I've collected about every reputable doc on the Internet related to EMP calculation, with an eye to potentially modeling it.
-
-
Replying to @wellerstein @Casillic
Our mockery of the emp hysterics is ok, right? Like, they're not actually secretly right, are they?!?pic.twitter.com/afvNOObdIL
6 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @NuclearAnthro @Casillic
To put it another way — the most technical & reputable stuff I've seen puts the threat in the middle of "everything" and "nothing."
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
you wouldn’t mind sharing that “technical & reputable” stuff for the common good would you?
6 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I could see trying for an EMP attack prior to a bigger attack, to complicate the ability to reply, etc. But if pain is goal, target cities.
2 replies 4 retweets 10 likes -
… but real stuff (e.g. ICBM controls) is shielded and, quite frankly, losing cable TV is not such a serious first volley, is it?
7 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
But I acknowledge this is a tricky issue with a lot of uncertainties on all sides.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I am actually curious as to the effects of nuking a nuclear plant but not "too close": can the neutron burst increase reactivity to blow it?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I have seen calculations on the amount of fallout generated by nuking a reactor (it increases the "dirtiness" by a significant factor),
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I imagine that in the old OPLAN dropping a little something on Ignalina would have had quite an effect.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It dramatically adds to the contamination — it's like the worst of both worlds (nukes and reactor accidents) — if I recall.
-
-
I can imagine, especially the spent fuel pools.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.