321–330 of 418 posts
The K-index for this is an 8 which is one less than an extreme G5 geomagnetic storm ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-index ). I haven't been able to find it, so I'm curious what the Carrington event K-index was?
SWPC is now showing this storm as a G5 with a K-index of 9: https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strong disagree. When there is sufficient political will complex policies can and will be enacted. What is missing in climate action is not some psychological deficiency of our species, it’s lack of strong enough political consensus. ”We can’t do this” is both inaccurate and harmfull. I believe ”We are not currently fixing this” and ”there is a need for stronger political alignment” are the more accurate descriptions…
> it’s lack of strong enough political consensus But this _is_ the psychological deficiency of our species.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uuuuh I have a flight today 8pm CT . What will this mean for airplanes?
According to the SWPC[0], the "SPACE WEATHER CONDITIONS" section displays the pertinent information: as of 5/10/2024 at 6:00 CST, the "24-Hour Observed Maximums" list "R3 S2 G4". The "Latest Observed" section shows "R1 S1 G4". According to NOAA Space Weather Scales [1], the effects of those events, their levels, and the corresponding hazards (including biological risks for the "S" category) are listed. It is unclear…
Above FL410 is rare, except for business jets that can cruise that high. It comes with extra requirements on oxygen masks etc.
Polar routes are not that rare, but depend on certification how far away from a suitable airport you can go.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source for this? My friend was asking about this.
FWIW I'm an aircraft mechanic and the only complaint I've ever heard related to solar storms was that the HF radio stopped working. Which isn't a radio thats going to be used or even installed on a typical airliner. Although it could also disrupt satellite communication causing some delays in flight planning and aircraft/crew turnaround. For a fun anecdote, when the HF radio fault was reported we weren't aware of the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to be a logistics officer for an Infantry battalion. Most of the comments down thread underestimate water consumption. Depending on the climate, you'll want the following daily quantities [1]: - 2-3 gallons for drinking - 1.5 gallons for hygiene (can skip for a while) - 0.5 gallons for food prep The planning factor for military operations was 8 gallons per person per day. Water is heavy—8 pounds per gallon—and…
8 ga of water per person per day is completely insane in disaster scenario. 2-3ga for drinking a day? Medical professionals recommend less than 1 for a normal person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linear scales usually don't have an intuitive upper limit that people can understand ("is 10000 bad?"). Citizen-facing scales should optimally go from 0 (no concern) to 10 (either world-shattering event or highest value ever observed). Due to the nature of how many natural disasters scale in impact on humans, this will often result in an logarithmic scale.
Excellent point about linear, but sometimes log_10 accelerates pointlessly fast. log_2 might be more reasonable.
Good scale, I like it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humanity is good in sweeping problems under the rug and not preparing to various threats.
Are we not prepared though? Given other posts in this thread it seems to me that the effects are all calculated, expected and accounted for. I mean if it's strong enough to fry off-grid electronics then it's a different matter entirely, but consumer electronics has some protections against that, right?