EMP is very damaging and can cause blackouts and other bad results specially on electronic devices , so i heard that our sun is going to make an electromagnetic pulse during the next 50 years ..is that true ? and how is it going to affect us ?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
8
-
1$\begingroup$ No, the sun is not making EMPs and coronal mass ejections aren't quite as dangerous as the people who don't understand the difference between infrastructure back in the days of the Carrington event and modern infrastructure make them out to be. $\endgroup$– CuriousOneCommented Jul 3, 2016 at 1:18
-
$\begingroup$ @CuriousOne Perhaps you could write an answer and include what went wrong in Canada? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_storm You should also factor in the damage to satellites and people on them. weather.com/science/space/news/… It seems to me this is a perfectly reasonable question. $\endgroup$– ProfRobCommented Jul 3, 2016 at 7:53
-
1$\begingroup$ @RobJeffries: Comparing a coronal mass ejection with an EMP is not reasonable by any means. Damage to spacecraft is a problem for spacecraft designers who didn't care to read the instructions for the electromagnetic and radiation environment they have to cope with. As for losing power... that's not dangerous and used to happen in my neck of the woods quite a few times in summer (AC use) until they upgraded the transformers. Smart people learn from their mistakes. $\endgroup$– CuriousOneCommented Jul 3, 2016 at 8:04
-
1$\begingroup$ @RobJeffries: Please note that I didn't say that coronal mass ejections can't do harm. They can do harm. Yes, we will lose power, yes, some transformers and generators will have to be replaced, but that's about it. My point is entirely that the fears that have been caused in the public are based on a poor understanding of the phenomenon, especially when the Carrington Event is being mentioned, the phenomenology of which was based on infrastructure of a different kind than what exists, today. Why everybody is opposed to getting facts straight instead of causing fear is a mystery to me. $\endgroup$– CuriousOneCommented Jul 3, 2016 at 18:30
-
2$\begingroup$ Comments are not answers. Get the facts straight in an answer. $\endgroup$– ProfRobCommented Jul 3, 2016 at 21:04
|
Show 3 more comments
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
8
You are probably referring to a Carrington Event where a large coronal mass ejection from the sun hits the Earth and creates massive disturbances in the magnetic field, with the result that things like the power grid are damaged by the induced currents.
On July 23, 2012 a "Carrington-class" Solar Superstorm (Solar flare, Coronal mass ejection, Solar EMP) was observed; its trajectory missed Earth in orbit.
It missed the Earth by about 9 days. Current estimates are that there is a 12% chance of being hit by such an event, per decade. Unless there was an orderly shut down of power grids worldwide before the event damage could cost trillions and take years to repair.
-
2$\begingroup$ The damage caused by the Carrington Event doesn't transfer to modern infrastructure the way it's often portrayed. Part of the problem with the naive comprehension is caused by the fact that telecommunications lines were not based on twisted pairs back then, but on free hanging wires with "ground" (as in dirt) return path. We have long abandoned that technology and power transmission equipment can handle thousands and in extreme case millions of times as much energy as the bit of sparking that was observed back then contained. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 3, 2016 at 1:22
-
1$\begingroup$ @CuriousOne Not true. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_storm "Because of serious concerns that utilities have failed to set protection standards and are unprepared for a severe solar storm such as a Carrington Event, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is now (as of 2013) in the process of a proposed ruling that may require utilities to create a standard that would require power grids to be protected from severe solar storms." $\endgroup$– user56903Commented Jul 3, 2016 at 14:07
-
1$\begingroup$ That's what regulators are for, but such a sentence says absolutely nothing about the potential severity of a possible event or about its associated cost. All it says is that a regulating authority is doing its job, as it should. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 3, 2016 at 18:13
-
1$\begingroup$ @CuriousOne science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/… "According to a study by the National Academy of Sciences, the total economic impact could exceed $2 trillion or 20 times greater than the costs of a Hurricane Katrina. Multi-ton transformers damaged by such a storm might take years to repair." $\endgroup$– user56903Commented Jul 3, 2016 at 19:47
-
1$\begingroup$ @CuriousOne science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/… $\endgroup$– user56903Commented Jul 3, 2016 at 19:48