Actually, it probably isnt. But according to various NASA reports and scientists, the sun is entering a new phase of increased solar activity, and the danger to global economic infrastructure (esp. the electrical grid) is a real thing.
According to the NASA website: "Richard Fisher, head of NASA's Heliophysics Division, explains what it's all about:
"The sun is waking up from a deep slumber, and in the next few years we expect to see much higher levels of solar activity. At the same time, our technological society has developed an unprecedented sensitivity to solar storms. The intersection of these two issues is what we're getting together to discuss.""
How bad could this get? According to the NASA report in the second link above: "To estimate the scale of such a failure, report co-author John Kappenmann of the Metatech Corporation looked at the great geomagnetic storm of May 1921, which produced ground currents as much as ten times stronger than the 1989 Quebec storm, and modeled its effect on the modern power grid. He found more than 350 transformers at risk of permanent damage and 130 million people without power. The loss of electricity would ripple across the social infrastructure with "water distribution affected within several hours; perishable foods and medications lost in 12-24 hours; loss of heating/air conditioning, sewage disposal, phone service, fuel re-supply and so on.""
So this appears to be a real thing. Maybe not probably on the scale they are talking about, but possible. Which leads me to ask three questions:
1) How likely is this? One NASA report isn't definitive, what do other authorities say?
2) If it did happen, what are the possible disruptive effects that could occur? How bad could it get? How quickly?
3) Regardless of how likely or unlikely it is, how would one go about preparing for this kind of disaster?
Let's keep this relatively close to the facts. Conspiracy theories are fun and all, but except to debunk them, I'm more interested in what we do know.
"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
Its the end of the world!
Actually, it probably isnt. But according to various NASA reports and scientists, the sun is entering a new phase of increased solar activity
, and the danger to global economic infrastructure (esp. the electrical grid) is a real thing
.
According to the NASA website
: "Richard Fisher, head of NASA's Heliophysics Division, explains what it's all about:
"The sun is waking up from a deep slumber, and in the next few years we expect to see much higher levels of solar activity. At the same time, our technological society has developed an unprecedented sensitivity to solar storms. The intersection of these two issues is what we're getting together to discuss.""
How bad could this get? According to the NASA report in the second link above: "To estimate the scale of such a failure, report co-author John Kappenmann of the Metatech Corporation looked at the great geomagnetic storm of May 1921, which produced ground currents as much as ten times stronger than the 1989 Quebec storm, and modeled its effect on the modern power grid. He found more than 350 transformers at risk of permanent damage and 130 million people without power. The loss of electricity would ripple across the social infrastructure with "water distribution affected within several hours; perishable foods and medications lost in 12-24 hours; loss of heating/air conditioning, sewage disposal, phone service, fuel re-supply and so on.""
So this appears to be a real thing. Maybe not probably on the scale they are talking about, but possible. Which leads me to ask three questions:
1) How likely is this? One NASA report isn't definitive, what do other authorities say?
2) If it did happen, what are the possible disruptive effects that could occur? How bad could it get? How quickly?
3) Regardless of how likely or unlikely it is, how would one go about preparing for this kind of disaster?
Let's keep this relatively close to the facts. Conspiracy theories are fun and all, but except to debunk them, I'm more interested in what we do know.
"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."