One. One nuke could potentially disrupt it…but it’s not really advised for a few reasons:
If the conditions are still there that built up the storm, you’ve basically just nuked some wet air - if the pressure gradient remains and the waters are still warm, it very much could simply reform immediately
Dumping large amounts of energy into an active system might just turn it a different direction, unpredictably; you might steer a storm right into Miami that was just going to hit some empty marshes
Dumping large amounts of radioactive materials into a storm heading towards you might just end up making a giant somewhat radioactive hurricane, which is not great
Puerto Rico does not appreciate you dropping nukes just offshore
The #Stop in that URL just jumps to the section of the page about commonly asked methods for stopping hurricanes, but you could also interpret it as them kindly asking that you #Stop this line of inquiry immediately.
I know it doesn’t actually answer the question, but the numbers included give you an idea of the kind of scale you’d be looking at. tl;dr hurricanes are much much stronger than nukes, and also it seems unlikely that dropping a nuke on a hurricane would even affect it in the right way to disrupt it.
Nuclear Weapons
During each hurricane season, someone always asks “why don’t we destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them” or “can we use nuclear weapons to destroy a hurricane?” There always appear suggestions that one should simply nuke hurricanes to destroy the storms. 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.
Now for a more rigorous scientific explanation of why this would not be an effective hurricane modification technique. The main difficulty with using explosives to modify hurricanes is the amount of energy required. A fully developed hurricane can release heat energy at a rate of 5 to 20×10^13 watts and converts less than 10% of the heat into the mechanical energy of the wind. The heat release is equivalent to a 10-megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes. According to the 1993 World Almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate of 10^13 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.
If we think about mechanical energy, the energy at humanity’s disposal is closer to the storm’s, but the task of focusing even half of the energy on a spot in the middle of a remote ocean would still be formidable. Brute force interference with hurricanes doesn’t seem promising.
In addition, an explosive, even a nuclear explosive, produces a shock wave, or pulse of high pressure, that propagates away from the site of the explosion somewhat faster than the speed of sound. Such an event doesn’t raise the barometric pressure after the shock has passed because barometric pressure in the atmosphere reflects the weight of the air above the ground. For normal atmospheric pressure, there are about ten metric tons (1000 kilograms per ton) of air bearing down on each square meter of surface. In the strongest hurricanes there are nine. To change a Category 5 hurricane into a Category 2 hurricane you would have to add about a half ton of air for each square meter inside the eye, or a total of a bit more than half a billion (500,000,000) tons for a 20 km radius eye. It’s difficult to envision a practical way of moving that much air around.
Attacking weak tropical waves or depressions before they have a chance to grow into hurricanes isn’t promising either. About 80 of these disturbances form every year in the Atlantic basin, but only about 5 become hurricanes in a typical year. There is no way to tell in advance which ones will develop. If the energy released in a tropical disturbance were only 10% of that released in a hurricane, it’s still a lot of power, so that the hurricane police would need to dim the whole world’s lights many times a year.
Nuclear Weapons During each hurricane season, someone always asks “why don’t we destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them” or “can we use nuclear weapons to destroy a hurricane?”
Problem is… don’t think of a hurricane as “a thing”. It’s really not, it’s a manifestation of a larger system. It’s the result of something happening, and that thing that is happening is ongoing.
In the case of a tropical storm, it would depend on when you caught it and how big it was. If it’s over warm enough water, then it’s constantly being created. If you flipped some kind of magic switch that Thanos-blinked it out of existence, it would start coming back, because what is making it is still there.
To really get rid of it, permanently, you would need to cool the ocean underneath it off. Nukes can’t do that. I suppose you could try to boil the whole ocean away with nukes, but I have a feeling that would make the storm far worse.
To really get rid of it, permanently, you would need to cool the ocean underneath it off.
Or heat up the upper athmosphere. The hurricane does not feed of the warm ocean per se, it feeds of the temperature difference from top to bottom.
Well, you would still need a ton of nukes to accomplish it, and you would still have massive fallout wherever the system moves, but that way you at least have a chance of accomplishing something.
I’ve heard of systems being developed to quickly cool the water in a hurricane zone by releasing it from underneath as it crosses over. These zones would be built and filled long before a hurricane crossed them, then set off like traps.
No we just drop an ice cube into the ocean from time to time. And then the next time we make that ice cube bigger than the on last time. And that will solve our provlems once and for all.
We could start chipping away at that big ice cube in Antarctica. If that slides off into the ocean and heads north we could cool off the ocean and solve hurricanes forever!
I wonder if a large enough bomb, nuke or not, would create enough heat to mess up that balance, or just move enough air in the blast that it dissipates.
Obviously this would have to be a establish hurricane about to make landfall. But it would be cool as hell to watch.
Heat and moving the air out of the way (lowering the pressure) would make it stronger. Those are two of the three building blocks of a hurricane. The third being moisture.
You could maybe try nuking around it, kinda trying to implode it by blasting air towards the center. This would increase the pressure instead of lowering it. tbf I have no clue what would happen. lol
I might have these numbers off a little bit, but I learned recently that the amount of energy hitting the earth from the sun every second is equivalent to 2500 of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb going off.
Those were not large nukes by today’s standards, but weather is powered by the sun and it should give you a relative idea of how much energy is involved.
Basically there is farrrrr more energy in weather systems than in nukes.
I think a new group name for the amount of nukes it would take should be a “trump”. As in “They set off a trump of nukes because they thought it was a good idea but all it did was fuck everything up”
long story short: a nuke (even many) has only a tiny fraction of the power of a hurricane, so if you nuked a hurricane, not only would it have very little-to-no effect, now you’d have a hurricane full of deadly radiation contaminating everything it came into contact with.
This is actually where I got the idea for this question. Apparently, it takes a lot of nukes as well though I think hurricanes would take significantly more to disrupt.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community space dedicated to being helpful and answering each others’ questions on various topics.
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All posts titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That’s it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it’s in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content. Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Matrix Chat Room
To find & join our chat room, log into fluffychat.im(or any other matrix client) and put #nostupidquestions:matrix.org on the search bar.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
One. One nuke could potentially disrupt it…but it’s not really advised for a few reasons:
Actually, that nuke would not even disturb it much.
I feel like this is the equivalent of trying to put out a kitchen fire with hand grenades. Which is to say, very much the wrong tool for the job.
As others have noted, what you really want to do is get the storm over cool water and it will fizzle out on its own.
Casual reminder that the NOAA has an official section on their FAQ page about nuking hurricanes - https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd-faq/#Stop
The #Stop in that URL just jumps to the section of the page about commonly asked methods for stopping hurricanes, but you could also interpret it as them kindly asking that you #Stop this line of inquiry immediately.
I know it doesn’t actually answer the question, but the numbers included give you an idea of the kind of scale you’d be looking at. tl;dr hurricanes are much much stronger than nukes, and also it seems unlikely that dropping a nuke on a hurricane would even affect it in the right way to disrupt it.
Here’s the full text:
Nuclear Weapons During each hurricane season, someone always asks “why don’t we destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them” or “can we use nuclear weapons to destroy a hurricane?” There always appear suggestions that one should simply nuke hurricanes to destroy the storms. 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.
Now for a more rigorous scientific explanation of why this would not be an effective hurricane modification technique. The main difficulty with using explosives to modify hurricanes is the amount of energy required. A fully developed hurricane can release heat energy at a rate of 5 to 20×10^13 watts and converts less than 10% of the heat into the mechanical energy of the wind. The heat release is equivalent to a 10-megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes. According to the 1993 World Almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate of 10^13 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.
If we think about mechanical energy, the energy at humanity’s disposal is closer to the storm’s, but the task of focusing even half of the energy on a spot in the middle of a remote ocean would still be formidable. Brute force interference with hurricanes doesn’t seem promising.
In addition, an explosive, even a nuclear explosive, produces a shock wave, or pulse of high pressure, that propagates away from the site of the explosion somewhat faster than the speed of sound. Such an event doesn’t raise the barometric pressure after the shock has passed because barometric pressure in the atmosphere reflects the weight of the air above the ground. For normal atmospheric pressure, there are about ten metric tons (1000 kilograms per ton) of air bearing down on each square meter of surface. In the strongest hurricanes there are nine. To change a Category 5 hurricane into a Category 2 hurricane you would have to add about a half ton of air for each square meter inside the eye, or a total of a bit more than half a billion (500,000,000) tons for a 20 km radius eye. It’s difficult to envision a practical way of moving that much air around.
Attacking weak tropical waves or depressions before they have a chance to grow into hurricanes isn’t promising either. About 80 of these disturbances form every year in the Atlantic basin, but only about 5 become hurricanes in a typical year. There is no way to tell in advance which ones will develop. If the energy released in a tropical disturbance were only 10% of that released in a hurricane, it’s still a lot of power, so that the hurricane police would need to dim the whole world’s lights many times a year.
I think the exponent formatting broke
Also nature be scary
Yeah sorry, I just copied and pasted
Do they though?
A lot.
Problem is… don’t think of a hurricane as “a thing”. It’s really not, it’s a manifestation of a larger system. It’s the result of something happening, and that thing that is happening is ongoing.
In the case of a tropical storm, it would depend on when you caught it and how big it was. If it’s over warm enough water, then it’s constantly being created. If you flipped some kind of magic switch that Thanos-blinked it out of existence, it would start coming back, because what is making it is still there.
To really get rid of it, permanently, you would need to cool the ocean underneath it off. Nukes can’t do that. I suppose you could try to boil the whole ocean away with nukes, but I have a feeling that would make the storm far worse.
Or heat up the upper athmosphere. The hurricane does not feed of the warm ocean per se, it feeds of the temperature difference from top to bottom.
Well, you would still need a ton of nukes to accomplish it, and you would still have massive fallout wherever the system moves, but that way you at least have a chance of accomplishing something.
Right, because as the air cools the moisture condenses. No cooling air, no condensation. Cool stuff, thank you for the correction.
So you’re saying we need a freeze ray for the water
I’ve heard of systems being developed to quickly cool the water in a hurricane zone by releasing it from underneath as it crosses over. These zones would be built and filled long before a hurricane crossed them, then set off like traps.
That’s exactly what I read. You can even nuke the ice after cuz nukes r fun
I also watched the Well There’s Your Problem on Operation Plowshare.
https://youtu.be/ek2P-Ui46GE
No we just drop an ice cube into the ocean from time to time. And then the next time we make that ice cube bigger than the on last time. And that will solve our provlems once and for all.
Just like daddy puts in his drink every morning!
Then he gets mad…
We could start chipping away at that big ice cube in Antarctica. If that slides off into the ocean and heads north we could cool off the ocean and solve hurricanes forever!
Do I need to add a /s here?
Haley’s comet would be the best bug free source of ice
I wonder if a large enough bomb, nuke or not, would create enough heat to mess up that balance, or just move enough air in the blast that it dissipates.
Obviously this would have to be a establish hurricane about to make landfall. But it would be cool as hell to watch.
Vote me for president, ill find out
Heat and moving the air out of the way (lowering the pressure) would make it stronger. Those are two of the three building blocks of a hurricane. The third being moisture.
Ah fuck.
So nuking a hurricane would make it stronger?
I still wanna try it
You could maybe try nuking around it, kinda trying to implode it by blasting air towards the center. This would increase the pressure instead of lowering it. tbf I have no clue what would happen. lol
Only one way to find out!
Just blow up the earth, no earth no hurricane.
I don’t know, but any amout of nukes that is enough to disrupt a hurricane is way the fuck worse than the hurricane would have been on its own
I might have these numbers off a little bit, but I learned recently that the amount of energy hitting the earth from the sun every second is equivalent to 2500 of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb going off.
Those were not large nukes by today’s standards, but weather is powered by the sun and it should give you a relative idea of how much energy is involved.
Basically there is farrrrr more energy in weather systems than in nukes.
I think a new group name for the amount of nukes it would take should be a “trump”. As in “They set off a trump of nukes because they thought it was a good idea but all it did was fuck everything up”
Some problems can’t be solved by nukeing them.
long story short: a nuke (even many) has only a tiny fraction of the power of a hurricane, so if you nuked a hurricane, not only would it have very little-to-no effect, now you’d have a hurricane full of deadly radiation contaminating everything it came into contact with.
Sounds like an interesting yet terrifying concept for a novel 🤔
5 minute short online video, youtube/any fediverse alternative.
Open: massive fucking hurricane.
Scene 2: officials standing around talking about it. One guy gets an idea. Let’s nuke it.
Scene 3: nuke viciously detonates dead centre of hurricane on ground.
Scene 4: hurricane turns orange. Narrator exclaims: “Well, that fucked it”
End
So basically a hurricane is Godzilla IRL
Reminds me of the time when a former U.S. President suggested ‘nuking hurricanes’ to stop them hitting America
https://theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/26/donald-trump-suggests-nuking-hurricanes-to-stop-them-hitting-america-report
@[email protected] How many nukes would it take to disrupt a hurricane?
@[email protected] ☝😢
The bot has been banned here, take it up with the mods, they’re the ones unnecessarily banning it.
Ah, ok. Now I see Thanks.
Five. No! Three!
So nuking a hurricane isn’t very realistic but what about bombing/nuking a tornado?
I’d rather have a tornado, thank you.
This is actually where I got the idea for this question. Apparently, it takes a lot of nukes as well though I think hurricanes would take significantly more to disrupt.