The EMP threat: fact, fiction, and response

Space Review ^ | 1/25/2010 | Yousaf M. Butt

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

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.

[ansel12]

All I really need is my knife and my rugged good looks, and some black shoulder pads and I’m good to go.

[uscabjd]

So what do we do about this?

[Names Ash Housewares]

“So what do we do about this?”

Pray we get rid of Obama in time and get someone in who wants to do what it takes to protect this nation.

Short of that, we wait for it to happen. What else can we do?

[Cold Heat]

Shielding is not hard to accomplish but the electrical grid is vulnerable as we know from past Geo magnetic events.

[Greysard]

But how likely is this scenario and what should we do about it?

Pretty unlikely. Terrorists don't have the capability for a suborbital launch of a nuke. And there is no nuclear state on the planet that would consider attacking the USA; most are not enemies, and the rest don't have a chance to live through the exchange.

The greatest threat to the USA is not of military nature. It is of economic nature.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

They can launch it from a ship

[dr_lew]

The greatest threat to the USA is not of military nature. It is of economic nature.

I would say social.

[James C. Bennett]

Terrorists don't have the capability for a suborbital launch of a nuke. And there is no nuclear state on the planet that would consider attacking the USA.

Iran pays, North Korea makes, then they get a Muzzie mule to do the launch.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufZJe3n8nds

[Apple Pan Dowdy]

Have any of you read the book “One Second After”?

[Greysard]

Iran pays, North Korea makes, then they get a Muzzie mule to do the launch.

Yes, they can do that, and they can launch from a ship (thanks for the video!) However:

• An EMP attack is of least-deadly type, more suitable to force the foe to surrender, rather than for terrorizing.
• An EMP attack requires exploding a LARGE nuke (thermonuclear) and at HIGH altitude, perhaps higher than the ISS is now, if you want the coverage.

It is very difficult to launch a missile into orbit from a ship. The only known system of the kind, Sea Launch, is complicated and uses rockets that are specially built to go to orbit. SCUD can't go to LEO, its ceiling is limited to 100-150 km, practically much less; it's an ancient design, with first flight in 1953. To lift a warhead high enough for EMP you need an ICBM. If terrorists get hold of those, EMP will be our least worry.

Another issue is the type of the nuke. To generate a useful EMP effect you need to use, say, a 10 MT nuke. This will put the lights out in a dozen states. But will terrorists do that, or they will prefer a more straightforward way - to destroy a city? Knowing what we know about islamic terrorists, the answer is obvious: they will go for a simplest solution that promises maximum carnage.

Because of all that I think the EMP scenario alone is not very likely. If terrorists want to attack the country using nukes they will aim the nuke at a city, no frills. Easier this way, and more damage. Worrying about EMP and other far-fetched scenarios only distracts from real elephants in the room, of which we have plenty.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

They do not need a missile. They can bring it on to cargo containers disassembled and after they pass through customs they can reassemble it in a seedy downtown flophouse. We have thousands of unprotected coastlines and thousands of unguarded Canadian woodlands where they can drop it off

[oldenuff2no]

No matter where it came from it would be detected soon after launch. Even if it detonated and did damage the targeting information would have already been broadcast to the “boats.” Somewhere in the wet part of the world there would be a few bubbles and then a rush of water followed by the ignition of a solid fuel rocket motor. Somewhere else there would be a second set of bubbles and the process would be repeated. A few minutes later part of the islamic world would turn to glass. A few minutes after that North Korea would no longer exist.
When the dust settles we would still have a fully functioning triad of nuclear capability scattered around the world. The next strike would be delivered quickly and precisely as necessary. All of this would be almost automatic with every president that has any balls so we would have to wait and see what the obambat would do.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I agree with your assessments.

[familyop]

"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]."

Yousaf Butt and John Mueller must be very proud. Maybe they'll even keep oil prices down for a few months longer. ;-)

Whatever you do, be sure to ignore the news bits and pieces about engineering ties between Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. If oil goes up, import prices will go much higher and put the squeeze on import interests (our bipartisan rulers who control the politicians).

[Greysard]

No matter where it came from it would be detected soon after launch. Even if it detonated and did damage

If the missile is launched from the ship it will certainly be detected, but you have only a few seconds to do anything. It will hit the target unless it is protected by Patriot, and the operators are actively waiting for it.

If the nuke is brought into the country (on a ship, on a private plane, or even on mules across the border) then it's impossible to detect at all.

the targeting information would have already been broadcast to the “boats.”

The boats are a weapon against a state. If, say, NK launches an attack then the boats will definitely get the message.

However if a rusty container ship (see the video that sonofstrangelove posted) approaches the shore and fires a missile - and then sinks - who do you blame for it? There will be no traceable culprit; the ship will be leased by a fictituous offshore company to transport some junk, and the owner won't complain while the lease money is coming in. (the ship is meanwhile being fitted with a launcher.) And minutes after the attack AQ claims responsibility. Now what?

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/08spec.htm

[familyop]

"Pretty unlikely. Terrorists don't have the capability for a suborbital launch of a nuke."

The topic is in regards to the possibility of a space launch. Iran has already completed such a launch.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

They Iranians are getting more advanced than the North Koreans. The North Koreans are still experimenting with Liquid propelled rockets while the Iranians have graduated to solid propelled rockets.The student has sudden became the teacher.