
How Space Weather Could Trigger a Future Economic Crisis - JumpCrisscross
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-19/how-space-could-trigger-a-future-economic-crisis
======
flippmoke
As a background, I used to work on the FAA - WAAS[0] a system that provides
more accurate GPS and more importantly provides realtime integrity reports of
GPS for users. A big part of my work was studying ionospheric storms and how
they affected GPS. We made the majority of analysis from collected data from
the late 90s and onward, the sad truth is that we have no real idea of what a
massive solar event would do to satellites and the earth.

Satellites in general have a very hard time discharging large amounts of
current, because there simply is no ground and the possibility of a Carrington
Event[1] in the modern age is simply frightening. An event of this size today
could possibly knock out thousands of satellites at once -- including the
entire GPS constellation.

The effects on earth could be very damaging too, what would happen we aren't
quite certain. However, you could see arcs from power lines or any long
distance wire as it would provide easy paths for electrons. This also could
affect any computers much like an EMP blast. We could be looking at a large
percentage of all electronics broken. So we might suddenly have large areas,
with no power, no electronics, and no communication.

After spending lots of time learning about the science behind these storms, to
me this is the stuff of nightmare fuel.

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System)

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859)

~~~
Florin_Andrei
> Satellites in general have a very hard time discharging large amounts of
> current

Um... don't you mean "charge" instead of "current"?

> We could be looking at a large percentage of all electronics broken. So we
> might suddenly have large areas, with no power, no electronics, and no
> communication.

As a HAM radio operator, this is why I want to build a transceiver that has no
semiconductors in it. If it's not connected to a large antenna, or to the AC
network, or to any long wires, there's no way anything coming in from space
could fry it (that would not fry me too).

~~~
sandworm101
If you arent attaching it to anything, put it in a tinfoil sac. It will be
fine and ready to go when needed, semiconductors and all.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
Well, if you go into the physics of the whole thing, penetration depth, skin
effect, absorbance, etc, you realize there's always a combination of factors
that will screw up your silicon. Plus, if it's not in the bag when it hits, it
gets fried. Plus, it should be more like a military-style box than a bag.

Tubes are just a heck of a lot harder to screw up, except mechanically.

------
neaden
The descriptions of effects of the 1859 solar storm on the telegraph system[0]
are pretty crazy. It started fires, shocked operators, powered unplugged
machines, etc. Can't imagine what that would be like with all of our modern
machines.

[0]: [http://www.history.com/news/a-perfect-solar-superstorm-
the-1...](http://www.history.com/news/a-perfect-solar-superstorm-
the-1859-carrington-event)

~~~
sandworm101
They fail to mention all the very similar accidents that happened in those
days regardless of space weather. We have safety systems in place today
(fuses, breakers, grounded parts) to prevent accidents that were once the
norm. They will also mitigate space weather effects. It would be bad, but not
nearly as destructive.

------
brentm
> A world without power because of damaged transformers would become
> economically stagnant

Economic stagnation would probably be the least of our problems. The cascading
issues from a world without power for an extended period of time are
incredibly far reaching. It would most certainly be a form of chaos.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _a world without power_

A CME wouldn't cause a world without power. It would cause _parts_ of the
world to lose their power _grids_ and satellites. Generators would almost
certainly be hooked up to critical infrastructure and cities in rich
countries.

~~~
rsync
"A CME wouldn't cause a world without power. It would cause parts of the world
to lose their power grids and satellites. Generators would almost certainly be
hooked up to critical infrastructure and cities in rich countries."

This is true, of course, however I am pessimistic about the ability for
manufacturers to resist cutesy network/cloud/status/monitoring functions in
these devices.

I am sure that somewhere, right now, there is a diesel generator acting as
backup for something critical that is plugged into ethernet and queries a
license server every five minutes.

~~~
Retric
There might be massive issues for power distribution but not power generation
as generation can be quickly taken off grid. Local power plants could then be
brought back very quickly.

There could still be issues in specific areas dependent on long distance
power. However, nuclear subs and aircraft carriers have been used in the past
to provide power for critical infrastructure ~(40+MW a pop) and local power
grids would not be impacted long term. Compared to say a war this would be a
minor long term impact.

PS: The $613 billion estimate over 5 years is 0.15% of the ~390,000 billion
world GDP over that same 5 years.

------
saycheese
Saying it would cause a crisis is unlikely, at least long-term, since anything
to would cause spending to recover and the cause of the "crisis" would be
known and accounted for.

To put this in perspective, America alone lost tens of trillions of dollars in
from the peak to the trough of the whole 2008 crisis:

[http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/09/news/economy/household_wealt...](http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/09/news/economy/household_wealth/)

------
lutorm
Am I right in thinking with advanced warning this could be mitigated by simply
shutting down the power grids for a few hours? That would be a big deal, but
clearly not as bad as taking it out.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
I think the massive electromagnetic flux caused by the CME interacting with
Earth's magnetosphere induces current even in powered-down systems. I believe
it's necessary to cut lines and perhaps even disconnect individual
transformers from the grid.

~~~
lutorm
Absolutely, but transformers can already be disconnected from the grid, you
just have to have the guts to do it in advance.

~~~
knz
How long does that take to do though? My understanding is that the scale of a
CME is what makes a potential disaster.

~~~
rtkwe
The major distribution sub stations already have remote controlled disconnects
that isolate them from the power grid it's a basic requirement for
maintenance.

They can have some pretty powerful arcs too:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5YxdRfAe14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5YxdRfAe14)

------
petre
Forget CMEs. They're really transient. Grids can be fixed in a couple of
months. What can't be fixed is a new Fukushima event.

How about decreased solar output for 70 years, like the Maunder Minimum? That
would realy trigger a full scale economic crisis.

~~~
ridgeguy
How fast grids can be fixed depends on what breaks.

If large power transformers (LPTs) get fried, the lead time for manufacturing
replacements can exceed 20 months [1]. They're so expensive that spares are
not commonly bought or built.

As well, a Carrington-scale CME event could wreck enough grid infrastructure
to require a black start [2] of unprecedented scale.

Our energy infrastructure has never experienced a Carrington CME. I think it
could easily take a year or more to get back to the continent-wide coordinated
grid we now have.

[1]
[https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Large%20Power%20Transfor...](https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Large%20Power%20Transformer%20Study%20-%20June%202012_0.pdf)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_start](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_start)

------
guard-of-terra
It won't trigger an economic crisis. What it would trigger is an economic
boom. Capital owners will all have to pony up to repair the infrastructure
they own or depend on. You might get some of your possessions damaged, but
after that making quick buck will become easier for a duration.

~~~
thinkmassive
Broken window fallacy?

~~~
lxmorj
If you are breaking the windows of a very rich man who has most of the windows
in your community due to his enormous house, and your economy is largely
window-installation based...

------
crpatino
I find it interesting that Bloomberg gets all hyped out about the consequences
of Outer Space events that may eventually happen and we do not have any way to
prevent, but cheerfully ignores the consequences, - and the very tangible
costs, - of Climate Change here on Earth.

"We can’t dodge, prevent or suppress solar flares. But we can increase funding
for early-warning systems such as the Space Weather Prediction Center in
Boulder, Colorado."

Oh, wait. Nevermind... I get it now.

~~~
CptJamesCook
No one is very worried about the consequences of climate change here on earth.

Exhibit A: The White House's official policy on climate change does not
mention the word "nuclear"

When Obama came into office, 66% of America's power was from fossil fuels.
When Obama left office, 66% of America's power was from fossil fuels.

~~~
cmurf
I don't think your last sentence is accurate.
[https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cf...](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_1_01)

~~~
wott
You table shows figures that sum up to 70-71% fossil fuel in 2008, and 66-67%
in 2015. The major change is the shift from coal to gas but the total did not
decrease as significantly.

~~~
dajohnson89
The oil price plummet, and the natural gas boom, both made it very hard
economically to not use fossil fuels. I'm not making excuses, just providing
an explanation.

