Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 20-01-2010, 01:14 PM   #21
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Car-stopping electropulse cannon
A vehicle mounted pulse weapon capable of stopping a (modern) car at 200m is to be demonstrated "next month", apparently.
Cig-lighter EMP blaster down to suitcase size, apparently
By Lewis PageGet more from this author
Posted in Science, 20th January 2010 13:15 GMT

Flight International has the story, uncovered while following up on a recent US Air Force request for an aircraft weapon capable of "disabling moving ground vehicles while minimising harm to occupants". The USAF is more than capable of stopping such vehicles at present, but its existing methods generally reduce the car or truck and its occupants to a few mangled scraps - not to mention destroying a large section of road and quite likely anything else in the general vicinity.

Just how the Air Force will proceed remains to be seen. However the US Marines have for some years been working with California firm Eureka Aerospace to produce an electromagnetic pulse (EMP, aka High Powered Microwave or HPM) weapon for this sort of task.

Historically, EMPs with serious effects have been produced only as a side effect of nuclear weapons going off. But the advanced militaries of the world have striven for less drastic methods for years - without success thus far, despite endless media reports to the contrary.
Eureka, which has been working on electropulse blasters since it was founded in 2001, hasn't done terribly well thus far. Its initial blaster weighed 200lb and measured six by three feet; despite that it had an effective range of no more than 15 metres. Even worse, it was only capable of stopping fairly modern cars with microprocessor-controlled engines: its pulses weren't strong enough to affect the more basic electronics found in older vehicles.
Understandably, the Marines weren't vastly impressed, and at one point Eureka was compelled to tout the machine for use in police pursuits, to be mounted on the roof of cop-cars and powered by the vehicle's alternator (presumably via the cigarette lighter socket).
Now, however, company chief James Tatoian tells Flight that a new and improved pulse blaster is almost ready. It is said to be able to scramble a car's engine chips from 200m and has now slimmed down to 55lb, though it still requires an antenna 1.2m wide. The new zapgun is apparently to be demo'd for the Marines "next month".

Such a device might be of use to military customers in rural or wilderness areas, unconcerned about the inevitable collateral damage which would result if it were used in modern cities - lifts paralysed, computers scrambled, Wi-Fi allergic teachers up in arms etc etc.

But in a military context, there are already methods for stopping vehicles without harm to the occupants: snipers - often helicopter-borne - have specialised in putting big-bore bullets into moving engine blocks for years. And a .50 slug, unlike an electropulse blast, works on an engine without microprocessor controls - or one whose electronics modules have been wrapped in tinfoil, say. Even better, a bullet won't scramble the possibly intelligence-crammed personal gadgets - sat phones, laptops etc - of anyone riding in the target vehicle.

The car-stopping electropulse blaster, even if it works, would seem to fall under the heading of a solution in search of a problem. But the US Air Force could provide an alternative customer for Eureka should the Marines prove unimpressed.

Are your circuits safe from attack? Electromagnetic interference
By L. Samuel Pfeifle 01.19.2010

MINNEAPOLIS—What would happen if a malicious person detonated an electro-magnetic pulse weapon just outside your facility? Essentially, everything with an integrated circuit—servers, alarm systems, HVAC systems, surveillance systems—would be rendered useless.

How do you protect against such an eventuality? That’s what Emprimus does. A consultancy and integrator focused on measuring, assessing, designing, implementing, and testing remediation efforts to protect critical, non-military electronic systems and data assets against intentional electromagnetic interference (known as IEMI).

“The military discovered with nuclear weapons,” said Gale Nordling, Emprimus CEO, “that they give off this huge electro-magnetic pulse that basically fries everything. And now you can do this locally and disrupt anything with an integrated circuit from a distance—anything with a computer chip in it.”

These devices, the design for which can essentially be found on the Internet and can be made the size of a standard briefcase, have been used to take down banking systems, disrupt workplaces, and more, but there are fears, with our increasingly computerized society, that terrorists have only begun to design uses for them.

“The traditional remediation has been the military approach,” said Nordling, “a very robust metal shielding, but now there’s some new types of metallicized cloth that’s a fraction of the cost and you can put that around pieces of equipment.” This makes remediation much more approachable for data facilities, for example, that don’t have military-sized budgets. “The cost of the cloth is probably $4 to $10 per square foot. The military solution might run $100 per square foot.”

Emprimus also sees an education and policy void that needs filling. “We were escorted into a federal facility with very high security,” said Jim Danburg, director of security and continuity, by way of explanation. “And we were asked to be scanned for kinetic threats [i.e., explosives], but nobody checked our laptops and devices for authenticity. No one asked us to turn them on. It’s very possible to disguise the smaller IEMI devices in a laptop or fake server. These are things the security community needs to be aware of.”
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 20-01-2010 at 01:21 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2010, 01:47 PM   #22
anthony1965
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,342
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

John: Have you ever read any of Joseph P. Farrell's books?

I'm just reading one of his latest "The Secrets of the Unified Field".

I think you'll find it interesting!

For example, you mention above:

Flight International has the story, uncovered while following up on a recent US Air Force request for an aircraft weapon capable of "disabling moving ground vehicles while minimising harm to occupants". The USAF is more than capable of stopping such vehicles at present, but its existing methods generally reduce the car or truck and its occupants to a few mangled scraps - not to mention destroying a large section of road and quite likely anything else in the general vicinity.

Just how the Air Force will proceed remains to be seen. However the US Marines have for some years been working with California firm Eureka Aerospace to produce an electromagnetic pulse (EMP, aka High Powered Microwave or HPM) weapon for this sort of task.


I just read again today that the Nazi's had this technology "Motorstoppmittel", but it probably originated in Italy with Marconi. Also referred to as the "magnetic wave".

Last edited by anthony1965; 20-01-2010 at 01:52 PM.
anthony1965 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2010, 03:21 PM   #23
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Hello Anthony, I have read sections but not all of these books. After your recomendation i will add to my ever increasing global amazon basket, money is the issue to buying all and everything out there.

Thanks for your pointer my friend, your information is glady welcome here with these imposing threats of electromagnetics.. ...
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2010, 03:24 PM   #24
starstuff
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 596
Likes: 7 (5 Posts)
Default

http://standeyo.com/News_Files/NBC/EMP.protection.html - useful info for shielding stuff - apparently a cardboard box inside a metal tin, or one covered in tin foil, and placed on wood or inside another cardboard box (ie a cheap DIY faraday cage), would protect the contents from an EMP. Worth considering for a laptop and external hard drive containing large amounts of useful info, if you have a means of charging the laptop's batteries without the grid.
starstuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-01-2010, 05:11 PM   #25
rydeon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Within The Fallen Zone
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 10 (9 Posts)
Default

Glad I drive a vehicle that doesn't have an ECU control system in it...
rydeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-01-2010, 07:15 AM   #26
anthony1965
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,342
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johntitor View Post
Hello Anthony, I have read sections but not all of these books. After your recomendation i will add to my ever increasing global amazon basket, money is the issue to buying all and everything out there.

Thanks for your pointer my friend, your information is glady welcome here with these imposing threats of electromagnetics.. ...
Do I know what you're talking about!

I'm running out of shelf space as well, but there are a few books that I really want to read. If I have any recommendations for you I'll let you know!

I agree with you that this is a massively important topic. Have you seen the thread I created yesterday with Dr Doepp discussing the effects of electrosmog on brain functions, behaviour etc.?

And apparently we ain't seen nothin' yet. The videos were made in Summer 2008 and he described how the mobile phone network is going to be cranked up daramatically, fitting in well with the timeline you've been describing.

2010 will be a big year.

The videos give some easy exercises designed to aid the brain connection of left and right hemispheres.
anthony1965 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-01-2010, 07:59 AM   #27
deca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 19,285
Likes: 1,071 (727 Posts)
Default

Quote:
And apparently we ain't seen nothin' yet
__________________
It would also appear possible to create high fidelity speech in the human body, raising the possibility of covert suggestion and psychological direction...Thus, it may be possible to 'talk' to selected adversaries in a fashion that would be most disturbing to them."
United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, New World Vistas: Air and Space Power For The 21st Century
find out more website ==> https://decasfoxhole.wordpress.com/
deca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-01-2010, 12:33 PM   #28
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Newt Gingrich Warns of Electromagnetic Pulse Attack

http://empcommission.org/

Wakey Wakey America, Your time is almost up !
This is a catastrophic threat and America is the country at threat its that simple. If one weapon went off it could immobilize the whole of America. China and Russia are already focused on this technology. There is plenty of evidence of this. Please watch the news break and see what brief outlook Newt has to say on the feed. My words to shout out, exactly ! This was October 2009.
Its plain to see, were heading for something big, THIS IS IT ! With the dollar down and all reserves need a big hit, and people focus, this is whats needed in a world of corruption and BS. No aircraft this time, it will be a hidden threat that the eye cant see. Don't get me wrong the whole Norway thing was a sheer spectacle of this electromagnetic technology. This event shows technology that could quite simply be a cyclotron. Artificial spectacle of defense technology, this being a new form of a missile deflection system. This very wormhole could be that technology at play ?


2010 Its not just about bombs !
This is a major topic and its relevant ! All topics rolled into one here as the threats are all Electro-magnetic and were here now in 2010. We have arrived people, the weather is changing, Our brains are being manipulated. I read Anthothy1965 has posted up some more emerging data of this energy grid i speak of an relevance to mobile data and connections with body and mind. The link here to the mobile phone network being a mass Mind control project... The problem here is people cant see it until its too late... I'm not sure how to get my point across for all those who are failing to see my point.
  • Weather Manipulation
  • Mind Control
  • EMP Bombs
  • Earthquakes
ITS ALL ELECTROMAGNETIC AND ITS A THREAT


Life itself and everything connected can be affected by any one frequency. Be it Sound or light, TPTB are messing around in this spectrum and there is MASS CONTROL at play here...
AND WE CANT SEE WHAT THEY ARE DOING

Please get ready.. .. .. .
and thanks for reading through.. .. ..
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 21-01-2010 at 12:36 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2010, 08:58 AM   #29
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

MAYOR DON COOMBS PROCLAIMS JANUARY 2010 AS ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY AWARENESS MONTH
Christiane Tourtet B.A.
January 23, 2010

Don Coombs, Mayor of Harbour Grace, Newfoundland, Canada, has proclaimed January 2010 as Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Awareness Month. This is the fourth proclamation in Canada, (the first one was signed by David Saunders, Mayor of the City of Colwood, B.C. (August 2009) the second one was done by Dennis O ´ Keefe, Mayor of St Johns´s in Newfoundland), ( August 2009), and the third one was signed by Mayor Fred Budgell of Norris Arms, Newfounland (October 2009).

Canada , thus, joins other countries , such as in the USA, where one Mayor , Broward County ( May 2009) and two Governors , Connecticut, ( May 2009 and 2010) Colorado, ( May 2009) have signed proclamations for the recognition of this devastating environmental illness, which is the direct result of worldwide electromagnetic pollution.

In the proclamation it is stated that, people of all ages in Harbour Grace and throughout the world have developed the illness of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EMHS) as a result of global electromagnetic pollution, and that Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, is a painful chronic illness of hypersensitive reactions to electromagnetic radiations for which there is no known cure, and that the symptoms of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, include dermal changes, acute numbness and tingling, dermatitis, flushing, headaches, arrhythmia, muscular weakness, tinnitus, malaise, gastric problems, nausea, visual disturbances, severe neurological , respiratory, speech, problems, and numerous other physiological symptoms and often can develop into Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS). It is also stated in the proclamation, that Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity is recognized by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, The Canadian Government as an Environmental Sensitivity, The Americans with Disabilities Act, and many other

National and International commissions, and that, this illness may be preventable through the reduction or avoidance of electromagnetic radiation in both indoor and outdoor environments and by further medical research.. .. .

Santa Fe man sues neighbor whose gadgets irritate his 'electromagnetic allergies'

There are frivolous lawsuits and then there are seemingly reasonable -- but still frivolous -- lawsuits. A Santa Fe man has filed a $500,00+ lawsuit against a neighbor over radio waves from her iPhone and wireless network.

Wi-Fi, cell phones, laptops, and other wireless devices sure do make life a lot easier … unless of course you have “electromagnetic allergies”, in which case such devices make life a living hell.

It sure is for one Santa Fe man !

Via Yahoo! News, The Huffington Post reports that Arthur Firstenberg is suing his former chef-turned-neighbor, Raphaela Monribot, because she refuses to turn off her gadgets. The Santa Fe Reporter says, “Firstenberg claims that the low-level electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell phones and other modern gadgets makes him, and others ‘sensitive’ to radio waves, suffer terribly. The side effects of exposure, he believes, include ‘nausea, vertigo, diarrhea, ringing in the ears, severe headaches and body aches, crippling joint pains, insomnia, impaired vision, impaired muscular control’ and other ailments, some potentially deadly.”

What Firstenberg suffers from is, supposedly, a legitimate condition called (EMS). Firstenberg first started experiencing the symptoms of EMS when he was in college in the 1980s. Since then he has been a vocal and vigilant opponent of public wireless systems … and he’s not alone.

He’s part of a group of Santa Fe residents who are taking legal action to remove all Wi-Fi hotspots from public venues because the claim the wireless radio waves irritate their “electromagnetic allergies.” The Yahoo! News story says, “To add merit to their case, they are classifying their ‘allergy’ or ‘sensitivity’ as a disability and are claiming the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimination based on disability.”

According to the SF Reporter story, Firstenberg wants a judge to stop his neighbor from using her iPhone, wireless Internet, and laptop charger, as well as award him $530,000 in damages, including $100,000 for pain and suffering. He claims that Monribot’s use of these electronic devices has forced him from his home.
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2010, 09:18 AM   #30
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

The EMP threat fact or fiction ? PART1 !

by Yousaf M. Butt
Monday, January 25, 2010

A nuclear weapon explodes high above the US, unleashing a deadly electromagnetic pulse (EMP) that almost instantly knocks out much of our electrical grid. The electronic control systems in our water, oil, and gas distribution systems fail, and other infrastructure such as telecommunications and transport grind to a halt. While it would be far too high up in the atmosphere (40–400 kilometers) to directly kill people by blast and heat, such an attack would have “the capability to produce significant damage to critical infrastructures and thus to the very fabric of US society”, according to the congressional “Commission to Assess the Threat to the U.S. from EMP Attack”.
But how likely is this scenario and what should we do about it? The methodology and conclusions of the EMP commission have already been criticized a few years ago [1,2,3]. Here I examine the salient technical issues and attempt to compare the threat of nuclear EMP with that from a powerful “once-in-a-century” geomagnetic storm.
The precise effects of nuclear EMP are difficult to predict but depend on, among other factors, the yield of the weapon, the detonation altitude, as well as upon the geographic latitude and the magnitude of the local geomagnetic field. Knowing the type of adversary who may entertain such an attack allows us to narrow down the sorts of weapons that may be employed, how they may be used, and thus the type of threat we possibly face.
I examine the salient technical issues and attempt to compare the threat of nuclear EMP with that from a powerful “once-in-a-century” geomagnetic storm.
I first briefly describe the source of the various types of electromagnetic pulses that are the sub-components of what is generically termed “EMP”: E1, E2 and E3. To properly assess the effects of EMP on electric power systems, appropriate specifications of these E1, E2, and E3 sub-components are vital. I follow by a short review some historical US and Soviet high-altitude nuclear explosions that took place 1955-1962 in order to see what may be learnt from such archival data. Lastly, I evaluate the possible threat we may face from an EMP attack, as well as that from geomagnetic storms, and conclude with some suggested responses.

Description of nuclear electromagnetic pulses
During the course of a nuclear explosion, gamma rays are produced both by the fission process, and by inelastic scattering of neutrons in the material of the device. Most of these energetic gamma rays are absorbed by the material of the weapon itself and never escape. For typical bomb designs, just 0.1-0.5% of the total bomb yield is expected to be radiated as prompt gamma rays. The higher number corresponds to simple low-yield fission weapons with relatively thin outer casings, and the lower number applies to the more complicated two-stage thermonuclear devices. These prompt gamma-rays are emitted in a relatively thin (on the order of a few meters) spherical shell whose radius increases at the speed of light.
As a nuclear EMP device is exploded at an altitude of between 40–400 kilometers, the downward directed gamma rays collide with electrons in air molecules of the thin upper atmosphere transferring their energy to the electrons via the Compton process. These electrons are ejected from their parent molecules at high energies and, once liberated, collide with other electrons creating a cascade of roughly 30,000 electrons for each original gamma ray [4]. The electrons spiral in the magnetic field of the earth emitting coherent synchrotron radiation. Since this radiation, and the initial excitation gamma-rays, both travel at the speed of light, the EMP radiation field “piles-up” in an analogous manner to a “sonic-boom”: the electromagnetic radiation formed at different distances from the explosion arrives virtually simultaneously to an observer on the ground. The source region of the pulse is located, primarily, in an approximately 10-kilometer-thick region of the atmosphere roughly between 25 and 35 kilometers altitude: well above a 35 kilometers, the density is too low for much production of Compton scattered electrons and much below 25 kilometers, most of the prompt gammas are absorbed [4]. The pulse has a risetime of nanoseconds and usually decays within a microsecond or so. During that short time it can induce fields of, typically, 100 to 30,000 V/m at ground level. However, any ionization present in the source region will tend to “short-out” the EMP. High-energy X-rays are also produced during the explosion and these will enhance the ionization in the high-altitude EMP source region. This source of ionization was largely ignored in EMP assessments until 1986. The inclusion of the X-ray ionization in more recent modeling has lowered the assessed values of the peak EMP fields.
The exact value of the induced peak electric field depends upon the bomb yield, its design, and other factors already mentioned above, such as the detonation altitude, local magnetic field strength, and the geographic latitude of the explosion. Higher geomagnetic field strengths and higher latitudes (i.e. farther away from the equator, north or south) will typically create a stronger peak EMP field, other things being equal.
An EMP affects electrical systems by “coupling” to them: in effect, electrical devices, and their attachments (e.g. power cables), simply act like antennas which pick-up the EMP signal.
For a large device (greater than 100 kilotons), significant EMP fields will be induced out to the tangent radius: i.e., the whole region on the Earth’s surface which is within line-of-sight to the high-altitude explosion will experience the EMP pulse. For instance, a detonation at 100 kilometers will expose a circular region of radius 1,120 kilometers on the earth’s surface to the pulse, and a 40-kilometer detonation will expose a region of radius 710 kilometers. The electric field expected towards the periphery of these exposed regions will be roughly half the peak field for high-yield weapons, but—importantly—it will be significantly less in that region for a smaller (~1 kiloton) device [5]. For a burst at high northern latitudes, such as for Europe or America, the peak field region occurs in a broad arc located south of the burst “ground-zero”, due to the orientation of the magnetic field [Fig 1]. Also, since the radiation is produced by electrons’ motion transverse to the Earth’s magnetic field, those electrons moving right along the magnetic field lines will not radiate. There is, therefore, also a region of near-zero field strength just north of “ground-zero”, where the downward-angling magnetic field lines from the elevated burst site intersect the Earth, as shown in the figure below.
The exact pulse profile (rise and decay time) also depends on the location of the observer in the exposed region: in general, further away from the peak-field region the pulse will have a slower rise and decay. [6]
The above discussion applies to the prompt, high-amplitude, “E1”, signal from the nuclear detonation. However, this pulse is immediately followed by lower-amplitude, but longer-lasting, “E2” and “E3” EMP signals.
The E2 part of the EMP arises from previously scattered ambient gammas, as well as from the inelastic scattering of the weapon-produced neutrons from the nuclei of air molecules—a process which also yields copious gamma-rays external to the device. The eventual capture of the progressively slowing neutrons results in additional gamma-rays, as does the prompt decay of some of the fission products. The sum of these variously-produced gammas leads to an impulsive Compton electron current (due to the separation of the electrons from their parent molecules) that depends on the polar angle because of the atmospheric density gradient. There is also a non-compensated vertical current directly below the detonation. The resultant “E2” pulse has a duration of up to about 1 second. [7]
Fig 1: Variation of the E1 EMP field strength on the region of earth within line-of-sight of the elevated burst, for a large nuclear device (>100 kT) exploded in the northern hemisphere. The peak electric field region is shown by the dark shaded arc just south of “ground-zero”. For a smaller device, the E1 electric field at the tangent radius will be significantly less than 0.5 of the peak value (Glasstone and Dolan, 1977). “HOB” refers to the height of the burst. For a 40km burst (an optimal altitude for a small weapon – see Section V), the tangent radius is 710km, but substantial E1 fields would not be expected outside about 10xHOB, or a 400km radius, for a 1kt device. (credit: FAS)

The even lower-amplitude—but longer-lasting—E3 EMP pulse comes about as a result of the ionized explosive fireball expanding and “expelling” the earth’s magnetic field (due to the fact that it is an electrically-conductive region), in a “heaving” action. For this reason, it is also known as the Magneto-hydrodynamic (MHD) pulse. This pulse can last up to 1,000 seconds or longer and has with a frequency of less than 1 Hertz.
Directly under the burst point, a temporary layer of ionized air is created by the atmospheric absorption of X-rays produced by the weapon. This region tends to shield the area under the burst for the “early” portion of the MHD-EMP signal. As time progresses, however, the hot ionized air under the burst begins to rise and move across the earth’s geomagnetic field lines causing large atmospheric currents to flow. These ionospheric currents likely account for the second phase (>10 sec) of the MHD-EMP signal. [8]
Lastly, the auroral motion of charged particles from the detonation, spiraling along the earth’s magnetic field between conjugate points in opposite hemispheres, results in a final EMP at extremely low frequencies, typically 0.01 Hertz. The E3 (and Auroral) EMP is the most similar to that associated with natural geomagnetic storms, and is the one that most directly threatens long-line power delivery systems [9]. The E3 pulse is low frequency pulse which, unlike the high frequency E1 and E2 pulses, can penetrate the ground, where it can induce substantial electric currents in very long (over 100 kilometers long) buried cables. [10].

Coupling of the three EMP components to ground systems
An EMP affects electrical systems by “coupling” to them: in effect, electrical devices, and their attachments (e.g. power cables), simply act like antennas which pick-up the EMP signal. The different types of EMP—E1, E2, and E3—couple in different ways to the various types of electrical systems.[11,12]
The prompt E1 couples well to local antennas, short (1–10 m) cable runs, equipment in buildings (through apertures), and can disrupt or damage integrated circuit (IC)-based control systems, sensors, communication systems, protective systems, computers, and similar devices. The most common protection against the effects of E1 is the use of electromagnetic shielding, filters, and surge arresters [11].
E2 couples well to longer conductive lines, vertical antenna towers, and aircraft with trailing wire antennas. It is similar to lightning in its time-dependence, but would, of course, be more geographically widespread, while being lower in intensity, especially for a low-yield weapon. As the EMP commission acknowledges, the E2 pulse would not, in general, be an issue for critical infrastructure systems since they already have protective measures for defense against occasional lightning strikes.
It is useful to review the actual measured effects of EMP from Cold War ear nuclear tests.
The E3 pulse couples well to power and long communications lines including undersea and underground cables. The low frequencies (sub-Hertz) of E3 make shielding and isolation difficult. Experience from both geomagnetic storms and 1960s-era Russian and American nuclear testing indicates that there is a great likelihood of commercial power and landline disruption from E3 pulses of powerful (>100 kt) nuclear devices. Small isolated systems will however, typically, be unaffected by E3. The E3 environment is so slowly varying that quasi-DC analysis models are appropriate for estimating the behavior of the induced power system responses.
Dr. Radsaky and Mr. Kappenman have summarized the effects of E1 and E3 from a large nuclear device in their statement before the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology:
For the operation of the electric power grid, the… E1 and E3 pulses are the most important. Research performed for the EMP Commission clearly indicates the following concerns:
1) Malfunctions and damage to solid-state relays in electric substations (E1)
2) Malfunctions and damage to computer controls in power generation facilities, substations, and control centers (E1)
3) Malfunctions and damage to power system communications (E1)
4) Flashover and damage to distribution class insulators (E1)
5) Voltage collapse of the power grid due to transformer saturation (E3)
6) Damage to [High Voltage] HV and [Extremely High Voltage] EHV transformers due to internal heating (E3)
The E1, E2, and E3 EMP subcomponents scale differently with weapon yield (and design) so it is important to be clear what effects one is interested in: i.e. effects on IC-based electronics (which couple strongly with E1) or electrical power systems connected to long-lines (which couple most strongly with E3, and auroral EMP). The salient issues are, then, what strengths of E1 and E3 pulses one may expect over what parts of the country from the types of devices adversarial states possibly possess (or may possess in the foreseeable future) and, of course, how likely the actors are to carry out such an attack. Before addressing those questions, it is useful to review the actual measured effects of EMP from Cold War ear nuclear tests.

Real world experience
Direct experience of nuclear EMP effects is limited and not all the data is publicly available. There were a total of about 20 Soviet and US tests [13], between 1955 and1962: 13 US tests and 7 Soviet ones. Many of these were powerful megaton-range weapons and their effects cannot be simply interpolated to lower yield weapons (such as new nuclear proliferator states may possess), nor is it trivial to infer what effects they may have had upon the much more sensitive modern electronics. Of course, it is also important to recalibrate the expected effects from similar weapons exploded in different parts of the globe: detonations further from the equator, or those taking place in a high magnetic field region, will generally lead to stronger peak E1 pulse amplitudes, other things being equal.
Modern integrated circuits are about a million times more sensitive to prompt E1 pulses than the early-1960s era electronics.
In particular, lower-yield weapons—such as those feared by EMP commission from small adversarial states and/or, possibly, terrorists cells—will have a substantially smaller E3 component than the megaton yield weapons simply because of the size of their ionized fireball is much smaller. This means that the effect of smaller (~kiloton) weapons on long-line power and telephone cables, which couple most effectively to E3, will also be much less than in the megaton cases; however, the E1 fields from such weapons may still be sufficient to disrupt and/or destroy the electronic controls of the power-delivery systems, as well as computers, Blackberrys, cell phones, etc., located within or close to the peak-field region.
The advent of modern solid-state circuitry (ICs) as compared to the vacuum-tube technology of 1962, has dramatically increased the susceptibility of electronic equipment to the E1 pulse. Modern ICs are about a million times more sensitive to prompt E1 pulses than the early-1960s era electronics.

US tests
A good source for information on American Cold War era high-altitude tests is the publicly available document, “US High Altitude Test Experiences” [13], which states:
Starfish produced the largest fields of the high-altitude detonations; they caused outages of the series-connected street-lighting systems of Oahu (Hawaii), probable failure of a microwave repeating station on Kauai, failure of the input stages of ionospheric sounders and damage to rectifiers in communication receivers, Other than the failure of the microwave link, no problem was noted in the telephone system. No failure was noted in the telemetry systems used for data transmission on board the many instrumentation rockets. There was no apparent increase in radio or television repairs subsequent to any of the Johnson Island detonations. The failures observed were generally in the unprotected input stages of receivers or in rectifiers of electronic equipment; transients on the power line probably caused the rectifier failures. There was one failure in the unprotected part of an electronic system of the LASL Optical Station on top of Mount Haleakala on Maui Island.
For a more detailed study of the Starfish test’s effect upon the streetlights in Honolulu the reader is referred to Sandia Laboratory report “Did High-Altitude EMP cause the Streetlight Incident?” by C.N. Vittitoe [14].

Soviet tests
The first two of the Soviet “K-Project” high-altitude nuclear tests over Kazakhstan in 1961 were only 1.2 kilotons (at 150 and 300 kilometers altitude), so the EMP could be carefully measured, but these tests, apparently, did not have much of an impact on the 1961 infrastructure of Kazakhstan. This is unsurprising because of the hardier electronics of that era (which would be less susceptible to E1), as well as the smaller E3 pulse from such small devices.
Of the Soviet tests, test 184 (290 kilometers, 300 kilotons) appears to have caused the most problems with the civilian infrastructure in Kazakhstan. At that detonation altitude the horizon radius is about 1900 kilometers, which means the pulse would have affected all of Kazakhstan. This test caused damage to the overhead power and telecommunication transmission lines, as well as to diesel generators. Reportedly, the diesel generator problems occurred some time after the detonations due to dielectric breakdown in the generator windings.
According to Jerry Emauelson (see also presentation by Dr. William Graham [15]):
Other known effects of Test 184 were that it knocked out a major 1000-kilometer (600-mile) underground power line running from Astana… to the city of Almaty. Several fires were reported. In the city of Karagandy, the EMP started a fire in the city’s electrical power plant, which was connected to the long underground power line. The shielded electrical cable was buried 3 feet (90 cm.) underground. The geomagnetic-storm-like E3 component of the EMP… can easily penetrate into the ground. The E3 component of the Test 184 detonation… began rising immediately after the detonation, but did not reach its peak until 20 seconds after the detonation. The E3 pulse then decayed over the next minute or so.
Indeed, the main damage in the Soviet test #184 appears to have been caused by the E3 component by its coupling to the long-lines which functioned as antennae for the low frequency pulse. This E3 component (related to the size of ionized fireball) would be expected to be much smaller in a 1-kT type weapon that appears to be of most concern to the EMP commission now. On the other hand, it is very important to recognize the fact that geomagnetic storms, on occasion, can induce more powerful pulses than the E3 pulse from even megaton type nuclear weapons. This will be explored further in part two of this article.
Interestingly, different sources concur that prompt peak E1 component of this 300-kiloton Soviet test was not excessive: between 5 kV/m and 10 kV/m. This is likely a result of the pre-ionization effect in two-stage weapons [16].
Electronic control systems are effectively, according to the EMP commission, the Achilles’ heel of our power delivery network.
The strength of the EMP is dependent upon strength and orientation (dip-angle) of the geomagnetic field. The Earth’s magnetic field varies across the globe and also varies with time at a given location. Since Kazakhstan’s latitude and magnetic field (magnitude and orientation) are similar to that over the continental US, we would expect very similar EMP fields from a large (300-kiloton) two-stage device exploded about 290 kilometers over the continental US. Of course, such devices are not available to new nuclear proliferator states.

Effects upon power-delivery systems
It has been argued that the lack of damage to both the power and communications systems in Hawaii from the 1.4-megaton Starfish test counters the prevalent view that EMP is devastating to such systems [17]. However, it should be noted that the line-runs in Hawaii were considerable shorter than on the continental United States, so one cannot dismiss the vulnerability altogether based only the empirical data collected in Hawaii.
While high E1 fields may not couple to the long-lines in a power delivery system, the E1 pulse could disrupt/destroy the IC-based controllers for power-delivery systems, leading to at least temporary failure, and possibly more serious effects in the hardware. As the EMP commission reports:
[T]he local switching, controls, and critical equipment have become largely electronic with concomitant vulnerability to [E1] EMP… The continuing evolution of electronic devices into systems that once were exclusively electromechanical, enabling computer control instead of direct human intervention and use of broad networks like the Internet, results in ever greater reliance on microelectronics and thus the present and sharply growing vulnerability of the power system to [E1] EMP attack… The E1 pulse can upset the protection and control system, including damaging control and protective system components, and cause the plant to trip or trigger emergency controlled shut down… Given the range of potential E1 levels, analysis and test results provide a basis to expect sufficient upset to cause a plant’s system to shut down improperly in many cases. Proper shutdown depends on synchronized operation of multiple controllers and switches. For example: coal intake and exhaust turbines must operate together or else explosion or implosion of the furnace may occur. Cooling systems must respond properly to temperature changes during shut down or thermal gradients can cause boiler deformation or rupture. Orderly spin-down of the turbine is required to avoid shaft sagging and blades impacting the casings.
Electronic control systems are effectively, according to the EMP commission, the Achilles’ heel of our power delivery network. While it is uncertain what the exact implications of losing such control systems would be on the major hardware (e.g. transformers, turbines, etc.), it is best to be prudent and assume substantial damage may result, at least in the peak E1 field region, for a large nuclear device. (The spatial extent of this peak-field region, for the types of the threats most feared by the EMP commission, see Fig 1.) Outside the region exposed to a substantial E1 pulse cascading grid failure may well occur, but since the associated hardware damage would not be expected there, it would reasonable to assume that that portion of the grid could be resuscitated after a short outage.
Specifically regarding nuclear power plants, in the early 1980s a Sandia Laboratories analyzed the “worst case” scenario and concluded that EMP poses no substantial threat to such plants based upon both analysis and simulated EMP tests. [18]
For the reasons outlined above, one cannot simply use the peak E1 field numbers to calculate the effects on long-lines. It is the weaker, but longer lasting and lower-frequency E3 pulse that causes the greatest direct damage to power delivery systems, as it is this component that couples to the long-lines [17].

EMP effects upon IC-based devices
The effects of EMP on ICs include malfunctions and loss of data, thermal runaway, gate-insulator breakdown, avalanche breakdown, tunnel breakdown, and metalization burnout. The energy required may be provided by the surge itself and/or by other sources (such as the power supply or storage capacitors). As successive generations of electronics pack ever more components into smaller spaces, this increasingly inhibits the ability of the circuit to conduct away the heat that results from the typically intense, short voltage and current flows generated by an EMP.
Tests with EMP simulators have shown that a very short pulse of about 10-7 Joule is sufficient to damage a microwave semiconductor diode, and roughly .05 J will damage an audio transistor, whereas 1 J would be required for vacuum tube damage [ref. 5, pp. 522–4]. More precisely, the limit is defined in terms of the instantaneous (few nanoseconds risetime) power delivered to the IC [19]. A few watts to a few hundred watts of power are sufficient to destroy most ICs, when delivered in a few nanoseconds (e.g. 10-7 J /10-8 sec = 10 W).
Thus, how quickly the EMP E1 pulse is delivered affects the consequent IC damage. Note that the pulse length increases as one goes further from the peak field region [6], and this is another reason (besides the natural decrease of the E1 field strength) to expect somewhat less damage towards the periphery of the exposed region, especially for a small (~1 kiloton) device.
The effects of prompt, E1 EMP on ICs cannot be calculated directly without knowledge of the details of the particular electronic system set-up. An E1 pulse acts on an electronic system by inducing surges in the interconnections (cables, wires, inductors, etc.), which arrive at input, output, and power-supply terminals of solid-state components to cause transient and/or permanent failures. When applied to solid-state parts, a nuclear EMP can be considered a quasi-static field because most of the EMP energy is carried by the spectral components below 108 Hz, which corresponds to a wavelength of about 3 m. Investigations have shown that the direct effects of such a field are negligible for most purposes if its electric and magnetic components are less than 100 kV/m and 600 A/m, respectively [20].
The bottom line is that, indeed, our infrastructure is vulnerable to significant E1 and E3 pulses. While significant E3 would not be expected from a low yield weapon, it would be expected from a solar storm.
Thus, EMP hardness assurance of ICs is concerned with EMP-induced voltage surges rather than the actual EMP field intensity, per se. To be able to properly asses the induced voltage surges one must be able to characterize EMP voltage surges that may arise in wires and at the terminals of solid-state components and then determine the response of a particular solid-state component to the voltage surges. It is important to note that an EMP can induce powerful voltage surges even when the electromagnetic field itself is moderate in strength. This occurs in electronic systems with suboptimal layouts, such as those with long connecting cables that act as antennas. EMP-induced surges are also strongly dependent on the orientation of the parts relative to the electric and magnetic fields, the precise parameters of the solid-state components, the amount of shielding provided, and the method of grounding.
In recent tests, three types of failure were observed: upset, temporary failure due to latchup, and permanent damage caused by secondary effects [20]. Upsets occurred from 1- or 10-microsecond pulses. While a 0.1-microsecond pulse was found to be too short to change the charge state of parasitic capacitances and corrupt the data, its steep (~few nanosecond rise-time) leading edge activated latchup of the components. Even a few hundred volts of induced voltage was found to be sufficient to cause permanent IC damage.

Comparisons with lightning
Lightning shares many of characteristics of E2, but contrary to what is often quoted, its magnitude can exceed even the peak E1 fields in the discharge region [17]. Research on lightning indicates that a stroke may contain significant components with rise-time of less than 10-7 sec and electric fields greater than 106 V/m—more than a order of magnitude greater than even the highest peak E1 fields, from the biggest nuclear devices. [21]. Although the aforementioned Russian study [20] indicates that it is the sharp leading edge of the pulse, with components from 10-9 to 10-8 sec that are of most concern to IC latchup, the implications of lightning research for EMP vulnerability is a critical topic to include in any future peer-reviewed study of the EMP threat.

EMP commission tests
Although the EMP commission carried out tests of the robustness of various devices to E1, the unclassified version of the commission documents do not contain many meaningful technical details. We simply do not know level of EMP stress applied in the quoted tests, and whether they would be appropriate to a large (>100 kilotons) or a small (~1 kiloton) type device.
e.g. The EMP commission states that:
…at relatively low electromagnetic stress levels, a portion of a DCS process controller provided false indications of the process status. An operator interface indicated a switch was on when in actuality it had been turned off, while internal voltage and temperature were reported as out of their normal operating ranges when they were actually normal… In addition to false readings from the sensors, direct malfunctions of some tested control elements were also noted. Additional control element effects included the failure of pressure transmitters, which included both physical damage and loss of calibration data required to indicate proper readings… Communications systems based on Ethernet components similar to those found in PC networking systems suffered substantial degradation and damage effects when illuminated by the simulated albeit low-level EMP pulse. These damage effects are significant since they require the systems to be physically repaired or replaced in order to restore the normal communications capabilities… General-purpose desktop computers and SCADA remote and master terminal units… were the most susceptible to damage or upset of all the test articles.
But since we are not informed of the numerical values of various levels of EMP stress, it is difficult to independently ascertain just how vulnerable the devices are to the range of threats from various yield devices. And again, it should be remembered that the pulse length increases as one goes further from the peak field region [6], and this, together with the natural decrease of the E1 field strength further from the peak-field region, may be reason to expect less disruption and/or damage towards the periphery of the exposed region, especially for a small device.
The bottom line is that, indeed, our infrastructure is vulnerable to significant E1 and E3 pulses. While significant E3 would not be expected from a low yield weapon, it would be expected from a solar storm. And as explained in the following section, while a small weapon could certainly produce substantial destructive E1 fields, such fields would be restricted to only a small region of the country.

Dependence of EMP on weapon yield and detonation height
The EMP commission’s executive report expresses the concern that “terrorists or state actors that possess relatively unsophisticated missiles armed with nuclear weapons may well calculate that… they may obtain the greatest political-military utility from one or a few such weapons by using them—or threatening their use—in an EMP attack.” Given that scenario, such a warhead would likely be launched by one of the Scud/No-dong/Shahab family of missiles. Since the payload of such missiles is limited to ~1000 kilograms, and only relatively crude technologies are available to such actors, we can safely assume that the yield would be on the order of ~1 kiloton [22]. By comparison, the gun-type U-based Little Boy (15 kilotons) weighed 4 metric tons (4,000 kilograms), and the Fat Man (21 kilotons) was an implosion Pu-based device and weighed 4.6 metric tons.
The EMP effects of a crude one-kiloton device , though still substantial, will be dramatically less than that of a one-megaton device. Firstly, a megaton-range EMP weapon is not very sensitive to the detonation altitude: any altitude between roughly 40 and 400 kilometers will yield a very strong E1 EMP pulse at ground level. On the other hand, the EMP effects of a smaller, one-kiloton warhead, is quite sensitive to the detonation altitude [16]. To boost the EMP lethality of a simple one-kiloton fission weapon, it must be detonated much lower than the hundreds of km that would expose the entire continental US to harmful electric fields. In fact, the “sweet spot” for maximizing the EMP lethality of such weapons would be a detonation altitude of about 40 kilometers—significantly higher, or lower, and the peak fields at ground level will decrease.
This lower altitude implies a smaller region on the ground will exposed to high E-fields, as the “horizon” (the farthest extent on the ground with direct view of the detonation) is closer to ground-zero. For 40 kilometers altitude, the maximum extent of the induced EMP E1-fields is within a 725-kilometer radius. In reality, this is an overestimate because the EMP far from the peak field region is inherently limited in strength by the lower initial gamma-ray yield for a small device, and the distant pulse also has a wider (and, thus, less threatening) pulse time-profile. Although in standard texts it is shown that the E-fields expected at the periphery of the exposed ground regions are roughly half the peak fields, this applies to large (>100 kilotons) devices [5]. For smaller devices the peripheral fields will be expected to be significantly below half the peak field. A reasonable estimate for the extent for the destructive EMP E1 fields from a one-kiloton burst at 40 kilometers is about 10 times the altitude, or ~400 kilometers radius [Fig. 1].
Thus, a standard “crude” one-kiloton device will not expose a very large area of the US to high E-fields, both because it will have to be detonated lower in the atmosphere to boost its EMP, and also because its EMP is inherently limited in strength.
Secondly, although a one-kiloton weapon could have a substantial peak E1 component in a limited region of the country, this component does not couple well to long-lines, and would not induce large currents in long cable runs. At the same time, a small weapon would have a significantly smaller E3 component (which is driven by the size of electrically charged fireball) than a megaton-range weapon, which, again, means that long-lasting country-wide power outages would not be expected.
Serious long-lasting consequences of a one-kiloton EMP strike would likely be limited to a state-sized region of the country. Although grid outages in this region may have cascading knock-on effects in more distant parts of the country, the electronic devices in those further regions would not have suffered direct damage, and the associated power systems far from the EMP exposed region could be re-started.
So-called “super-EMP” devices could boost the EMP, even for a low-yield weapon by, for instance, reducing the shielding of the fissile core in a preferential direction—say, downwards—and thereby increase the gamma-rays escaping in that direction. Such weapons would, typically, use non-spherical, e.g. cylindrical or linear, implosion techniques to match the asymmetry of the shielding. However, while these super-EMP devices will boost gamma-rays which can cause a more powerful E1 pulse, they will not induce a powerful E3 signal. Also, due to the fact that the super-EMP weapon will be directional, it is unlikely to affect a large part of the country: it could cause havoc, but, again, only in a small region of the country. To obtain a higher E3 pulse one must have bigger fireball from a larger device.
[Part Two of this article will compare this EMP threat with a space-based source: geomagnetic storms.]

References
[1] “EMPty Threat?” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Sept/Oct 2005 p. 50
[2] “The Newt Bomb: How a pulp-fiction fantasy became a GOP weapons craze.” The New Republic, June 3, 2009.
[3] “The Next Fake Threat”.
[4] C. L. Longmire. “On the Electromagnetic Pulse Produced by Nuclear Explosions,” IEEE Trans. on Electromag. Compat., Vol. EMC-20, No. 1, pp. 3-13, February 1978.
[5] Glasstone, Samuel and Dolan, Philip J., The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. Chapter 11, section 11.73. United States Department of Defense. 1977.
[6] see Fig 2.4 in “HEMP Emergency Planning and Operating Procedures for Electric Power Systems”, T.W. Reddoch and L.C. Markel, Electrotek Concepts, Inc, ORNL/Sub/91-SG 105/1
[7] Greetsai, V.N., A.H. Kozlovsky, M. M. Kuvshinnikov, V.M. Loborev, Yu. V. Parfenov, O.A. Tarasov, L.N. Zdoukhov, “Response of Long Lines to Nuclear High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP),” IEEE Transactions on EMC, Vol. 40, No. 4, November 1998, pp. 348-354.
[8] IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-1, No. 3, July 1986.
[9] http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640018807_1964018807.pdf
[10] http://glasstone.blogspot.com/2006/03/emp-radiation-from-nuclear-space.html
[11] http://www.tscm.com/MIL-STD-464.pdf
[12] http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/emp/c-2body.pdf
[13] US High Altitude Test Experiences, Herman Hoerlin, LANL Report LA-6405, 1976.
[14] “Did High-Altitude EMP cause the Streetlight Incident?”, C.N. Vittitoe, Sandia Laboratory System Design and Assessment Note 31, June 1989.
[15] Presentation by Dr. William Graham, Chairman of the EMP Commission “Commission to Assess the Threat from High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP): Overview”.
[16] A Calculational Model for High Altitude EMP,, Louis W. Seiler, Jr., Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, March 1975, p. 31.
[17] Mario Rabinowitz, “Effect of the FAST NUCLEAR ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE on the Electric Power Grid Nationwide: A Different View”, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2: 1199-1222, 1987 available as: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0307127.
[18] D. M. Erickson et al., Interaction of Electromagnetic Pulse with Commercial Nuclear Power Systems, Sandia Report, SAND82-2738/2, 1983.
[19] EMP Susceptibility of Integrated Circuits, C. R. Jenkins and D. L. Durgin, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, Vol. NS-22, No.6, December 1975.
[20] Simulating the Exposure of ICs to Voltage Surges Caused by Nuclear Explosions K. A. Epifantsev, O. A. Gerasimchuk, and P. K. Skorobogatov, ISSN 1063-7397, Russian Microelectronics, 2009, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 260–272. Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2009.
[21] M. A. Uman, M. J. Master, and E. P. Krider. “A Comparison of Lightning Electromagnetic Fields with the Nuclear EMP in the Frequency Range 104 - 107 Hz,” IEEE Transaction Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. EMC-24 (4), pp. 410-416, 1982
[22] Chapter 12, John Mueller, “Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda”, Oxford University Press, 2010.
Yousaf Butt is a staff scientist at the Center for Astrophysics at Harvard University, where he worked on NASA’s orbiting Chandra X-ray Observatory project from 1999–2004. He was a research fellow at the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Global Security Program from 2005–2007. He holds BSc degrees in physics and in mechanical engineering from MIT and a PhD in experimental nuclear astrophysics from Yale University.
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 26-01-2010 at 09:35 AM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2010, 11:37 AM   #31
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Soldiers see through walls
Jan 2010
By Matthew Hickman (U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command)


Anthony Naia, from the Communications-Electronics Research,
Development and Engineering Center, demonstrates how to use
Sense-Through-the-Wall technology to Secretary of the Army
John M. McHugh (right) and Research, Development and Engineering
Command Commander Maj. Gen. Nickolas G. Justice.


SAN ANTONIO -- Entering a building and clearing rooms may become much safer for Soldiers in combat as Army scientists continue to develop Sense-Through-the-Wall technology to increase situational awareness.

Research, Development and Engineering Command technicians demonstrated Sense-Through-the-Wall radar imaging and many other high-tech gadgets at the Army Strong Zone outside the Alamodome during the buildup to the 2010 All-American Bowl Jan. 9.

The Army Strong Zone gave visitors a glimpse of career opportunities and futuristic Army equipment and vehicles.

The radar imaging device emits an electromagnetic wave that penetrates physical barriers. The wave records Doppler movements and sends information to the receiver antenna. The imager then displays the range and general direction of all targets for the Soldier.

Officials said the technology may be useful in urban areas where many of today's battles occur. Building clearing procedures take a priority in city streets and back alleys. A device that would allow Soldiers to recon a house and determine enemy locations would certainly save lives.


"This is giving Soldiers more awareness," said John Cua, Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, Fort Monmouth, N.J. "They have an extra piece of information to use in room clearance missions that would help them make the right decision."

The technology has been in continuous development for 10 years, but the device has entered into a bidding process and Cua said testing continues to go well.

"We have contacted Battle Labs at Fort Benning, Georgia. We gave them this equipment and asked them how they could integrate this technology into their strategies," he said.

Although the bidding process has started, RDECOM continues to make improvements to the device, and Cua said Soldiers shouldn't treat it like a silver bullet.

"The Soldiers obviously want an increased range and we're definitely trying to get the equipment lighter," he said. "We don't want to burden the Soldiers with a piece of heavy equipment that replaces another piece of equipment that could save lives."

The device is user friendly and it takes less than two days of new equipment training before Soldiers become effective at using the technology. The graphic user interface is easy to read, and Cua said the feedback has been very positive.

"Soldiers would love to have this capability at hand," he said. "If it's something that would help save their own lives and others then they're definitely welcoming it."

''Finaly, people should learn to relate major political, ideological and strategic developments in the world with the major technological and military capabilities at the disposal of forces and governments seeking the destruction of Western civilization and culture of freedom. Active and aggressive entities such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, North Korea and many others are prime candidates who have either acquired the EMP technology, are close to acquiring it or can be equipped with it by their more powerful patrons in short order''.
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 27-01-2010 at 11:54 AM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2010, 11:55 AM   #32
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default


Thought this might be of interest here.. .. hehe.. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .

Permanent link to this comic: http://xkcd.com/273/Image URL (for hotlinking/embedding): http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/electrom...trum_small.png
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 27-01-2010 at 01:50 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-01-2010, 02:09 PM   #33
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

EMP attack, our version of Haiti earthquake
Submitted by SHNS on Wed, 01/27/2010 - 13:34 By CLIFFORD D. MAY, Scripps Howard News Service

Had the earthquake that hit Haiti shaken Florida instead, the death toll would not have been so tragically high -- over 150,000 at last count. In Haiti, as in other impoverished countries, buildings are often shoddily constructed, infrastructure is weak, and governance is incompetent. The primary response to disaster: wait for help from abroad.
It's a well-established rule: Rich nations endure natural disasters better than poor nations. But there may be an exception. Stay with me for a moment and you'll see what I mean.
In recent years, Americans have become dependent not just on electricity but also on computers, microchips and satellites. The infrastructure that supports all this has become increasingly sophisticated -- but not more resilient. On the contrary, as this infrastructure has become more complex, it also has become more fragile and therefore more vulnerable -- an Achilles' heel.

That is why, in 2001, the U.S. government established a commission to

"assess the threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack."

Such an attack would involve the detonation of a nuclear warhead at high altitude over the American mainland, producing a shockwave powerful enough to knock out electrical power, electronics, communications, transportation and much more. Think of a blackout, but one of indefinite duration -- because we have no plan for recovery and could expect little or no help from abroad.

The EMP commission also reported that Iran - which is feverishly working to acquire nuclear weapons -- has conducted tests in which it launched missiles and exploded warheads at high altitudes. And the CIA has translated Iranian military journals in which EMP attacks against the U.S. are explicitly discussed.

Might Iran's rulers orchestrate such an attack if and when they acquire a nuclear capability? That is a heated debate among defense experts. But what is almost never discussed is the threat of a naturally occurring EMP event.

I first learned about this possibility a few months ago at a conference organized by Empact America, an organization concerned exclusively with the EMP challenge. Scientists there explained about "severe space weather" -- in particular, storms on the surface of the sun that could trigger an EMP event.

The strongest solar storm on record is the Carrington Event of 1859, named after Richard Carrington, an astronomer who witnessed the super solar flare that set off the event as he was projecting an image of the sun on a white screen. In those days, of course, there was nothing much to damage. A high-intensity burst of electro-magnetic energy shot through telegraph lines, disrupting communications, shocking technicians and setting their papers on fire. Northern Lights were visible as far south as Cuba and Hawaii. But otherwise life went on as normal.
The same would not be true were a solar storm of similar magnitude to erupt today. Most of us would not adapt well to this sudden return to a pre-industrial age.

How likely is a repeat of the Carrington Event? Scientists say it is not only possible -- it is inevitable. What they don't know is when. The best estimates are that super solar storms occur once every 100 years -- which means we are about 50 years overdue.

Both the EMP Commission and a 2008 study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) call for a response: hardening the electrical grid and other components of the infrastructure to increase the chances they would survive, as well as pre-positioning spares of essential but complex components of the electrical grid and other infrastructure critical to communications and emergency public services.

President Obama has pledged $100 million to help Haiti recover from its recent earthquake. By coincidence, that's precisely the amount that the NAS recommends be spent on measures it estimates would limit the damage resulting from an EMP event by 60 to 70 percent. When you consider that such an event -- whether naturally occurring or a "man-caused disaster" -- could cause trillions of dollars in damage and claim more lives than were lost in World War II, that sounds like a reasonably priced investment.

Link to "One Second After:" http://shadowboxent.brinkster.net/Forstchen/home.html
Link to NASA Study: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12507http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12507&page=29
(Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism. E-mail him at [email protected])


Are your circuits safe from attack?
Emprimus focuses on protecting against intentional electromagnetic interference
interference By L. Samuel Pfeifle

MINNEAPOLIS—What would happen if a malicious person detonated an electro-magnetic pulse weapon just outside your facility? Essentially, everything with an integrated circuit—servers, alarm systems, HVAC systems, surveillance systems—would be rendered useless.


How do you protect against such an eventuality? That’s what Emprimus does. A consultancy and integrator focused on measuring, assessing, designing, implementing, and testing remediation efforts to protect critical, non-military electronic systems and data assets against intentional electromagnetic interference (known as IEMI).

“The military discovered with nuclear weapons,” said Gale Nordling, Emprimus CEO, “that they give off this huge electro-magnetic pulse that basically fries everything. And now you can do this locally and disrupt anything with an integrated circuit from a distance—anything with a computer chip in it.”


These devices, the design for which can essentially be found on the Internet and can be made the size of a standard briefcase, have been used to take down banking systems, disrupt workplaces, and more, but there are fears, with our increasingly computerized society, that terrorists have only begun to design uses for them.


“The traditional remediation has been the military approach,” said Nordling, “a very robust metal shielding, but now there’s some new types of metallicized cloth that’s a fraction of the cost and you can put that around pieces of equipment.” This makes remediation much more approachable for data facilities, for example, that don’t have military-sized budgets. “The cost of the cloth is probably $4 to $10 per square foot. The military solution might run $100 per square foot.”


Emprimus also sees an education and policy void that needs filling. “We were escorted into a federal facility with very high security,” said Jim Danburg, director of security and continuity, by way of explanation. “And we were asked to be scanned for kinetic threats [i.e., explosives], but nobody checked our laptops and devices for authenticity. No one asked us to turn them on. It’s very possible to disguise the smaller IEMI devices in a laptop or fake server. These are things the security community needs to be aware of.”


Oh Shit!
Pentagon Scientists Target Iran’s Nuclear Mole Men
By David Hambling

Iran’s nuclear facilities may be deeply-buried in a “maze of tunnels” — making them hard to find and even harder to destroy. But the Pentagon is working on some new technological tricks for exactly this kind of mission.
Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, apparently takes a personal and close interest in tunnels — he’s a founder member of the Iranian Tunneling Association. Many of those facilities were built as underground shelters in the aftermath of the 1987 “War of the Cities,” when Iraq and Iran exchanged bombardments of Scud missiles.
There are hundreds of miles of such tunnels, created by giant boring machines. The underground locations provide defense and concealment — there is no telling what is a nuclear facility and what is an empty storage space. And, even if the entrance is visible, the extent and layout are unknown, making targeting difficult. Even if the site is attacked, the thickness of mountain rock makes them invulnerable to ordinary bombing.
That’s why the U.S. Air Force is rushing the Massive Ordnance Penetrator into production. The MOP can punch through 60 feet of concrete, but this is the very bluntest of instruments for the job. There is more subtle technology to seek out and destroy such facilities.

Pentagon mad science division Darpa has an array of research projects devoted to Underground Facility Detection & Characterization. According to the program’s website, the agency’s Strategic Technologies Office is:
''investing in sensor technologies that find, characterize and identify facility function, pace of activity, and activities in conjunction with their pre- and post-attack status. STO is also investigating non-nuclear earth-penetrating systems for the defeat of hard and deeply buried targets.''
Seeing through solid rock might sound like a tall order, but Darpa thrives on challenge. One project is called Airborne Tomography using Active Electromagnetics, which builds on technology originally developed by the geophysical exploration industry. The ground is illuminated with electromagnetic energy — typically extremely low frequency — and the distortions on the return show the presence of underground facilities and tunnels. Some years ago, military-backed scientists at Alaska’s High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) were able to map out tunnels at depths of a hundred feet or greater. Papadopoulos, for example, says he wants to do another round of subterranean surveillance experiments. “Personally, I believe it can reach 1,000 kilometers. It [currently] can’t reach Iran, if that’s your question,” one of those researchers, Dennis Papadopoulos told Danger Room. “But if I put HAARP on a ship, or on an oil platform, who knows?”

Gravity Anomaly for Tunnel Exposure is even more sophisticated, using nothing more than variations in the local gravitational field caused by underground spaces. Extremely sensitive gravity gradiometers measure the difference in pull to map out underground voids. Darpa has already reached the stage of integrating the gravity gradiometer and signal processing payloads and mounting them in an unmanned aircraft, and have been “verifying performance in relevant geologic environments.”

Darpa is not neglecting the traditional methods of surveying underground structures, and there is a parallel Seismic and Acoustic Vibration Imaging effort. This might use untended ground sensors dropped from aircraft, or it might be something more advanced — Darpa’s website describes a mobile system using “an integrated, laser vibrometry system to detect seismic wave anomalies.” This might be another airborne sensor, though it might still need to drop something to produce shockwaves to create the seismic and acoustic vibration to be detected.

Darpa clearly believe that it is possible to locate and “characterize” underground facilities — this can mean everything from looking at what sort of vehicles come and go, to monitoring communications traffic or atmospheric sampling for traces of tell-tale nuclear material. It is hardly a surprise that Iran has complained of U.S. drone intrusions in recent years. Some observers suspect that the Air Force’s newest stealth spy drone in Afghanistan, the RQ-170 “Beast of Kandahar” may be sneaking over the border.
If detected, can such targets be attacked? The MOP may be capable of smashing through a lot of rock, but there are smarter approaches. The U.S. Air Force has developed skip-bombing techniques with bunker busters so that they arrive horizontally and can be aimed precisely at entrance doors. They may not destroy the entire facility, but if all the entrances are wrecked, then nothing can go in or out.
Thermobaric bombs like the BLU-118 “cave buster” have been specifically designed for attacking tunnel systems; the shockwave will travel far underground, going around corners and bends that would degrade normal blast waves. One test showed that it could kill human targets even when the blast had traveled through 1,100 feet of tunnels.
There are also more exotic options, like the Rocket Balls (or more correctly, “kinetic fireball incendiaries”) developed for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. A warhead would release a large number of these rubberized balls of rocket fuel; once ignited they bounce around at high speed, spreading out by going through doorways and other openings and raising the surrounding temperature to over a thousand degrees within seconds.
Attacking the Iranian nuclear program would be a massive undertaking, though but not necessarily impossible. However, it would certainly appear that the United States is the only nation with the capability to carry out such an attack. As far as we know, Israel lacks both the sensor technology and the munitions for the job.




__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 28-01-2010 at 02:46 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-01-2010, 06:52 AM   #34
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Earthquake weapon responsible for Haiti and China temblors?
Tony Hake

A grim report prepared by the Russian Northern Fleet for Prime Minister Putin is stating today that the catastrophic earthquake that has devastated the Island of Haiti was the ‘clear result’ of a United States Navy test of one of its ‘earthquake weapons’ planned to be used by the Americans upon the Persian Nation of Iran but had gone ‘horribly wrong’.

Unbeknownst to the world, the United States has a new weapon that was responsible for last week’s magnitude 7.0 earthquake in Haiti and the May 2008 earthquake in Sichuan, China that killed 90,000 people. That of course is a ridiculous statement but the claim was nevertheless made on Venezuela’s ViVe TV, the official news outlet of the nation’s dictator, Hugo Chavez.
According to the report, not only can this devastating weapon cause earthquakes, it can also “create weather anomalies to cause floods, droughts and hurricanes.” The claims are based on a supposed report from Russia’s Northern Fleet which has been monitoring United States Navy activity and documented the new device.
ViVe TV says the earthquake in Haiti was the result of the U.S. Navy testing this new weapon and the United States was aware that it could cause damage. Despite this, ViVe says the U.S. proceed with the test and “had pre-positioned their Commander Southern Command Officer, Gen. PK Keen, on the island to oversee relief efforts if needed.”
What would the United States want with such a destructive weapon? The ultimate goal, according to ViVe, is to use the weapon on Iran to generate a series of quakes that would lead to toppling the current Islamic regime in that nation.
The overbearing Chavez has long been a vocal critic of the United States and is well known for making outrageous claims. Last week as the United States began relief operations in Haiti, he said the real goal was not humanitarian but instead was a military takeover of Haiti.
"The empire [United States] is taking Haiti over the bodies and tears of its people. They are occupying Haiti undercover,” Chavez said.
What follows is the text of the ViVe TV report as translated by Google.

"Earthquake experimental" devastated Haiti U.S.''



According to Russian reports, the State Department,
USAID and the Southern Command of the United States
began its work of "humanitarian invasion" by sending
at least 10,000 soldiers and contractors, to control now,
instead of the UN, Haitian territory after the devastating
earthquake experimental.''


------------------------
RNV (18 January 2010)
------------------------
A report prepared by the Russian Northern Fleet would indicate that the earthquake that devastated Haiti was the "clear results" of a U.S. Navy test through one of its "weapons of earthquakes."
The Northern Fleet has been monitoring the movements and U.S. naval activities in the Caribbean since 2008 when the Americans announced their intention of restoring the Fourth Fleet had been dissolved in 1950, to which Russia responded a year later with a Russian fleet headed by the nuclear cruiser Peter the Great ", starting his first exercises in this region since the end of the Cold War.
Since the late 1970s, the U.S. has "made tremendous progress" state of its weapons of earthquakes and, according to these reports, now employs a technology devices using Pulse, Plasma Tesla Electromagnetic and Sonic along with "waves pump shock''.
The report also compares the U.S. Navy testing of two of these weapons of earthquakes last week, when the test in the Pacific caused an earthquake of magnitude 6.5 hit the area around the town of Eureka, California without causing deaths, but with your proof in the Caribbean and caused the deaths of at least 140 thousand innocent.
As the report said, is "more than likely" that the U.S. Navy has had "full knowledge" of the catastrophic damage that this test could have potentially earthquake on Haiti and had pre-positioned their Commander Southern Command Officer, Gen. PK Keen, on the island to oversee relief efforts if needed.
As the final outcome of the tests of these weapons by the United States, warns the report, is the United States plan the destruction of Iran through a series of earthquakes designed to topple the current Islamic regime.
According to the report, the system experienced by the United States (HAARP) would also create weather anomalies to cause floods, droughts and hurricanes.
According to another report coincident with data to establish that the earthquake in Sichuan, China, 12 May 2008 with a magnitude of 7.8 Richter, was also created by the radiofrequency of HAARP.
As there is a correlation between seismic activity and the ionosphere, through control of the radiofrequency induced by hippocampus, part of HAARP, it is concluded that:

1. Earthquakes in the same depth is linearly on the same fault, are caused by induced frequency linear projection.

2. The satellite configuration allows you to generate projections of frequencies concentrated at certain points (hippocampus).

3. You have developed a linear sequence diagram for the earthquakes reported that coincidentally occurred at the same depth all
Venezuela on January 8, 2010. Depth 10 kms.
Honduras on 11 January 2010. Depth 10 kms.
Haiti on 12 January 2010. Depth 10 kms.
The rest of the replicas had depths of about 10 kms.

After the earthquake, the Pentagon said the hospital ship USNS Comfort, which was anchored in Baltimore, began to call the crew to leave for Haiti, although it could be days until the arrival of the vessel. Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said the U.S. military was working preparing the emergency response to this disaster.
Fraser, Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), said the cutter boats U.S. Coast Guard and Navy ships in the region were also sent to offer help but have relief supplies and helicopters limited. The super carrier USS Carl Vinson will be sent to the naval base at Norfolk, Virginia, with a full complement of planes and helicopters arrived in Haiti in the early afternoon of January 14, said Fraser. Additional groups of helicopters would join the Vinson said.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), already operating in Haiti before the earthquake.
President Obama was informed of the earthquake at 5:52 pm on Jan. 12 and asked his staff to ensure that employees of the embassy are safe and to begin preparations to provide the necessary humanitarian aid.

According to Russian reports, the State Department, USAID and the Southern Command of the United States began its work of "humanitarian invasion" by sending at least 10,000 soldiers and contractors, to control now, instead of the UN, Haitian territory after the devastating earthquake experimental.
------------------------------------


Protect those balls guys ! In 2012 your sperm is needed !
On a lighter note, a rather novel idea that works..
By Chip Chick
January 31, 2010 at 4:02 am


Chances are you’ve heard of, or seen those little stickers that supposedly reduce the electromagnetic radiation on your cell phone. But the HARApad is the first time we’ve seen something be developed to reduce the amount of radiation on your laptops. Actually, it does make a lot of sense – if you believe that the radiation coming from your cell phone is hazardous to your health, than the radiation from your laptop isn’t much different. After all ,besides its regular components, your laptop has Wi-fi, and maybe even 3G data on it. According to HARApad, Laptop computers emit Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) up to 100 times the safe amount and this EMR may be linked to serious health issues including cancer and infertility, or cause less-serious symptoms of electromagnetic radiation sickness. The HARAPad counteracts the radiation by providing protections, and dissipating heat away from your body.
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 31-01-2010 at 01:34 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2010, 12:15 PM   #35
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Iran's Fools Gambit - An Empty Threat? By Skip MacLure

Ahmadinejad stuck his unkempt visage in front of the cameras to put a time and date to deliver a `telling blow' to the "world powers" on February eleventh. Is this more of the Iranian President's usual bloviating rhetoric, or could there be something more sinister here? Keep in mind that Ahmadinejad says nothing his puppet masters have not told him to say.


Newt Gingrich has said that "Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world AND THE SINGLE MOST URGENT THREAT to American national security". The recent tests of missiles launched from merchant ships in the Caspian Sea, not targeted but detonated high in the air, have raised the urgency of a threat long speculated on by scientists, military and national security experts.
An NEP, or nuclear electromagnetic pulse, attack over a portion of this country would fry any electrical or electronic equipment not hardened against an EMP or electromagnetic pulse, throwing the affected area instantly back into a horse and buggy existence. With this threat in mind, Obama's reducing funds to our missile defense systems and development programs may take on the proportions of intentional national suicide. Sound extreme? It wasn't all that long ago that the world, including the US, ignoring the rising tide of aggression represented by the axis powers during the 1930's led to World War Two and the deaths of millions of people world-wide.
Given Iran's stated aim of the destruction of the free and independent state of Israel, the murder of its entire population and the additional promise to destroy "The Great Satan" - uhh... that would be US folks... some serious attention should be paid to our options, other than the tepid sanctions being enacted by the Obama administration. TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. That should be the Obama theme song. If there is a way to do something just exactly wrong, this goon gaggle seem to be able to find it every time.
I've been hoping that Israel might force our hand. Our military has begun reinforcing and increasing our missile defenses throughout the middle east. It's beginning to look like there will be a real shooting war over there soon. Let's hope that we treat it like a war and not one of Obama's `I can't make up my mind but I'm thinking about it' issues.
The United States may not be able to afford his indecision. The world may not be able to either.
Israel has substantially increased its anti-missile anti-rocket capability with land and sea based assets possessing a very high level of capability. There is no doubt in Israel's mind what is coming.
The clock is ticking.


Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2010, 04:35 AM   #36
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Is it really all about to begin... WWIII ? Shall we see folks i have been shouting out about emps here, please be aware of this imminent threat to the world !

Just Got Back From Saint Helena Island
Zartoc Veldorn

Well, I'm alive!

The last time we landed our craft on Saint Helena island, in the South Atlantic, we were almost killed by Trias with an EMP generator. As we were leaving, they aimed the device at our craft and we lost power for almost 5 minutes until Jaze was able to save us, just a few hundred feet before we crashed.

This time, we took extra precautions and reworked our cloaking device to give us more protection. As we suspected, after doing several "fly bys" and actually landing near the town of Jamestown, Trias has set up their principle headquarters on this remote island where Napoleon was banished to in the 19th Century. We were able to find their base of operations, several miles inland. Using sophisticated electronic monitoring gear that Jaze developed, we now know that they are capable of much destructive power...not only with the weather augmenter, but with the EMP generator. We still suspect that Trias was demonstrating the power of this weapon last year, when a passenger airline mysteriously vanished near Saint Helena.

We also fear that Trias is working with Iran and will soon be giving Iran technological information that will expedite their missile weapons program. We have also learned that Trias has at least two satellites that they have placed over the United States and Europe and are currently strengthening a low pressure that will be causing a blizzard of 2-3 fee of snow to hit Washington, DC over the next few days.

I talked with Sarah this morning, my ex girlfriend, and body guard for ex President Bush. She tells me that George Bush told her that Obama had been getting mysterious text messages from an unknown source threatening the bad weather. The threat was being carried out because the administration would not deal with Trias last summer, when they offered not to use the augmenter on the United States in exchange for 1 billion dollars. I was more surprised to hear that ex President Bush was having conversations with current President Obama, than the threats that Trias was making against the United States. Apparently Obama contacted Bush to try and find out if he knew where we were, since he knows we are trying to stop Trias. As most of you know, I actually met ex President Bush last year when my craft landed fairly close to his ranch in Crawford, Texas.

That's all for now, except the dampness in Kerrville. I don't know how much it rained here over the past 2 days, but it was a lot! Now, it looks like Trias will be messing with the weather again next week, possibly causing snow and ice as far south as our location in Kerrville.

Iran make preemptive strike ?
'Isn't it Interesting that Ahmadinejad's recent statements of a “surprise” on 11 February that this capsule is to be de-orbited on that date'. What if this is how Iran has chosen to set off an EMP over the Continental USA. A surprise attack ? I distinctly remember Amadinejad saying years ago that Iran would preempt any US attack and the threats and military forces are almost all in play around Iran. So what does amad have to wait for ? and you know what, I believe this liar. I'm not saying this is the date, could be . What I am saying is expect a surprise attack on the US from Iran and her allies. Neutralize the mainland with an EMP and cut off all US forces in the vicinity of Iran.

US accelerating missile defenses in Persian Gulf
Officials tell New York Times deployment of antimissile systems in at least four Persian Gulf countries, special ships off Iranian coast intended to forestall any Iranian escalation of its confrontation with West if new set of sanctions imposed. 'There is certainly an element of calming the Israelis as well,' one of them says.

The Obama administration is speeding up the deployment of new defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks in the Persian Gulf, placing special ships off the Iranian coast and antimissile systems in at least four Arab countries, the New York Times reported Saturday, citing administration and military officials.


Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of US Central Command, was quoted by NYT as saying that the acceleration of defensive systems — which began when President George W. Bush was in office — included “eight Patriot missile batteries, two in each of four countries.”

Patriot missiles are capable of shooting down short-range offensive missiles.

According to NYT, General Petraeus also described a first line of defense: He said the United States was now keeping Aegis cruisers on patrol in the Persian Gulf at all times. Those cruisers are equipped with advanced radar and antimissile systems designed to intercept medium-range missiles.

NYT said, "Those systems would not be useful against Iran’s long-range missile, the Shahab 3, but intelligence agencies believe that it will be years before Iran can solve the problems of placing a nuclear warhead atop that missile."

The deployments are also partly intended to counter the impression that Iran is fast becoming the most powerful military force in the Middle East and to forestall any Iranian escalation of its confrontation with the West if a new set of sanctions is imposed, the report quoted administration officials as saying.


In addition, they told NYT, the administration is trying to show Israel that there is no immediate need for military strikes against Iranian nuclear and missile facilities.

Military officials told NYT that the countries that accepted the antimissile weapons were Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait.

"They said the Kuwaitis had agreed to take additional defensive weapons to supplement older, less capable models it fielded years ago, while it awaits delivery of an upgraded system that it is seeking from the Raytheon Company. Saudi Arabia and Israel have long had similar equipment of their own," said the report.

“Our first goal is to deter the Iranians,” one senior administration official told NYT, "A second is to reassure the Arab states, so they don’t feel they have to go nuclear themselves. But there is certainly an element of calming the Israelis as well.”

The US Senate voted Thursday night to strengthen existing sanctions against Iran and impose new ones aimed at its gasoline supplies as part of the US effort to dissuade Tehran from pursuing nuclear weapons and cracking down on internal dissent.

On Thursday President Shimon Peres told International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Yukiya Amano, "Nuclear weapons in the hands of a fanatical regime such as Iran's pose a threat not only to Israel but to the entire world."

Iran Schedules War on Earth for February 11th
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 05-02-2010 at 05:08 AM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2010, 05:01 PM   #37
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

It’s time to play the war card..Time is almost Up for the EMP.. .. Who will strike first ?
By Chet Nagle 02/10/10 at 12:01 pm

Everyone has suddenly noticed an elephant in the room: Play the War Card! So right after Daniel Pipes’ column in National Review Online last week, “How to Save the Obama Presidency: Bomb Iran,” pundits from Arnaud de Borchgrave, to Pat Buchanan, to Sarah Palin rushed to approve or disapprove of the idea. They all bring their agendas to the debate, but they all agree a U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would significantly raise Obama’s disastrous approval poll ratings. Like politics, all warfare is domestic.

Even with the issue finally out in the sunlight, questions remain like: Why attack Iran when sanctions and ballistic missile defenses are available? Would an attack be effective anyway, and what about the Muslim response? Examination of those key points is timely.

First, no serious observer doubts Iran’s intentions except Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, who told Congress last week he did not know whether Iran has decided to produce nuclear weapons. Although this has been the posture of the Bush and Obama administrations for years, officials now publically concede that Tehran’s huge uranium enrichment program is designed to build nuclear weapons. In addition, the German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung just reported that with the help of a Russian expert in advanced warhead design, Iran is developing a nuclear warhead small enough to fit in their Shahab 3 intercontinental ballistic missile. The paper added that Western intelligence agencies and diplomats confirmed the report; other reports suggest Iran already has a warhead but it is too large for their missile.

Whatever the status of Iran’s program, the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu gave a thinly veiled warning to Iran on Jan. 27 (Holocaust Memorial Day) saying, “From this site, I vow as the leader of the Jewish state that we will never again allow the hand of evil to destroy the life of our people and the life of our state. Never again!”
Tempo increased with a statement on Feb. 9 by Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that his country would “punch” the western powers during the annual celebration of the revolution on Thursday, Feb. 11. He said: “The Iranian nation, with its unity and God’s grace, will punch the arrogance (western powers) on the 22nd of Bahman (11 February) in a way that will leave them stunned.” (Agence France-Presse).
What might that “punch” be? If Iran tests a nuclear device the calculus of terror in the Middle East changes dramatically, and things will surely happen on several fronts. Such a test is unlikely, however, and the “punch” is probably some new conventional armament. Nevertheless, Iran’s promise to wipe Israel off the face of the earth would spur that nation to action should Iran demonstrate a nuclear arsenal. And Israel is not the only concerned Middle East nation. A nuclear arms race is already under way in the region and would accelerate. The purchase of Pakistani nuclear weapons by Shiite Iran’s fearful Sunni neighbors cannot be ruled out.
With China refusing to endorse an embargo on gasoline sales to Iran, and with Russia dragging its feet, the peaceful option of sanctions is a dead horse. Ineffectual promises of sanctions and vague threats were hallmarks of the Bush presidency. To that Obama has only added lapsed deadlines and the offer of ballistic missile defenses (BMD) to Iran’s neighbors. Why does Washington follow such failed policies? The answer is that a nuclear-armed Iran is a distant threat to the United States, and even if Iran somehow landed a missile on American soil we would absorb the blow and completely incinerate them. So Washington delays action, counsels patience, and hopes that something will happen soon—even if that something is an Iranian nuclear capability. Israel does not have the luxury of distance or land mass, and a single Iranian nuclear missile slipping through the Aegis or Patriot BMD systems would be a catastrophe. Into this mix comes the debate of whether or not American military action against Iran would bolster poll standings of president Obama. I believe U.S. military action is a moot point, since there is absolutely nothing to indicate that Obama would consider playing the war card.

White House meetings on the subject of Iran must be interesting. If we attack Iran we face a tsunami of condemnation while Islamic leaders whip the ‘Muslim Street’ into a frenzy. Terror attacks on Americans will take place here and abroad. And if Israel attacks Iran instead, we will be named a co-conspirator and face the same tidal wave. Damned if we do, and damned if we don’t. Meanwhile, the military ball is in Israel’s court.
The world knows the U.S. military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons. But what about Israel? That country, with a population less than that of New York City, has developed a “triad”—the capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft, missile silos, and submarines. Besides Israel, only the US, Russia, and China have that deterrent power. But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran? I suggest that is unlikely because, as we will see below, it is unnecessary in the usual sense. As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike, Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft. The distance is great, the defenses formidable, and the casualties would be very high. Instead, I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon. What’s that?

In 1962 the U.S. conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime. In it, a 1.4 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific. The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii, 900 miles away! The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground. If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground. In fact, if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out, cars stop, fridges die, power line transformers short out, refineries shut down, and yes, those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning. This bloodless annihilation, coupled with a selective cyber attack, would freeze Iran for decades.

What could be Iran’s response to such an attack? If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz. Because of depth, width, and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined, but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect. Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait. Then we revisit “Tanker War” tactics of 1985, and the U.S. Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis. If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational, a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble, along with associated infrastructure like military harbors.
A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel, unless another EMP weapon was used. Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans, but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces, especially if they are forewarned. Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while. On the positive side, Iranian “Green” opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime.

So it seems the “war card” is in the hands of Israel, and the card has “EMP” on it.

More on the Weather War ! Trias behind next Washington, DC blizzard.
Zartoc Veldorn

A quick posting for today...Jaze has successfully been able to isolate the frequency that Trias is using to communicate with their weather augmenter satellite. Even though we are unable to "jam" the frequency, we at least know that they are behind the unusual weather that has been targeting the Washington, DC area. This is in retaliation for our administration not paying the 1 billion dollar ransom to Trias last summer.

A chilly, but nice day in Kerrville, TX. We are making progress on adding more electronics and building a structure that can allow us to easily take off and land our spacecraft. Right now, we simply have it hidden in the bushes with a tarp on it.

Sarah called me today from the Bush's ranch in Crawford, TX. President Obama really wants to speak with me about Trias, but I have to remain in hiding. The last time I got involved with Washington, Trias found out where I was living and tried to kill me. I told Sarah to tell President Obama that we are very confident that Trias is causing the major snow events up there, but that there isn't anything we can do. Even if I told the US government where Trias was orchestrating their weather events, it would look pretty odd for the US to start bombing a peaceful island like Saint Helena! I get this feeling that Sarah is using this situation as an excuse to talk with me. She even hinted that she and Edward Norton are not seeing each other very often.


More tomorrow...
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 11-02-2010 at 05:08 PM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 06:49 PM   #38
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

The EMP threat: fact, fiction, and response (part 2)
by Yousaf M. Butt

Are the proposed nuclear EMP scenarios realistic?

What appears to be of particular concern to the EMP commission is the scepter of terrorist groups or so-called “rogue” nations carrying out such an attack. As outlined by Dr. Pry, one of the commissioners, before a 2005 Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, “[a] nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran, or terrorists, the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland, without developing an ICBM, and with some prospect of remaining anonymous. Iran’s Shahab-3 medium-range missile… is a mobile missile, and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter.” However, as mentioned above, such missiles have a payload capacity of approximately 1,000 kilograms corresponding to a crude U-based warhead of ~1 kiloton yield [22]—if, and when, the Iranians eventually develop nuclear weapons. Even the North Koreans, who are much further along in their weapons program, have had great difficulty reaching even a ~5 kiloton yield from their Pu-based devices in carefully orchestrated ground-tests, and their 2009 test was likely a fizzle.

Thus, it is not at all a simple matter, even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort, to build such weapons, let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems. As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book, Atomic Obsession, it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22, p. 172–198]. Even a “crude” U-type device is not all that “crude” and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers. Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested. For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief. As John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org has said, “It is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile, and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like that.”

If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon, they are likely to explode their “crown jewel” in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city, and not risk the complications—and likely failure—of a lofted EMP strike.

Dr. Philip Coyle, former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation, has stated that the EMP commission’s report appeared to “extrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact, and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giants.” The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that “the Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this is…”
If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon, they are likely to explode their “crown jewel” in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city, and not risk the complications—and likely failure—of a lofted EMP strike that will, if all goes according to their plan, cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nation’s infrastructure. The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called “rogue” states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike. A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption.
A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US. The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable. However, even so, there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause. While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion, even their current state of development would, in some measure, dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack. Furthermore, the US certainly has data, via its DSP satellites, on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries. Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the Scud/Shahab/No-dong family of missiles, the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether, e.g., the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs, perhaps due to differences in fuel and/or subtle design idiosyncrasies. This is data only the US has, and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile. This is almost certainly the case if, say, Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strike—if and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons, of course. In such a case, the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation.
Furthermore, the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly. If it fell short and/or did not explode, it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material. For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic: they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly. Even so, it may still be possible to identify the country of origin, which would invite massive US retribution.
What about an adversarial nation “sub-contracting” its dirty work to a terrorist cell? Again, there would be substantial doubt in the nation’s leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon. In any case, as argued by Mueller [Ref 22, p. 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell. At least in the case of Iran, this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University, who conclude, “[W]e judge, and nearly all experts consulted agree, that Iran would not, as a matter of state policy, give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct U.S. or Israeli retribution.”
Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device, the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil. Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also, post-Cold War, our economies are intimately linked, which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent. The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref. 22, p. 65]. We owe China tremendous sums of money, they need us as a market, and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets. Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons, this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [“Electromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defense”, by Dr. Chien Chung], and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine.

It is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm, capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid, will occur within the next few decades.

More importantly, the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its “Militarily Critical Technologies List”. This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities. Part II, “Weapons of Mass Destruction Technologies,” addresses those technologies required for development, integration, or employment of biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US. This document states that “HEMP can pose a serious threat to U.S. military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs. In principle, even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike. In practice, however, it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast, shock, and thermal pulse. Furthermore, a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton), and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device, much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcher.”
Lastly, General Robert T. Marsh, former Chairman of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did 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 real threat: geomagnetic storms

For the reasons outlined above, it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose to—or, in the case of a terrorist cell, even be remotely capable of—carrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US. However, it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm, capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid, will occur within the next few decades. In fact, this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity, known as “solar maximum”, which is forecast to peak in 2013. Geomagnetic storms are E3-like: low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines.
The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires. Later, in 1859, a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the “Carrington Event”, after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare. However, the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989. There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto, Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3).
Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field, just as in an E3 pulse. Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nT/min). Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities. For example, the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nT/min. Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nT/min, and a solar storm on May 14–15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nT/min. [23]. As Mr. Kappenman states [23], “analysis indicates that storms with...excursions of ~2800 nT/min have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures. Further anecdotal evidence suggests that... ~5000 nT/min may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921.”

Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms.

To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the , which was not geomagnetically induced. (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with “overgrown trees”.) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants, including several nuclear plants, were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff. Other effects included loss of water pressure, possible sewage contamination, gridlock, various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways, airlines, and gas stations), and disruption of oil refineries’ operations. Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air. It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7–10 billion in spoiled food, lost production, overtime wages, and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population. [24]
A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28, 2003, when “at 3.01 a.m., one of the main north-south transit lines – the Lukmanier transmission line – shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a tree”. although electricity was restored gradually (about 3–6 hours) in most places, and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning. Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5% of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made.
Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin, solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms, with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25]:

The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout. Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter. Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas. Rerouted flights cost airlines $10,000 to $100,000 per flight. Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits. GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59% of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted. The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft. On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument. Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak, most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations.

Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms. To quote the NAS study [25]:

Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society, the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptions… Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely include… disruption of the transportation, communication, banking, and finance systems, and government services; the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure; and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration. The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well.

Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms. For example, the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin, than in the past. As Kappenman states, “many of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic storms.” [25]
The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nT/min geomagnetic storm (centered at 50° geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2. Similar levels—10 times those experienced during the March 1989 storm—were reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14–15, 1921. A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15].

Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms. For example, the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin, than in the past. As Kappenman states, “many of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic storms.” [25]
The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nT/min geomagnetic storm (centered at 50° geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2. Similar levels—10 times those experienced during the March 1989 storm—were reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14–15, 1921. A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15].


Scenario showing effects of a 4800 nT/min geomagnetic field disturbance at 50° geomagnetic latitude scenario. The regions outlined are susceptible to system collapse due to the effects of the GIC disturbance; the impacts would be of unprecedented scale and involve populations in excess of 130 million. SOURCE: J. Kappenman, Metatech Corp., “The Future: Solutions or Vulnerabilities?,” presentation to the NAS space weather workshop, May 23, 2008. [25]

The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers, although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk. As the NAS study points out, transformers experience “excessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformer’s magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuit… previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers. These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field, and if damaged in this manner, they need to be replaced with new units, which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or more.”
Metatech Corp. estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25]. Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nT/min threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event. As a recent article in the journal Science states, “The surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territory.” [26]


Figure 3: A map showing the at-risk transformer capacity (estimated at ~365 large transformers) by state for a 4800 nT/min geomagnetic field disturbance at 50° geomagnetic latitude. Regions with high percentages of at-risk capacity could experience long-duration outages that could extend multiple years. SOURCE: J. Kappenman, Metatech Corp., “The Future: Solutions or Vulnerabilities?,” presentation to the NAS space weather workshop, May 23, 2008. [25]

In summary, current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience, generally do not reduce GIC flows, and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events. Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions, long-term blackouts, and lengthy restoration times, and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25].

Recommendations

Both the 2008 NAS study and the EMP commission offer useful advice on how to address the vulnerabilities of our infrastructure. These can be divided into monitoring, hardening and response functions.


Space weather monitoring

Continued monitoring of the space environment is essential, but is seriously under-resourced. NASA’s Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) satellite, which monitors energetic particles in the solar wind from a vantage point between the Earth and Sun (about 1.5 million kilometers sunward of Earth), was launched in August 1997 and is, according to the NAS report, “well beyond its planned operational life” with no plans on the books for a replacement even though “the requirement for a solar wind monitor… is particularly important”. The 12-year-old satellite, as well as another even older one named SOHO, “can fail any time, no one knows,” says Michael Hesse, director of the modeling center at Goddard Space Flight Center [26].

Even with the current instrumentation in place and working, fully one-third of major storms arrive unheralded and almost one-quarter of the warnings turn out to be false alarms, according to the Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) [26]. Backup ACE and SOHO satellites should be funded and built as soon as feasible to offer critical lead time of impending geomagnetic storms. Although the Chinese are planning a similar monitoring satellite as part of their KuaFu space weather project, it will not be launched for several years. Encouragingly, the NASA Authorization Act of 2008 (Section 1101) charges the Office of Science and Technology Policy to work with NOAA, NASA, other federal agencies, and industry to develop a plan for sustaining solar wind measurements from an L1-based spacecraft. The urgency of this directive cannot be overstressed.

Hardening

As the likelihood of a geomagnetic storm far exceeds that of an incapacitating multi-megaton EMP strike, it is sensible to give priority to investing in that hardening that would protect the electrical grid from E3 (and geomagnetic) type disturbances, as compared to E1. To quote the NAS study [25], “With respect to the entire grid, remedial measures to reduce GIC levels are needed and are cost-effective. The installation of supplemental transformer neutral ground resistors to reduce GIC flows is relatively inexpensive, has low engineering trade-offs, and can produce 60-70 percent reductions of GIC levels for storms of all sizes.” Improved education and situational awareness of grid operators is also called for: “regional system operators require initial and continuing training to understand their assigned roles and responsibilities in protecting the power system during solar events using new tools.” Instituting new design codes that would help reduce geomagnetically induced current (GIC) flows in the power grid during a storm are also called for.
Dr. Radasky and Mr. Kappenman have also outlined similar avenues for hardening the grid against E3 and geomagnetic storms for the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology. Other experts advocate improved cabling (e.g. industrial RS-485 cabling) in combination with improved external transient voltage suppressors to protect against the faster pulses. Specific methodologies for protecting against the lower priority fast EMP transients have been outlined in Cold War era (1984) NAS report “Evaluation of Methodologies for Estimating Vulnerability to Electromagnetic Pulse Effects”. [27] Of course, protecting and hardening critical infrastructure from geomagnetic storms (and EMP) would also offer protection against some cyber-threats, sabotage, and natural disasters, like severe storms or hurricanes.

However, any modernization and hardening of the electrical grid should also be done with an eye towards future renewable power sources that may eventually be fed into the grid. Last year’s stimulus bill specifically allocates $11 billion to DOE for “for smart grid activities, including to modernize the electric grid.” And a recent NAS study, “America’s Energy Future: Technology and Transformation” proposes an “expansion and modernization of the nation’s electrical transmission and distribution systems [that] would enhance reliability and security, accommodate changes in load growth and electricity demand, and enable the deployment of new energy efficiency and supply technologies, especially intermittent wind and solar energy”. It would be sensible if such improvements in the electric grid should were focused, at least partially, on reducing vulnerabilities to geomagnetic storms (and, by extension, EMP). However, hardening the grid, and making it “smarter” may work at cross purposes, and should be carefully coordinated. A peer-reviewed study of the most sensible and secure path for incorporating renewable power sources ought to be a priority.

Response

Some suggestions of the EMP commission regarding the response to an EMP strike (or, strong geomagnetic storms) are also eminently sensible: stockpiling large electrical transformers so they could be moved into place in an emergency would be very useful in case of serious damage to these devices in a geomagnetic storm. The EMP commissioners estimate that it would only take a few years to stockpile the requisite number of transformers if they were ordered in bulk. Further, establishing a domestic supplier of the transformers would also be sensible. At the moment, these large devices are imported.
The vulnerability of some of our infrastructure to nuclear EMP is real; however, the threat is overblown. A much greater threat to the US electricity-grid infrastructure is from a powerful once-in-a-century type solar storm.
Dr. Graham, the chairman of the EMP commission, has stated that “In just a few years we can make significant, affordable improvements to protect society even if an EMP attack is carried out against us” [15]. Indeed, other commissioners such as Dr. Wood and Dr. Pry have also weighed in saying that, “[t]he commission estimates… that we could probably put ourselves into a situation where we could neutralize this particular threat, at least to the extent that it… wouldn’t be a catastrophic, society-destroying threat and we would be able to recover.” Some of the cost estimates have been reasonable, e.g., Dr. Pry has quoted a figure of about $2 billion. Of course, the focus of any such response ought to be on resuscitating the electrical power grid as that is the backbone of modern society. As Dr. Pry has said, “If you get it up, you can eventually recover all the other infrastructures.” Hand-in-hand with such response functions, emergency responders ought to be trained in how to handle a large-scale outage as might be expected from a severe geomagnetic storm. Some hardened back-up communication links may also be useful for coordinating between certain emergency responders nationwide.

NMD to protect from Nuclear EMP?

A proposed way to protect against a nuclear EMP attack has been the controversial idea of implementing a national missile defense [24, 28, 29]. An incidental benefit of hardening our infrastructure is that it would also obviate the need for such an expensive (and, as argued by many experts, an ineffective) missile defense. Once the grid is hardened, and this fact has been made public, there is no further need for NMD: it would be a particularly stupid enemy that would try their hand at a EMP strike against a known EMP-hardened infrastructure, with backups and contingency plans in place.
Notably, EMP commissioners Dr. Lowell Wood and Dr. William Graham are also co-author and advisor, respectively, of the report “Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, and the Twenty-First Century” [29], which strenuously advocates the development and deployment of missile defense capabilities, well beyond the limited systems currently envisioned.

Conclusions

The vulnerability of some of our infrastructure to nuclear EMP is real; however, the threat is overblown. A much greater threat to the US electricity-grid infrastructure is from a powerful once-in-a-century type solar storm. As the response to the geomagnetic threat would also address many of the vulnerabilities raised by the EMP commission, we can effectively kill two birds with one stone. However, the prioritization of our responses should emphasize the threat posed by geomagnetic storms, i.e. addressing the vulnerabilities to E3 type pulse should take precedence over E1 type pulses. Strategies for mitigating the risk from geomagnetic storms should be informed by a peer-reviewed study such as the Cold War era NAS report “Evaluation of Methodologies for Estimating Vulnerability to Electromagnetic Pulse Effects” [27] which provides much insight into how to go about protecting systems from nuclear EMP. An updated version of this peer-reviewed study, but tailored to the real geomagnetic threat, is now overdue.

References

[1] “EMPty Threat?” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Sept/Oct 2005 p. 50
[2] “The Newt Bomb: How a pulp-fiction fantasy became a GOP weapons craze.” The New Republic, June 3, 2009.
[3] “The Next Fake Threat”.
[4] C. L. Longmire. “On the Electromagnetic Pulse Produced by Nuclear Explosions,” IEEE Trans. on Electromag. Compat., Vol. EMC-20, No. 1, pp. 3-13, February 1978.
[5] Glasstone, Samuel and Dolan, Philip J., The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. Chapter 11, section 11.73. United States Department of Defense. 1977.
[6] see Fig 2.4 in “HEMP Emergency Planning and Operating Procedures for Electric Power Systems”, T.W. Reddoch and L.C. Markel, Electrotek Concepts, Inc, ORNL/Sub/91-SG 105/1
[7] Greetsai, V.N., A.H. Kozlovsky, M. M. Kuvshinnikov, V.M. Loborev, Yu. V. Parfenov, O.A. Tarasov, L.N. Zdoukhov, “Response of Long Lines to Nuclear High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP),” IEEE Transactions on EMC, Vol. 40, No. 4, November 1998, pp. 348-354.
[8] IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-1, No. 3, July 1986.
[9] http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640018807_1964018807.pdf
[10] http://glasstone.blogspot.com/2006/03/emp-radiation-from-nuclear-space.html
[11] http://www.tscm.com/MIL-STD-464.pdf
[12] http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/emp/c-2body.pdf
[13] US High Altitude Test Experiences, Herman Hoerlin, LANL Report LA-6405, 1976.
[14] “Did High-Altitude EMP cause the Streetlight Incident?”, C.N. Vittitoe, Sandia Laboratory System Design and Assessment Note 31, June 1989.
[15] Presentation by Dr. William Graham, Chairman of the EMP Commission “Commission to Assess the Threat from High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP): Overview”.
[16] A Calculational Model for High Altitude EMP,, Louis W. Seiler, Jr., Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, March 1975, p. 31.
[17] Mario Rabinowitz, “Effect of the FAST NUCLEAR ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE on the Electric Power Grid Nationwide: A Different View”, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2: 1199-1222, 1987 available as: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0307127.
[18] D. M. Erickson et al., Interaction of Electromagnetic Pulse with Commercial Nuclear Power Systems, Sandia Report, SAND82-2738/2, 1983.
[19] EMP Susceptibility of Integrated Circuits, C. R. Jenkins and D. L. Durgin, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, Vol. NS-22, No.6, December 1975.
[20] Simulating the Exposure of ICs to Voltage Surges Caused by Nuclear Explosions K. A. Epifantsev, O. A. Gerasimchuk, and P. K. Skorobogatov, ISSN 1063-7397, Russian Microelectronics, 2009, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 260–272. Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2009.
[21] M. A. Uman, M. J. Master, and E. P. Krider. “A Comparison of Lightning Electromagnetic Fields with the Nuclear EMP in the Frequency Range 104 - 107 Hz,” IEEE Transaction Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. EMC-24 (4), pp. 410-416, 1982
[22] Chapter 12, John Mueller, “Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda”, Oxford University Press, 2010.
[23] “Great geomagnetic storms and extreme impulsive geomagnetic field disturbance events – An analysis of observational evidence including the great storm of May 1921”, John G. Kappenman, Advances in Space Research, Volume 38, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 188-199
[24] “Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack: A Preventable Homeland Security Catastrophe” by Jena Baker McNeill and Richard Weitz, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, October 20, 2008.
[25] National Academy of Sciences, “Severe Space Weather Events—Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts Workshop Report”, 2008
[26] Kerr, Richard. “Are we Ready for the Next Solar Maximum? No way, Say Scientists”, Science, 324, p 1640, 2009
[27] National Academy of Sciences, 1984, Evaluation of Methodologies for Estimating Vulnerability to Electromagnetic Pulse Effects.
[28] Brian T. Kennedy, “What a single nuclear warhead could do”, Wall Street Journal, November 24, 2008.
[29] “Missile Defense,the Space Relationship, & the Twenty-First Century”, 2009
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2010, 07:00 PM   #39
lizzy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,287
Likes: 31 (18 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by armoured_amazon View Post
Not kill them, just put them somewhere else.
yup, an a quaratined island with nothing but all their gold.
lizzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2010, 11:37 AM   #40
johntitor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: ®
Posts: 257
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

U.S. Navy’s
Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Program capability in a New World

Dormant for more than a decade, the U.S. Navy’s Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Program is being revived through the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Office of the Director for Force Electromagnetic (EM) Effects and Spectrum Management. The program’s immediate goals include establishing cognizance about current standards for system acquisition as related to EMP survivability; assisting with developing standards and methodology to test and assess future systems; assessing the current posture of mission critical systems with regard to EMP survivability; and coordinating with other Department of Defense (DoD) services and entities to share EMP resources and information.
__________________
..........∞.........
THE REAL THREAT 2010
Electro-Magnetic-Pulses threatens humanity 2010~2012
Geomagnetic Storms to EMP Bomb's, HAARP and THE-WMD & TPTB / Earthquakes / Planetary Alignement + more
WWIII-Russia-China-America-Iran

Last edited by johntitor; 07-03-2010 at 11:38 AM.
johntitor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.