While we worry about future threats like global warming, and present threats like Iran’s escalating nuclear program, the sun’s propensity for belching out monstrous solar flares (like the Carrington event of 1859) could almost instantly create a world without modern conveniences, or even electricity. The sun could literally “bomb us back to the stone age”.
Imagine a world without iPhones, and you’d understand why Homeland security rates New York and Seattle the highest for likelihood of major social unrest. Humans don’t do well in the dark. DHS has taken notice.
Above: A modern solar flare recorded Dec. 5, 2006, by the X-ray Imager onboard NOAA’s GOES-13 satellite. The flare was so intense, it actually damaged the instrument that took the picture. Researchers believe Carrington’s flare was much more energetic than this one.
First some history, from NASA:
At 11:18 AM on the cloudless morning of Thursday, September 1, 1859, 33-year-old Richard Carrington—widely acknowledged to be one of England’s foremost solar astronomers—was in his well-appointed private observatory. Just as usual on every sunny day, his telescope was projecting an 11-inch-wide image of the sun on a screen, and Carrington skillfully drew the sunspots he saw.
On that morning, he was capturing the likeness of an enormous group of sunspots. Suddenly, before his eyes, two brilliant beads of blinding white light appeared over the sunspots, intensified rapidly, and became kidney-shaped. Realizing that he was witnessing something unprecedented and “being somewhat flurried by the surprise,” Carrington later wrote, “I hastily ran to call someone to witness the exhibition with me. On returning within 60 seconds, I was mortified to find that it was already much changed and enfeebled.” He and his witness watched the white spots contract to mere pinpoints and disappear.
It was 11:23 AM. Only five minutes had passed.
Just before dawn the next day, skies all over planet Earth erupted in red, green, and purple auroras so brilliant that newspapers could be read as easily as in daylight. Indeed, stunning auroras pulsated even at near tropical latitudes over Cuba, the Bahamas, Jamaica, El Salvador, and Hawaii.
Even more disconcerting, telegraph systems worldwide went haywire. Spark discharges shocked telegraph operators and set the telegraph paper on fire. Even when telegraphers disconnected the batteries powering the lines, aurora-induced electric currents in the wires still allowed messages to be transmitted.
“What Carrington saw was a white-light solar flare—a magnetic explosion on the sun,” explains David Hathaway, solar physics team lead at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.
=============================================================
We’ve discussed before at WUWT what might happen if a Carrington Class solar flare induced Geomagnetic storm happened today. From my view, it is not a matter of if, but when.
The likely outcome is a broad scale collapse of power grids, frying of satellites, and collapse of our delicate silicon based microelectronics networks. Fortunately, we may have enough warning to shutdown everything ahead of time to minimize damage, but will we do anything about it?
The Department of Homeland Security has created this report on the issue, I’ve posted excerpts below.
=============================================================
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Over the last six years, natural hazards have caused catastrophic consequences across the globe. Tsunamis, hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions have led to hundreds of thousands of fatalities and billions of dollars in economic costs. Geomagnetic storms—a type of space weather—are much less frequent, but have the potential to cause damage across the globe with a single event. In the past, geomagnetic storms have disrupted space-based assets as well as terrestrial assets such as electric power transmission networks.
Extra-high-voltage (EHV) transformers and transmission lines—built to increase the reliability of electric power systems in cases of terrestrial hazards—are particularly vulnerable to geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) caused by the disturbance of Earth‘s geomagnetic field. The simultaneous loss of these assets could cause a voltage collapse and lead to cascading power outages. As a natural event whose effects are exacerbated by economic and technological developments, geomagnetic storms pose a systemic risk that requires both domestic and international policy-driven actions.
As part of the OECD Future Global Shocks project, this case study on geomagnetic storms was undertaken to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in current international risk management practices. The literature on geomagnetic storm risk assessments indicates that the state of the art for assessing the security risk from this type of event is still inchoate. There are examples of analyses that describe threat, vulnerability, and consequence, but they are not integrated, primarily because of the weakness in the threat analysis. The lack of valid risk assessments has limited risk mitigation efforts in many critical infrastructure sectors, as it is difficult to demonstrate the utility of investing in either hardening or operational mitigation efforts, especially if these investments reduce time and money spent in preparing for more common risks.
To explore the risk to the international community, this report presents a platform to discuss the risk of geomagnetic storms by describing a worst reasonable scenario and its risk factors. Our analysis identifies areas with EHV assets that are in vulnerable locations due to latitude and ground conductivity, and examines the first- and second-order consequences of an extreme storm, highlighting those consequences with an international impact such as scarcity of surplus EHV transformers and satellite communication signal degradation. In addition to exploring the expected economic consequences of a geomagnetic storm event, the report also assessed psychological consequence in the form of social unrest, behavioral changes and social vulnerability.
The potential for international consequences if an extreme event occurs are high, although the severity of those consequences can be mitigated if the international community takes certain actions in advance, such as investing in additional geomagnetic storm warning systems.
Geomagnetic storms can be categorized as a global shock for several reasons: the effects of an extreme storm will be felt on multiple continents; the resulting damage to electric power transmission will require international cooperation to address; and the economic costs of a lengthy power outage will affect economies around the world. As a global shock event, a severe geomagnetic storm, although unlikely, could lead to major consequences for OECD governments.
================================================================
I found this graphic in the report interesting, it suggests that New York, New England, and Seattle are the worst places to be in a Carrington type event. “Get outta Dodge” takes on a whole new meaning due to the social unrest that is likely:
===============================================================
RECOMMENDATIONS
The consequences of an extreme geomagnetic storm certainly would be severe at the local and national levels. The failure of transnational electric power systems would set off a series of cascading effects, including the disruption of government operations. The potential for international consequences if an extreme event occurs are high, although the severity of those consequences can be mitigated if the international community takes certain actions in advance. In particular, recommendations 1 through 3 provide low-cost mitigation mechanisms the international community can pursue to manage the international risks posed by an extreme geomagnetic storm.
1. The international community should mitigate against the risk of a single point of failure in the current space weather warning and alert system.
The investments that some nations have made in warning systems provide a valuable tool in helping all nations lower the risk of such catastrophic consequences. Today, the ACE satellite represents a critical possible point of failure in the global geomagnetic storm alert and monitoring network. The international community is relying on the United States of America to replace ACE. Although funds have been proposed in the FY11 U.S. Department of Commerce budget to fund an ACE replacement, DISCVR, the international community should carefully consider investing in additional satellite resources to complement the ACE replacement‘s planned CME directional detection capabilities.
2. The international community should improve the current geomagnetic storm warning and alert system.
The efforts to date fostered under ISES, and those of the SWPC in particular, are laudable. But, significant room for improvement remains in the international geomagnetic storm warning and alert infrastructure. First, understanding the consequences of geomagnetic storms requires a greater understanding of the ground induced currents resulting from those storms. Greater investment in magnetometers worldwide and integration of the resulting data would improve the SWPCs ability to assess storm severity.
The international geomagnetic storm alerting and warning community currently uses a 5- level scale to communicate the severity of an impending geomagnetic storm. This scale lacks sufficient granularity at the high end to provide useful tactical guidance to geomagnetic storm alerting and warning information customers. As consumers of space weather forecasting services, the electric power industry would benefit from greater granularity differentiating between severe and extreme geomagnetic storms for tailored operational mitigation measures.
3. Electricity-generating companies should be encouraged to harden high-voltage transformers connecting major power generating assets to electric grids.
Even with warning and alert procedures in place, operational mitigations may be overwhelmed by a sufficiently large storm. Hardening all critical infrastructures against geomagnetic storms is neither economically cost-effective nor technically possible. Hardening high-voltage transmission lines with transmission line series capacitors and the transformers connected to these lines through the installation of neutral-blocking capacitors is possible. But, doing so for all utilities supporting 345 MV and above would prove economically prohibitive (Molinski, 2000). For instance, since the 1989 Quebec electricity outage, Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $1.2 billion on transmission line series capacitors (Government of Canada, 2002). Although hardening all high-voltage transmission lines and transformers is not likely an economically viable strategy, OECD member governments should consider encouraging electricity generation companies and publicly owned utilities to harden transformers connecting critical electricity generation facilities to their respective electrical grids. Ensuring the survival of these high-voltage transformers in the event of an extreme geomagnetic storm will facilitate faster restoration of national electrical grids and remove part of the likely demand for replacement high-voltage transformers in an extreme geomagnetic storm scenario.
4. OECD members should define an allocation process for replacement high-voltage transformers in the event of increased international demand following an extreme geomagnetic storm.
As discussed above, the major international aspects from such an event are likely to be competition for limited resources necessary for recovery of electric power transmission capabilities. Joint planning, therefore, is a clear necessity. The international community would be wise to establish a framework or at least a forum for discussing various mechanisms for prioritization of needs in a competitive environment. Willingness to cooperate post-crisis, however, will depend in many ways on the individual nations‘ policies and planning prior to the crisis, and likely anticipated demands from consumers, both individual and corporate. If one nation invests nothing in warning, emergency procedures, and exercises, for example, it will have difficulty arguing that it should be first in line to receive replacement transformers after a disaster strikes.
Similarly, the international community should have a common understanding of how and when to communicate the possibility of catastrophic effects from an extreme geomagnetic storm prior as an immediate alert. Public panic and unrest can be caused or exacerbated by conflicting or inaccurate information. Clear communications are facilitated by plans and international understanding of roles and responsibilities that have been established prior to an emergency.
To ensure that each participating nation participates to a degree to support such an international partnership, it may be helpful to conduct a more thorough risk assessment. The assessment included in this report is based largely on existing data that have severe limitations and assumptions where there are no data. There are many aspects of the scenario presented here that could be improved through simulation, exercises, and additional analysis of operational procedures. The physical aspects of geomagnetic storms are relatively well known. The reaction of infrastructure operators, the public, and government leaders are more uncertain. These require more thorough understanding so that appropriate incentives can be developed for optimum policy development and implementation.
5. National governments should conduct mission disruption assessments.
The critical infrastructure interdependence analysis included in this report indicates a wide range of critical infrastructure sectors and sub-sectors would suffer second-order consequences stemming from the first-order consequences of an extreme geomagnetic storm. This analysis identifies eight critical infrastructure sectors and sub-sectors likely to experience first-order disruptions as a result of an extreme geomagnetic storm:
1. Communications (Satellite)
2. Communications (Wireline)
3. Energy (Electric Power)
4. Information Technology
5. Transportation (Aviation)
6. Transportation (Mass Transit)
7. Transportation (Pipeline)
8. Transportation (Rail)
As described starting on page 27, disruptions to three of these critical infrastructures would drive second-order disruptions to other critical infrastructures. For example, an extreme geomagnetic storm would result in widespread outages in the electric grids of the U.S.A. and Canada, in turn driving second-order disruptions to 20 other critical infrastructure sectors and sub-sectors (using U.S. DHS definitions for critical infrastructure sectors and sub-sectors). The extreme geomagnetic storm described in the scenario also would drive similar widespread electricity outages in Western Europe and Scandinavia, with second-order consequences similar to those suffered in the U.S. and Canada likely. The scale of these second-order consequences will vary from country to country, depending on a range of factors such as domestic legislation dictating back-up power requirements for hospitals.
The potential for cascading effects on critical infrastructure stemming from an extreme geomagnetic storm means OECD member governments should carefully consider conducting formal risk assessments in at least two areas. First, at a minimum, OECD members should conduct critical infrastructure dependence exercises determining the cascading effects of the loss of electric power. In addition to providing insight into the consequences stemming from an extreme geomagnetic storm, this form of risk analysis will also be applicable to other hazards that could interrupt electricity supplies. Second, OECD member governments should conduct assessments evaluating their dependence on space-based assets for continuity of government. An extreme geomagnetic storm could result in both short- and longer-term disruptions to space-based assets leveraged by OECD member governments for communications, navigation, and information technology.
6. The international community needs a commonly applied methodology to evaluate social vulnerability.
The international community lacks a commonly accepted methodology to assess social vulnerability across national lines. With increasing interest in the implications of social unrest as a global shock, the OECD should take a leading role in facilitating the development of methodology that could be applied internationally. The analysis in this report uses the University of South Carolina Social Vulnerability Index, which is designed for analysis within the United States. This has provided useful insight into the contributors to social vulnerability and comparative analysis for prioritization efforts. To compare similar phenomena across national boundaries, the international community would need to overcome challenges of inconsistent population area definitions, internationally comparable socio-economic factors, and political considerations that allow for application to a variety of types of government, emergency management, and hazard mitigation. The benefits would be a more robust approach to comparing a wide variety of hazard risks to nations and populations across the globe.
====================================================================
Read the full report here
h/t to Dr. Leif Svalgaard
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

And anyone else with stainless steel stents in both internal carotid arteries, go and stand in a tin shed for 24h and hope for the best! And try not to actually be on the operating table or on life support for the duration..
@ur momisugly Why is it so? says:
February 14, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Actually timg56 has raised some issues that I have often wondered about:
Why 0.22 and not 0.25?
Why 0.38 and not 0.30 or 0.35? Or even 0.40?
Why 0.45 and not 0.40?
And why the heck is it 0.223?
Informed people want to know!
==============================================
Lots of factors. Cost, ballistics, intended use, availability, etc. As they say in the yard sale ads: “Too much to mention”. Be glad you have many choices. Lot’s of people don’t have any choices.
Y2K anybody? Anthony, I dunno. Everytime we have a sig flare they say interruptions might occur, yet I’ve never had a problem in the city where I live these past 48yrs. I am not worrying about this.
Whatever happened to Faraday cages……why would automobiles be effectively killed when most car bodies are constructed of steel? I can anticipate unshrouded engines such as motor cycles, snow-mobiles and lawn mowers would be vulnerable….
Take the time to read this report as posted by
Retired Admiral, Physicist, James A. Marusek has already done all the research.
Very sobering.
It answers a lot of questions and scenarios pointed out in posts here.
The scary bit. It only takes a week of no electrical power for a modern city to descend into chaos.
CME’s have already had effects on a modern city – Quebec 1989.
Very interesting. My question is,if the grids,etc. are all down,just how is industry going to get the replacement parts built to get us back to our slothful 21st century living?
Query to Electrical/Utility Engineers:
What are prospects for safely bringing down the utility grid before a Carrington CME hits?
Would that prevent damage to the grid?
What is needed to bring the grid back up?
Compare the 2003 collapse of the Northeast Grid?
May I just point out that the averaging of New England points out how silly statistics can be when used incorrectly.
If “stunning auroras pulsated even at near tropical latitudes over Cuba, the Bahamas, Jamaica, El Salvador, and Hawaii,” how far south (or at least close to the equator) did the electric currents caused by the Carrington event reach? Should there be another one, how far are they likely to reach? Will it be limited to mainly the temperate northern hemisphere? Will electronics and power infrastructure in the tropics or the southern hemisphere remain unscathed? Just how “global” is this threat?
Katherine says:
February 14, 2012 at 5:38 pm
If “stunning auroras pulsated even at near tropical latitudes over Cuba, the Bahamas, Jamaica, El Salvador, and Hawaii,” how far south (or at least close to the equator) did the electric currents caused by the Carrington event reach? Should there be another one, how far are they likely to reach? Will it be limited to mainly the temperate northern hemisphere? Will electronics and power infrastructure in the tropics or the southern hemisphere remain unscathed? Just how “global” is this threat?
The aurorae are caused by a different set of currents at about 100 km altitude extending from both poles. There is also a current that encircles the Earth at a distance of several Earth radii. This current is therefore global and its effect also global.
Why is it so? says:
February 14, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Why 0.22 and not 0.25?
All the dimensions are pretty much covered as the link below will show. Most of the reasons are purpose and ballistics. Other reasons include customs and laws. A .22 is allowed say for small game hunting, such as squirrels and rabbits. But in some places at least 0.25 caliber is required for larger animals, say white tails.
http://www.gunnersden.com/index.htm.rifle-cartridges-ballistics.html
Mariwarcwm says:
February 14, 2012 at 1:24 pm
By 1859 the sun was revving up again after the Dalton Minimum – stretching its muscles after a long sleep. The sun is now going into a quiet phase, and is perhaps less inclined to put on a spectacular like the Carrington Event.
There is some evidence that great event occur more often with a quieter sun. Here is a paragraph from our solar cycle prediction paper http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Smallest%20100%20years.pdf
“Average space weather might be ‘‘milder’’ with decreased solar activity, but the extreme events that dominate technological effects are not expected to disappear. In fact, they may become more common. Two of the eight strongest storms in the last 150 years occurred during solar cycle 14 (Rmax = 64) [Cliver and Svalgaard, 2004], while three of the five largest 30 MeV solar energetic proton events since 1859 [McCracken et al., 2001] occurred during cycle 13 (Rmax = 88).”
They would pull themselves up by their boot straps.
You find small islands of power or make them using expedient generation. You use that power to help fix problems at other larger facilities, and gradually walk up the power chain until you can get major manufactures back in production.
For example there are many historical examples of the Navy feeding power to the shore in emergencies. Most large warships can provide significant power to the shore with a bit of expedient engineering.
Larry
Oh Good Grief, people…for the last time – CME (Coronal Mass Ejections) and EMP (Electro Magentic Pulse) are two completely different things which occur at the extreme opposite ends of the spectrum. Yes, they are both high voltage/current events but their effects are quite different. The CME is a very *low* frequency, high current event affecting long wires (high voltage xmission and maybe even local power & copper phone lines depending on strength of event) where an EMP is a very *high* frequency, high voltage event but of short duration (err…*pulse*) which affects shorter length electronic wires (auto wire harness, network cables, house wiring, etc.). Hopefully, when the massive CME is seen to be about to strike (as described so well by Tom Murphy above), all power systems will physically disconnect all power lines from distribution stations, let the event pass, then bring everything back up. It may take a day or two. If you feel uncomfortable about that, throw the main breaker to your house & disconnect *you* from your local system. An EMP would bee *seen* by the high voltage system but it would probably pass though the transformer equipment so fast, the system wouldn’t have time to react. So…relax…your cell phone, auto & other microelectronics would not be affected by a CME.
Jeff
The STARFISH PRIME shot was to answer some of these questions. Hawaii grid experienced problems.
Has anyone taken old telegraph equipment and induced enough current on an antenna to ignite the paper?
Good thing all the latest Solar research predicts that the next couple of solar cycles will be pretty wimpy. Seems like a half decent time to be a space traveler as well!
Les Francis says:
“The scary bit. It only takes a week of no electrical power for a modern city to descend into chaos.”
That would be scary if true, as if it were from a Stephen King novel like… “The Stand.”
However, modern cities in America (Florida peninsula a an example) have gone multiple weeks without power in the wake of the 2004 and 2005 hurricanes (e.g., Boca Raton, Fort Pierce, Miami, and Palm Beach). It took Florida Power & Light almost four weeks to restore power to those impacted by Hurricane Wilma in October 2005. There was inconvenience but nothing even remotely akin to chaos. Even though temperatures were well in excess of 90 degrees Fahrenheit with a relative humidity floating around 100% during the daytime, city dwelling Floridians were well-behaved – http://www.environmentalsciencedegrees.net/blog/2010/8-costliest-hurricanes-of-the-2000s/ .
And the heavily populated coastal and central cities of Connecticut went without power for more than a week during the recent Nor’easter in October 2011 (e.g., Danbury, Hartford, New Haven, and Waterbury). The CT customers were certainly… unhappy with what was they perceived was a poor utility response for a record-setting snow event, but there was no chaos – http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/nyregion/in-connecticut-thousands-still-without-power.html .
I recommend taking anything Wikipedia-sourced with a grain of salt, but the web site does reference a listing (by year) of major electric outages for review – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_outages . How many of these lead to chaos in modern cities…?
Jusy says:
“My question is,if the grids,etc. are all down,just how is industry going to get the replacement parts built”
Electric utilities have a number of spare or replacement “parts” (capacitors, circuit breakers, transformers, and voltage regulators) already in local stores; they’re needed for the more frequent terrestrial weather impacts. Many of these are not powered while in storage – the exception are the larger transformers which usually have a local service installed (120 volt) when stored. These local stores, though, would be used initially during the restoration, as needed.
Also, third-party equipment vendors will set aside a percentage of often-used “parts” in their inventories, as long as a utility pays them an annual retainer for the service. Lastly and if a utility needed a unit for which it did not have a spare, a request is made via established mutual assistance agreements to other utilities who may have a similar unit. And many utilities maintain mobile substations, which can be installed in lieu of a damaged substation; these mobile units may also be made available through mutual assistance, if needed.
These activities would bridge the short-term gap before replacement units are manufactured and installed to make the repairs permanent.
David L. Hagen says:
“What are prospects for safely bringing down the utility grid before a Carrington CME hits?”
Taking down an electric transmission grid is fairly straightforward, and utilities that own transmission assets have established load shed plans. These plans are often mobilized to varying levels during high demand periods when regional capacity is strained (e.g., summer in the Northeast). Granted, these plans typically target the bottom 10%, 15%, and 25% of load (bottom meaning locales that have a higher tolerance for interruptions like residential areas rather than city downtowns), but a utility could extend the load shedding to its remaining transmission circuits using the reverse of its priority restoration listing used routinely following storm impacts.
The biggest challenge would be determining how much of the grid to take down in advance. This would require timed coordination across the RTOs to avoid an accelerated shutdown, which could extend the outage (unintentionally) beyond the projected impact area. But there’s a “social problem” in this process, as well. When should the utilities and/or governmental agencies notify customers in impacted areas because there’s a small percentage of the population that is negatively opportunistic. This group will take advantage of the overall situation, if they know the date/time/duration of the outage (e.g., a bank robber, petty looter, or classic mob).
“Would that prevent damage to the grid?”
Yes, a controlled take down of the electric transmission grid would result in far less damage than a functioning grid at the time of impact. The bottleneck, though, would be the resource commitment of qualified workers needed to “switch off” and physically disconnect critical points within a compressed time period – a fair amount of this activity would be manual. The likelihood of completing the take down successfully would decrease as the geographic footprint of the impacted area was increased.
“What is needed to bring the grid back up?”
Restarting an electric transmission grid is also fairly straightforward but requires coordination, and utilities that own transmission assets have established black start plans. A black start typically begins with a battery-initiated generator (diesel-fueled), which then powers up the operation of a self-sustaining power plant (most often a hydroelectric dam but gas-fired, combustion turbines are becominf more common). The transmission lines from these power plants to other critical points (transmission substations) are energized to restore power to the base load power plants (e.g., coal, nuclear, and oil). Once the base load power plants are established, the other peak power plants (e.g., biomass and gas) are powered up. At this point the remaining transmission substations and circuits, sub-transmission circuits, and distribution substations and feeders would be energized.
The restart across a widespread region, though, will result in islands of generation which are focused around the restarted power plants and bounded by the extent of their associated transmission circuits. Eventually, though, these islands will be fused or synchronized with all power plants across the region aligned at the 60 Hz frequency, which is coordinated by the RTO. Although local voltages can range somewhat, the frequency across the synchronized grid must be maintained precisely at 60 Hz. If it isn’t, the asynchronous unit will be separated from the grid via the protective relays before other areas are affected.
Once this is completed, the customer restoration can commence in earnest. However, the grid cannot be restarted all at once because of the large, initial demand needed by electric devices that were left on at the time of interruption; thus, the need for a controlled restart. And this will take some time – not weeks but a few days for a widesread interruption (multiple, geographic regions).
The fact that this warning comes from Homeland Security and not the Bureau of Meteorology is a Red Flag to me. It is too like the IPCC. Both rhe IPCC and HS benefit from public fear as it enables them to increase their funding. Both organizations set about increasing fear for selfish reasons rather than in order to benefit society. In fact society is grossly damaged by both organizations and the thinking behind them. Fear is a powerful tool. We should not forget the most gross use of fear to implement destructive policies as set out here:
http://scienceof911.com.au/
It is all part of the same thing – the public losing control to authorities which are out of control.
Look how well DHS handles airport security, and border security. They have as much chance of dealing with a Carrington event as I do of winning a foot race at the London Olympics.
Since you ask, I cannot walk a block without sitting down due to my bursitis.
timg56 says:
February 14, 2012 at 12:20 pm
There are three numbers I keep in mind for dealing with something like this:
.30-06
.45
12
Must admit that I have come somewhat into the 20th century and now include the number .223
============
Include an early warning system and you’ll be ready. A dog.
Let me second Jim Cripwell’s (February 14, 2012 at 1:29 pm) endorsement of “The Sun Kings” by Stuart Clark. A truly interesting account of the Carrington Event, recent research into it, and the history of solar astronomy.
And on the bright side, a modern Carrington event would allow me to bomb around the empty streets of San Diego in my point-and-coil ignition ’73 Mini Cooper, dodging only the odd MGB and Triumph! Well, until the Lucas points or coil exhibited standard mean-time-to-failure…
Imagine bringing the grid back online with the vaiied output if any of wind and solar. The future holds some possible and interesting surprises if we continue on the current energy policies. But have no fear as it only takes about 10 years to build and bring nuclear online. We can begin after it’s too late.
Dog
.44
.270
20
.22
12
Another dog
The TSA is still working out how it can give the sun a pat down.
I scrolled thru the comments but could not see any mention of all the nuclear plants and spent fuel pools everyone of which will turn into a gigantic nuclear dirty bombs 5 days after the grid goes down notwithstanding any diesel generators that manage to start up and run for any length of time.
The SFP spent fuel pools are the worst as they are housed in warehouse buildings basically..tin roofs and cinderblock sides.Gigantic dirty bombs….tons of fuel rods in each pool scattered across the country in every state.