Politics aside, the EMP stuff is largely BS.
They like to use terms like “frie”, etc, but that aint the case.
The threat to the grid is limited to data aquisition and control equipment, not literally the “grid” (wires and poles) itself.
Most such equipment is sufficiently “hardened” already, in order to be able to withstand lightning - a strike of which applies exponentially more nergy to the grid then EMP.
This whole EMP thing is basically AGW’s little sister.
They like to use terms like “frie”, etc, but that aint the case.
“The threat to the grid is limited to data aquisition and control equipment, not literally the “grid” (wires and poles) itself.
Most such equipment is sufficiently “hardened” already, in order to be able to withstand lightning - a strike of which applies exponentially more nergy to the grid then EMP.
This whole EMP thing is basically AGW’s little sister.”
I suggest that you become informed about EMP. This has been recognized by the military [the USA DOD] since the mid 1980s during the Cold War. Our enemies understand the concept!
In the kindest possible way, your comments have set a new high (or low) in being completely ignorant about the subject matter being discussed.
It used to be the case that sensative equipement was hardened...but that is no longer the case. When I first got into the military back in the 80's...that was the case. It's not the case anymore.
It is also not the case that lighting applies more energy to the grid. Sure...at a very localized level it does...but not when you are talking about every power line across America acting as a conduit. Lightning will produce more voltage per meter than EMP (1 megavolt mer m2 vs 50K volts)...but less wattage (6 megawatts for EMP per m2...as opposed to 1 megawatt for lightning). But remember...with lightning...you are really only talking about an area the size of 1 sq meter. With EMP...you are talking about millions of square miles...all feeding into the large transformers.
The "grid" is composed of the whole system...not just wires and poles. That includes the tranformers...which is what is mostly in danger because the big ones have to be made to order. When a couple go out...you can work around the grid and find a fix...but when hundreds go out...you are in the dark.
The 1859, 1921 aqnd 2003 solar storms were just a small sample of what a full fledged EMP would be like. 1850 and 1921 had no grid or a loose grid to speak of. 2003 was a strong storm but not near as bad as 1859...and it did a lot of damage to the grid. An EMP would make these look like a Sunday picnic.
AGW's little sister? I don't think so.
The main threat to the grid is the large transformers which are vulnerable. They are not manufactured in the US and it takes about 2 years to get replacements. If we lose a certain percentage of the transformers a good portion of the country will be in the 1800’s for 4-10 years. We could lose over 70% of the population. Its very serious.
An EMP or a large solar flare would produce enough of a jolt to make lightening strikes look like child’s play. I used to sell surge suppression systems and we have one on our house. The average lightening strike on the power lines is about 3,000 volts. It takes 12,000 volts to fry my system. An EMP or solar flare would be significantly more intense than that. But again its the transformers that you have to worry about. Wires, circuit boxes etc could easily be replaced. We don’t have a bunch of extra transformers sitting around in a warehouse as backups.
NASA has put out several reports warning of the likelihood of an EMP. It only costs a couple hundred million to harden the system but the legislature has no intention of doing it. If we experience an EMP or a solar flare the only people that will be living with any modicum of normalcy will be those that have an alternative electrical system that is not tied to the grid. Everyone else will be in misery.