I think I can be labeled an anti-nuclear activist regarding use of reactors for power generation. However, I am uncomfortable about assuming that nuclear explosives can not be used for some geoengineering purposes. (Breaking up hurricanes is not one of them.) The following is a successful application of nuclear explosives that did help to reduce GHG release from burning natural gas fields. https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/industry/peaceful-nuclear-explosions.aspx Urtabulak: gas well fire
In 1966, a nuclear explosive was detonated at Urtabulak gas field in Southern Uzbekistan in order to extinguish a gas well fire that had been burning for almost three years and had resisted numerous attempts at control. The gas fountain, which formed at pressures of almost 300 atmospheres, had resulted in the loss of over 12 million cubic metres of gas per day through a 200 mm casing – enough to supply a city the size of St Petersburg. Two 445 mm holes were drilled that aimed to come as close as possible to the well at a depth of about 1500 metres in the middle of a 200 metre thick clay zone. One of these came to within about 35 m of the well and was used to emplace the special 30-kiloton charge which had been developed by the Arzamas weapons laboratory. Immediately after the explosion the fire went out and the well was sealed. This was the first of five PNEs used for this purpose, and all but one was completely successful in extinguishing the fire and sealing the well. No radioactivity above background levels was detected in subsequent surveys of any of the sites. On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 1:09 PM Jessica Gurevitch < [email protected]> wrote: > Hadn't heard this.....yes, this would indeed be geoengineering (of > weather, with unintended climate consequences).....it just gets crazier and > crazier..... > > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> > Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> > <#m_2482107334164272785_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 1:35 AM Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Poster's note: obliquely relevant as MCB is potentially able to influence >> hurricanes >> >> Axios: Trump suggested dropping nuclear bombs into hurricanes to stop >> them from hitting the U.S.. >> >> https://www.axios.com/trump-nuclear-bombs-hurricanes-97231f38-2394-4120-a3fa-8c9cf0e3f51c.html >> >> Scoop: Trump suggested nuking hurricanes to stop them from hitting >> U.S.[image: >> Illustration of Trump pressing nuclear button] >> Illustration: Lazaro Gamio/Axios >> >> President Trump has suggested multiple times to senior Homeland Security >> and national security officials that they explore using nuclear bombs to >> stop hurricanes from hitting the United States, according to sources who >> have heard the president's private remarks and been briefed on a National >> Security Council memorandum that recorded those comments. >> >> Behind the scenes: During one hurricane briefing at the White House, >> Trump said, "I got it. I got it. Why don't we nuke them?" according to one >> source who was there. "They start forming off the coast of Africa, as >> they're moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the >> hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can't we do that?" the source added, >> paraphrasing the president's remarks. >> >> - Asked how the briefer reacted, the source recalled he said >> something to the effect of, "Sir, we'll look into that." >> - Trump replied by asking incredulously how many hurricanes the U.S. >> could handle and reiterating his suggestion that the government intervene >> before they make landfall. >> - The briefer "was knocked back on his heels," the source in the room >> added. "You could hear a gnat fart in that meeting. People were >> astonished. >> After the meeting ended, we thought, 'What the f---? What do we do with >> this?'" >> >> Trump also raised the idea in another conversation with a senior >> administration official. A 2017 NSC memo describes that second >> conversation, in which Trump asked whether the administration should bomb >> hurricanes to stop them from hitting the homeland. A source briefed on the >> NSC memo said it does not contain the word "nuclear"; it just says the >> president talked about bombing hurricanes. >> >> - The source added that this NSC memo captured "multiple topics, not >> just hurricanes. … It wasn't that somebody was so terrified of the bombing >> idea that they wrote it down. They just captured the president’s >> comments." >> - The sources said that Trump's "bomb the hurricanes" idea — which he >> floated early in the first year and a bit of his presidency before John >> Bolton took over as national security adviser — went nowhere and never >> entered a formal policy process. >> >> White House response: A senior administration official said, "We don't >> comment on private discussions that the president may or may not have had >> with his national security team." >> >> - A different senior administration official, who has been briefed on >> the president's hurricane bombing suggestion, defended Trump's idea and >> said it was no cause for alarm. "His goal — to keep a catastrophic >> hurricane from hitting the mainland — is not bad," the official said. "His >> objective is not bad." >> - "What people near the president do is they say 'I love a president >> who asks questions like that, who’s willing to ask tough questions.' ... >> It >> takes strong people to respond to him in the right way when stuff like >> this >> comes up. For me, alarm bells weren't going off when I heard about it, but >> I did think somebody is going to use this to feed into 'the president is >> crazy' narrative." >> >> The big picture: Trump didn't invent this idea. The notion that >> detonating a nuclear bomb over the eye of a hurricane could be used to >> counteract convection currents dates to the Eisenhower era, when it was >> floated by a government scientist. >> >> - The idea keeps resurfacing in the public even though scientists >> agree it won't work. The myth has been so persistent that the National >> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. government agency that >> predicts changes in weather and the oceans, published an online fact >> sheet for the public <https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html> under >> the heading "Tropical Cyclone Myths Page." >> - The page states: "Apart from the fact that this might not even >> alter the storm, this approach neglects the problem that the released >> radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to >> affect >> land areas and cause devastating environmental problems. Needless to say, >> this is not a good idea." >> >> About 3 weeks after Trump's 2016 election, National Geographic published >> <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2016/11/hurricanes-weather-history-nuclear-weapons/> >> an >> article titled, "Nuking Hurricanes: The Surprising History of a Really Bad >> Idea." It found, among other problems, that: >> >> - Dropping a nuclear bomb into a hurricane would be banned under the >> terms of the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty between the U.S. and the >> former Soviet Union. So that could stave off any experiments, as long as >> the U.S. observes the terms of the treaty. >> >> Atlantic hurricane season runs until Nov. 30. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-04XLOrj8p%3DQ%3DK0Y7_q0G%2B2F7aPaX0jy%2B-v_yW4E1jG5xA%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-04XLOrj8p%3DQ%3DK0Y7_q0G%2B2F7aPaX0jy%2B-v_yW4E1jG5xA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> > Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> > <#m_2482107334164272785_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAMJYDzP6xgacfGDn1Vk4Jv%2BfjrPV19k%2B%2BZ_NSRr1S_5hQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAMJYDzP6xgacfGDn1Vk4Jv%2BfjrPV19k%2B%2BZ_NSRr1S_5hQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAKX06arbOcwD_Eahk7uF7cWsu0GfrCOMxSXzotH%3Drm6OgM%2Bsxw%40mail.gmail.com.
