, 1999.


 

Here's a page that outlines basics on EMP and TEMPEST and how best to "harden" military/critical civil/YOUR equipment against most EMP levels below the airburst-nuke-overhead level that'd probably kill you anyway.

 

http://jya.com/emp08.htm

 

The info even contains power induced data for figuring out how big a bang of EM you can figure you'd need to protect against depending on your level of paranoia. {chuckle}

 

 

As a side note, I used to have an URL to a page on a /mil server that described a series of prototype US military EMP weapons that didn't need a nuclear explosion to generate massive EMP spikes. If I come across the page again I'll post the URL. When you think about it, it's much less problematic to waste an aggressor's ability to wage war without poisoning the area with radiation, etc. in the event that you've got that "Alexander the Great" complex going and feel you positively need to conquer the area in question...

 

 

Oh well, the year of living dangerously started (to me anyway) on June 1... Betwixt then and June 1, 2K, it's gonna be... ummm... interesting...

 

 

The ever insane...



-- OddOne (mocklamer@geocities.com), June 11, 1999.

Diane:

I can't fit your rapture scenario in with this EMP discussion. Those holding to the Scofield pretribulational rapture will be in for a big shock when they realize they will suffer through the Great Tribulation. There is no easy escape.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), June 11, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ