Imagine you're a terrorist with a single nuclear weapon. You could wipe out the U.S. city of your choice, or you could decide to destroy the infrastructure of the entire U.S. economy and leave millions of Americans to die of starvation or want of medical care.
The latter scenario is the one envisioned by a long-running commission to assess the threat from electromagnetic pulse, or EMP. The subject of its latest, and little discussed, report to Congress is the effect an EMP attack could have on civilian infrastructure. If you're prone to nightmares, don't read it before bedtime.
An EMP attack occurs when a nuclear bomb explodes high in the Earth's atmosphere. The electromagnetic pulse generated by the blast destroys all the electronics in its line of sight. For a bomb detonated over the Midwest, that includes most of the continental U.S. Few, if any, people die in the blast. It's what comes next that has the potential to be catastrophic. Since an EMP surge wipes out electronics, virtually every aspect of modern American life would come to a standstill.
The commission's list of horribles is 181 pages long. The chapter on food, for instance, catalogs the disruptions up and down the production chain as food spoils or has no way to get to market. Many families have food supplies of several days or more. But after that, and without refrigeration, what? The U.S. also has 75,000 dams and reservoirs, 168,000 drinking water-treatment facilities, and 19,000 wastewater treatment centers -- all with pumps, valves and filters run by electricity.
Getting everything up and running again is not merely a matter of flipping a switch, and the commission estimates that many systems could be out of service for months or a year or more -- far longer than emergency stockpiles or batteries could cover. The large transformers used in electrical transmission are no longer built in the U.S. and delivery time is typically three years. "Lack of high voltage equipment manufacturing capacity represents a glaring weakness in our survival and recovery," the commission notes. (This last comment may be in error. MG)
Many industries rely on automated control systems maintained by small work forces. In emergencies -- say, during a blackout -- companies often have arrangements in place to borrow workers from outside the affected area to augment the locals and help with manual repairs. After an EMP attack, those workers would be busy in their home regions -- or foraging for food and water for their families.
The commission offers extensive recommendations for how industry and government can protect against the effects of an EMP attack and ensure a quicker recovery. They include "hardening" more equipment to withstand an electromagnetic pulse; making sure replacement equipment is on hand; training recovery personnel; increasing federal food stockpiles; and many others.
If not, our vulnerability "can both invite and reward attack," the commission's chairman, William Graham, told Congress last month. Iran's military writings "explicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United States," he said. James Shinn, an assistant secretary of defense, has said that China is developing EMP weapons. The commission calls an EMP attack "one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences." The threat is real. It's past time to address it.
It would seem from this article that distributed generation, combined with rapid implementation of new energy conversion systems with "hardened" electronics, warrants urgent exploration.
Control Centers and many major substations on the portion of the grid operated by Department of Energy are already hardened against a potential EMP attack; many other substations are operating on legacy hardware that is not affected by an electromagnetic pulse. The portion of the grid run by utilites may not be so secure, especially the new controllers going in at wind sites and co-gens. Also, the guidance systems in the arsenals of all super powers are completely hardened against an EMP attack. Unleashing the EMP threat against any nation with nuclear weapons would be irrational; unfortunately, not all world leaders are rational.
Think of EMP Before Problem Arises Regarding "The EMP Threat" (Review & Outlook, Aug. 9): In the 1990s, I was one of a handful of adjunct instructors at FEMA's Emergency Management Institute who taught the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Protection and Maintenance course. I was also contracted to build the National Emergency Training Center's first EMP teaching lab. FEMA's highly successful EMP protection program (as well as the course) was canceled during the Clinton administration because the folks on Capitol Hill deemed the threat of a warhead-based EMP burst to be highly unlikely. The fact is that you don't need a nuclear warhead. An EMP generator can be constructed that would fit inside a briefcase. If someone had a mind to use such a device, you could merely walk past an unprotected facility such as a server farm or communications center and disrupt the electronics. Another benefit of EMP hardening, which is considerably more practical, is that it can protect electronic equipment against the effects of lightning and everyday power-line surges. I strenuously urge Washington to consider re-establishing FEMA's EMP protection program. Electronic devices have permeated our lives so deeply that any disruption of these systems on which we so dearly depend could prove disastrous. H. Robert Schroeder Ewing, N.J. Letter published in the Wall Street Journal August 16, 2008
To Mr. Norquay: Are PV panels vulnerable to EMP. My experience is with EMC design/testing, so it isn't spot on applicable to nuclear generated pulse...nevertheless, here is my take- The article described protection of components of a pv system to conducted emmissions (transients coming in from power lines). A second mode of transmission is to the device itself. Crystalline panels are a series of solid state PN junctions. This topology is quite susceptable to strong electromagnetic radiation. That's why tubes perform better than transistors in very high EM environments. The strength of the radiated pulse from a nuclear device depends on several factors: Distance from detonation. degree of compton effect radiation (puts more energy in radio spectrum). design of the panels.
My guess is that PV panels will almost certainly be temporarily bilded by an intentional detonation. Permanent damage would result if the radiation is strong enough to permamnently alter the "P" and "N" material of the crystal If you thing our Russian friends are likely to "light up our lives" a bit, store your panels inside. Afterward they will be quite valuable. Defending them may be difficult, however.
Of course the cold war is over (we won it, you know) so we only have to be concerned with "terrorist" type disruptions. An outdoor mounted panel, with protection per the author, is likely to survive a single high altitude nuke designed to take down the grid. If this is your concern, avoid grid interconnects as the grid is a very effective antenna for compton effect electromagnetic radiation. An isolated PV system will probably work after an attack like this if protected as the author describes.
You have given a reasonably intelligent reply to Mr. Bean's inquiry; my post concerned grid integrity, and had nothing to do with photovoltaic panels. However, I do have a thought concerning the ability of PV panels to resist hostile electromagnetic radiation; solar panels generate electricity for the ISS, numerous vehicles in earth orbit, and exploration probes inside of our asteroid belt. If the PV panels on board these vessels can handle a solar flare, an EMP burst would have little or no effect. The electronics on board of telecommunications platforms are an entirely different matter...
Regarding "The EMP Threat" (Review & Outlook, Aug. 9): In the 1990s, I was one of a handful of adjunct instructors at FEMA's Emergency Management Institute who taught the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Protection and Maintenance course. I was also contracted to build the National Emergency Training Center's first EMP teaching lab. FEMA's highly successful EMP protection program (as well as the course) was canceled during the Clinton administration because the folks on Capitol Hill deemed the threat of a warhead-based EMP burst to be highly unlikely.
The fact is that you don't need a nuclear warhead. An EMP generator can be constructed that would fit inside a briefcase. If someone had a mind to use such a device, you could merely walk past an unprotected facility such as a server farm or communications center and disrupt the electronics.
Another benefit of EMP hardening, which is considerably more practical, is that it can protect electronic equipment against the effects of lightning and everyday power-line surges.
I strenuously urge Washington to consider re-establishing FEMA's EMP protection program. Electronic devices have permeated our lives so deeply that any disruption of these systems on which we so dearly depend could prove disastrous.
H. Robert Schroeder
Ewing, N.J.
Letter published in the Wall Street Journal August 16, 2008
My experience is with EMC design/testing, so it isn't spot on applicable to nuclear generated pulse...nevertheless, here is my take-
The article described protection of components of a pv system to conducted emmissions (transients coming in from power lines).
A second mode of transmission is to the device itself. Crystalline panels are a series of solid state PN junctions.
This topology is quite susceptable to strong electromagnetic radiation. That's why tubes perform better than transistors in very high EM environments.
The strength of the radiated pulse from a nuclear device depends on several factors:
Distance from detonation.
degree of compton effect radiation (puts more energy in radio spectrum).
design of the panels.
My guess is that PV panels will almost certainly be temporarily bilded by an intentional detonation.
Permanent damage would result if the radiation is strong enough to permamnently alter
the "P" and "N" material of the crystal If you thing our Russian friends are likely to "light up our lives" a bit, store your panels inside. Afterward they will be quite valuable. Defending them may be difficult, however.
Of course the cold war is over (we won it, you know) so we only have to be concerned with "terrorist" type disruptions. An outdoor mounted panel, with protection per the author, is likely to survive a single high altitude nuke designed to take down the grid. If this is your concern, avoid grid interconnects as the grid is a very effective antenna for compton effect electromagnetic radiation. An isolated PV system will probably work after an attack like this if protected as the author describes.