SailNet Community banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,167 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Deleting any reference to nuclear fallout which would make it inexcusable anyway...

Could a nuclear bomb blow a hurricane to smithereens? Or is the energy in a full size Cat 4 or Cat 5 so huge that a Nuc would do nothing?

Mark
 

·
Master Mariner
Joined
·
8,225 Posts
Deleting any reference to nuclear fallout which would make it inexcusable anyway...

Could a nuclear bomb blow a hurricane to smithereens? Or is the energy in a full size Cat 4 or Cat 5 so huge that a Nuc would do nothing?

Mark
Puleeze! Haven't the Russians and Japanese already put enough radiation into the atmosphere accidentally? Now some idiot wants to do so intentionally?
Of course, I might be a bit prejudiced as I live directly down wind, should this idiotic idea be used in the tropical mid-Atlantic Ocean. I'd rather take my chances with a hurricane, thank you very much.
Puleeze!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,790 Posts
What I read was the answer is “No.”. That a large strong hurricane releases many times more energy every few minutes than a typical nuclear weapon.

It’s not a dumb question.

But an article by hurricane researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) debunks that idea. They wrote that it's impossible to disrupt a hurricane with a nuclear bomb, since we don't have powerful enough bombs and because the explosives wouldn't shift the surrounding air pressure for more than a split second.

https://www.sciencealert.com/here-s-what-would-happened-if-you-nuked-a-hurricane-like-trump-reportedly-suggested
 

·
Weekend Sailor
Joined
·
133 Posts
Could a nuclear bomb blow a hurricane to smithereens? Or is the energy in a full size Cat 4 or Cat 5 so huge that a Nuc would do nothing?

Mark
Ok Mark, you piqued my interest: How does the energy in a Nuk compare to a Hurricane?

How big are Nucs?

"Hydrogen bombs of more than 50 megatons have been detonated, but the explosive power of the weapons mounted on strategic missiles usually ranges from 100 kilotons to 1.5 megatons."
( https://www.britannica.com/science/megaton )

How much energy is in Megaton Bomb
"One megaton is equivalent to 4.18 x 10^15 joules."
( The Energy from a Nuclear Weapon | Effects of Nuclear Weapons | atomicarchive.com )

How does that compare to a Hurricane?

"If we start by looking at just the energy generated by the winds, we find that for a typical mature hurricane, we get numbers in the range of 1.5 x 10^12 Watts or 1.3 x 10^17 Joules/day..
A hurricane also releases energy through the formation of clouds and rain (it takes energy to evaporate all that water). If we crunch the numbers for an average hurricane (1.5 cm/day of rain, circle radius of 665 km), we get a gigantic amount of energy: 6.0 x 10^14 Watts or 5.2 x 10^19 Joules/day!"

( https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/energy-hurricane-volcano-earthquake1.htm )

So, assuming these internet "Facts" found with less than 10 minutes research are reasonably correct, a typical hurricane has the energy equivalent of 10,000 Megaton Bombs over the course of a day. in a given minute, thats about 7 megatons. So, if you could find way to direct the energy to counter the forces, a brute force approach using explosions of this magnitude could be a formidable tool against hurricanes. Perhaps, only the wind energy portion needs to be addressed, making it more tenable, but still insane with current technology.

Interesting exercise. If someone has a several spare million to endow a foundation to study this hurricane control approach pending a clean way of releasing this energy is found, I'll gladly find some subject matter experts... ;-)

OTOH, I'm still trying to properly polish my fuel tanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,181 Posts
It’s not about comparing energy. It’s about a potential disruption of a particular wind pattern by creating a blast wave interference. Once the weather system is disorganized, it likely falls apart. Could H bomb do that? No idea. It’s way too theoretical. And of course also hopelessly impractical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,060 Posts
Would be curious not about dropping a bomb into the eye but rather detonation below it in the deep water. The energy for cyclonic storms is the warm water. If the detonation was deep enough and powerful enough could it force cold deep water up and thereby sap the strength of it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
Not a nuc but pretty sure would work...
My cousins wife really can talk up a storm, does not come up for air.
If strategically placed I am sure she could
resonate air waves to point of breaking up
pattern of a hurricane.
On second thought, much too dangerous.
Suggest continuing exploring nuc option.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,067 Posts
Such has been proposed for a test since the 1950s. There already are mostly 'clean' nuclear devices - ie. neutron bombs.

The gas-mechanics of such would seen plausible, initially. But, what to do the the massive momentum of atmosphere rotationally inflowing into the base of such rotating storm? .... the impact value would have to be extremely high to reverse the momentum!!!!
The initial scenario would be to disturb the inflow to the ultra low pressure core of the storm deliver sufficient enough pressure to shut down the intense 'spiraling upflow' in the eyewall(s).
All that stated, such would have to be done during the early 'development stage' realizing that the weather conditions that allowed the storm to initially form would still be viable to allow development later. .... you'd need a six-pack of neutron bombs ????

Ultimately a bad idea, as cyclones are natural mechanisms to transfer heat from the tropics to the higher latitudes .... we shouldnt 'mess' with mother nature by disturbing the 'equilibrium'.

Radiation and Fallout.
Back before the Sandinistas overwhelmed Nicaragua, there was a lot of serious discussion of using neutron bombs to help dig a new Atlantic to Pacific super wide canal through the valleys & mountain gaps of Nicaragua. Radiation yes, but only briefly, fallout - minimal. The late 1950s era 'Davy Crockett' field tactical atomic cannon supposedly used a 'clean' nuclear device, so that troops could quickly mop-up and occupy the area of the detonation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
525 Posts
The late 1950s era 'Davy Crockett' field tactical atomic cannon supposedly used a 'clean' nuclear device, so that troops could quickly mop-up and occupy the area of the detonation.
I've always been fascinated by the Davy Crockett. Round was too light to be effectively shielded so everyone handling it gets irradiated. Range was waaaaay to short for a crew in field conditions to survive the shot. But's that's not what the FM said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,188 Posts
Puleeze! Haven't the Russians and Japanese already put enough radiation into the atmosphere accidentally? Now some idiot wants to do so intentionally?
Of course, I might be a bit prejudiced as I live directly down wind, should this idiotic idea be used in the tropical mid-Atlantic Ocean. I'd rather take my chances with a hurricane, thank you very much.
Puleeze!
Let's not forget that we have to add our own nuclear disaster, Three Mile Island, which caused caused a two to ten times increase in lung cancer and leukemia in the plume path within ten miles of that nuclear accident.
 

·
al brazzi
Joined
·
2,076 Posts
Would be curious not about dropping a bomb into the eye but rather detonation below it in the deep water. The energy for cyclonic storms is the warm water. If the detonation was deep enough and powerful enough could it force cold deep water up and thereby sap the strength of it?
You're on to something here, maybe a bunch of dry Ice would be the right idea, To stick politics in a snatch it right back out, its a not so bad idea from a not so bright source, but temperature is the key not strength. Again all this is a theoretical guessing game. But hey looking seriously world wide at climate change without judgement is a step in the right direction. IMO
 

·
al brazzi
Joined
·
2,076 Posts
Not a nuc but pretty sure would work...
My cousins wife really can talk up a storm, does not come up for air.
If strategically placed I am sure she could
resonate air waves to point of breaking up
pattern of a hurricane.
On second thought, much too dangerous.
Suggest continuing exploring nuc option.
Sure hope shes not a sailor, who likes forums:devil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,015 Posts
Let's not forget that we have to add our own nuclear disaster, Three Mile Island, which caused caused a two to ten times increase in lung cancer and leukemia in the plume path within ten miles of that nuclear accident.
AFAIK there was no release of any nuclear material from Three Mile Island. If there was an increase of lung cancer downwind, it must have been from all the tobacco grown in the area. The famous picture of one of the cooling towers venting smoke/gas was actually a controlled release of pure steam containing no nuclear material.

Believe that surface detonations are a big no no unless you want to spread a lot of nuclear material around. With a surface detonation you get radiation from the bomb mixed with irradiated dust and debris from th surface. Above surface detonations don't spread a lot of nuclear material around. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were air bursts which left little lasting surface radiation and the cities were almost immediately reoccupied and rebuilt. The Pacific nuclear tests around Bikini Atoll were surface and underwater detonations and 60 years later are still too hot for human habitation. Same goes for Chernobyl.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top