Sunspot group AR1890 takes direct aim at earth

wayne says:
November 8, 2013 at 4:24 am
EO Peter says:
November 8, 2013 at 10:52 am
Wayne and Peter,
Thanks for the perspectives, Gents!
MtK

Bishophill has apparently been targeted. The site now returns a “no such account” from a black page

Mac the Knife says:
November 8, 2013 at 11:30 am
Jeff,
When you’re staring down the bore of a loaded cannon that is aimed directly at you and may fire at any moment, it is not ‘alarmist’ to express concern for your continued health.

Here is the problem. The title of the post says “directly”, the text says “nearly strait” [sic]. I see no quantification as to whether it actually WAS pointing “directly” at Earth (I suspect by this time that it’s now pointing elsewhere). Half a degree off and any flare that “may” come out of it will miss by a cosmic mile. There is such a serious lack of information here that it comes off as nothing but alarmist.
Clouds forming, may cause 40 day flood….

We’re getting some nice overhead activity here in Alaska’s interior right now (9:00pm), and should see big activity by midnight. If it picks up, people in Northern states may get a show tonight.
http://helios.swpc.noaa.gov/ovation/

Pamela Gray,
Try this: It is not possible to know about things of which we are not aware therefore to claim there are no such things of which we are not aware is patently illogical, even if there are none, we cannot know it. Such a claim, not logical, is suspect as to causal factors.

Michele says:
November 8, 2013 at 4:40 am
@lsvalgaard
“….The biggest group ever observed….”
6 April 1947 ?
http://daltonsminima.altervista.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/6-April-1947.jpg
Again, Jupiter, Venus, Earth and Mercury….
————
Is there a near equinox (shifting inflow) relationship involved also in this somewhere?

Since this is a sun topic, Two chart I put together today, you decide if the sun and activity controls the Temps on Earth, Shows up better in the Arctic because of the low humidity levels so the air can heat or cool faster with the sun spot activity.
https://twitter.com/NJSnowFan/status/399183126317920256/photo/1

From http://www.spaceweather.com/ today,
“”YET ANOTHER X-FLARE: As predicted, sunspot AR1890 has unleashed another strong flare, an X1-class explosion on Nov. 10th at 05:14 UT. NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory recorded a bright flash of extreme ultraviolet radiation from the blast site:
This is the third X-flare from AR1890 since Nov. 5th, and all three have something in common: brevity. AR1890 tends to produce impulsive flares, peaking sharply in a matter of minutes or less. Often, brief flares do not produce coronal mass ejections (CMEs), but this one could be an exception. A movie of the flare shows a plume of material lifting off the sun shortly after the UV flash. That could be the beginnings of an Earth-directed CME. Stay tuned for further analysis.””

otropogo says:
November 9, 2013 at 1:15 pm
If there is uncertainty and misinformation about the possible effects and scope of a solar flare, the people to blame our our national governments, who have kept this information from us. There can be no doubt that every nuclear power in the world has done extensive experiments on the EMP effect since its discovery.

Please!
It is a gross over simplification to compare EMP effects and the effects of a solar geomagnetic storm on the earth’s electrical power grids. The induced currents from a geomagnetic storm on long conductors over poor ground conductivity terrain (as in Hydro-Québec ’89) only have a passing similarity to the E3 effects of EMP from a high altitude nuclear burst. The E1 and E2 effects of a true EMP require very different protective measures and differ substantially from the slow rise time near DC currents induced by a solar storm. The only thing they have in common is that both have the potential to damage portions of the national electrical grid. EMP would put far more of our essential systems at risk, both because of how it impacts a broader class of systems but due to its essentially zero warning time onset.
The very slow rise time surges induced by a geomagnetic storm are orders of magnitude less difficult to protect against compared to the very fast < 5-10 nanosecond rise times of voltage surges induced in conductors by the E1 effects of EMP and the lightning like effects of the E2 component of EMP. Electrical grounding methods adequate for slow rise time surges characteristic of solar storm induced surges are entirely inadequate and essentially useless for protection against E1, E2 portions of EMP which require low impedance grounds that are effective well into the 100 mhz frequency range, and RF shielding even of very short conductors and protection from the effects of up to 50 kv/m electrical fields
They are not the same thing and we should use caution when comparing the two. Their impacts on our infrastructure will be very different. EMP would be far more serious for our essential electrical, electronic and radio frequency systems. It would result in the near instantaneous destruction of the majority of our unprotected RF communications and computer electronics infrastructure, in addition to much of our commercial power grid critical components like control systems and power transformers over large portions of a continental sized region. It would also cripple or destroy a large fraction of all our solid state electronic systems over the affected area.
The only similarity between the two for discussion, is that a system hardened against EMP is also most likely well protected against both direct lightning induced surges and geomagnetic induced surges. As such EMP protection is the higher threshold and best use of protective measures/funding as it will secondarily provide substantial protection against both lightning and geomagnetic storm induced damages to electrical and electronic systems.

Yes we are largely unprotected against geomagnetic storms and they can certainly cause damage to portions of the electrical wide area grids and especially the long lead time transformers, but the effects are much less severe than EMP and also dependent on local conditions. More importantly they are much easier to protect against and with modern satellite systems we have up to 18 hours warning time to take protective actions.
As in Hydro-Québec ’89 the problem is more significant in areas where the local ground has poor conductivity and in more northern latitudes. It could damage some of the major transformers who are connected to long distance power lines that are running in the right direction so that they most effectively couple with the magnetic effects of the disturbance. It would how ever not totally blackout entire continental areas as EMP could. It would break up the major grids into small island grids which could only serve local areas. The adverse effects could be worked around to get power to essential services like police, fire and medical facilities and food storage refrigeration and water pumping for municipal water supply and sewage.
That would be minor comfort to folks who depend on electrical heating, hot water and cooking, or major industrial customers who suddenly have limited power available for weeks or months, but there would at least be a boot strap power island around each power plant that could be used to recover from the damage and re-start normal operations. You would not lose all your major medical emergency power, or lose the ability to refrigerate all food and pharmaceuticals that require refrigeration over state wide areas.
It is simply a question of degrees, a carrington class Geomagnetic storm would be a major impact but relatively minor compared to the damage caused by a well executed massive EMP attack.
EMP would be a catastrophe with the vast majority of our electrical infrastructure destroyed or degraded, all the way down to local small electronics like your lap top and desk top computers in the most strongly affected areas. Loss of almost all commercial radio and television mass communications (no news or public information capacity) and the obliteration of a huge portion of our computer and internet infrastructure. A carrington event class geomagnetic storm would leave most consumer electronics untouched and cause major regional disruption of the major power grids but leave many local grids up and running or at least quickly repairable, although isolated from each other.
You would at least have some capacity for local industrial use of electrical power which would make recovery at least possible although painful.
Unfortunately the differences between the two would take a good sized book to explain, as both have unique features and impact different vulnerabilities in our infrastructure. For example EMP from a single high altitude burst could blanket an area over 1000 miles across with E3 effects but the peak E1 effects would be concentrated in a horseshoe shaped “smile” slightly south of the burst point (in the northern hemisphere) while a small area to the north of the burst point would have essentially no impact from the E1 effects. In the most strongly affected areas even small hand held electronics devices could be damaged especially those who are not designed to operate in hostile RF environments (smart phones) while some more hardy electronics like hand held police and fire radios might survive but their dispatch center would be toast. They would have local direct communication from unit to unit but no broad area communications, and due to damage to the power grid lose the ability to recharge batteries. In areas of strong E1 effects, modern car electronics systems like the engine management computers that manage fuel and spark to the engine would be fried in some cases, or knocked for a loop and require a power reset to return to normal operations. In some cases the cars electronics would survive if it was not running and parked in a partially shielded location like an underground garage, but a running car in the open would become a useless brick.
Just be aware that there are fundamental differences between the two classes of events and they should not be lumped together without understanding what effects that they share and the differences in how they impact our infrastructure.