by Bobby Akart
In a 2013 report, FERC concluded that if a limited number of substations in each of those interconnections were disabled, utilities would not be able to bring the interconnections back up again for an indeterminate amount of time. FERC’s conclusion isn't classified information. This information has been in government reports and widely disseminated on the internet for years.
FERC also noted that it could take far longer to return the electrical grid to full functionality than it did in 2003. Wellinghoff said, "If you destroy the transformers—all it takes is one high-caliber bullet through a transformer case, and it's gone, you have to replace it. If there aren't spares on hand—and in the event of a coordinated attack on multiple substations, any inventory could be exhausted—it takes months to build new ones.”
"Once your electricity is out, your gasoline is out, because you can't pump the gas anymore. All your transportations out, all of your financial transactions are out, of course because there are no electronics," Wellinghoff also stated.
FERC’s proposed solution was to break the system into a series of microgrids. In the event of a cascading failure, smaller portions of the country could isolate themselves from the collapse of the grid. There is a precedent for this. Princeton University has an independent power grid. When a large part of the critical infrastructure collapsed during Superstorm Sandy, the Princeton campus became a place of refuge for residents and a command center for first responders.
These doomsday scenarios may be beside the point because the electrical grid is already subject to a series of dangerous stresses from natural disasters. Sandy showed that the assumptions used to build many parts of the electrical infrastructure were wrong. The storm surge overwhelmed the substations, causing them to flood, and subsequently fail. Experts determined that significant portions of the grid might need to be moved to higher ground.
Even away from the coasts, extreme weather can threaten the system in unexpected ways. Some systems use gas insulation, but if the temperature drops low enough, the gas composition changes and the insulation fails. Power plants in warmer places like Texas aren't well-prepared for extreme cold, meaning power-generating plants could fail when the population needs them the most to provide power for heat. As utilities rely more heavily on natural gas to generate power, there's a danger of demand exceeding supply. A likely scenario is a blizzard, in which everyone cranks up their propane or natural gas-powered heating systems. As the system becomes overwhelmed, the gas company can't provide to everyone. Power providers don't necessarily have the first right of refusal from their sources, so they could lose their supply and be forced to power down in the middle of a winter storm.
Summer doesn't necessarily offer any respite. Even prolonged droughts can play a role. As consumers turn up their air conditioners, requests for more power will increase. There can be a ratcheting effect. If there are several days of consistently high temperatures, buildings will never cool completely. The demand from local utilities will peak higher and higher each day. Power plants rely upon groundwater to cool their systems. They will struggle to maintain cooling as the water itself heats up. Droughts can diminish the power from hydroelectric plants, especially in the western United States.
If such extreme weather continues to be the norm, the chaos that was unleashed on the grid by Sandy may have been a preview of the kinds of disruptions to the grid, that might become commonplace. As the New York Herald argued in 1859, referring to the Carrington event, "Phenomena are not supposed to have any reference to things past—only to things to come. Therefore, the aurora borealis must be connected with something in the future—war, or pestilence, or famine." Although the impact of solar storms was not fully understood at the time, the prediction of catastrophe remains valid.
What protective measures are possible?
The Obama administration has taken steps to replace some of the aging satellites that monitor space weather, and extra-high-voltage transformers that are vulnerable to solar storms. The administration’s new plan also calls for scientists to establish benchmarks for weather events in space, incorporating something similar to the Richter scale. The strategy also includes assessing the vulnerability of the power grid, increasing international cooperation, and improving solar-flare forecast technology — a crucial step.
But Dr. Peter Pry, Chairman of the EMP Commission, says that neither the White House, nor Congress, is taking the threat seriously enough or acting with the appropriate urgency. According to Dr. Pry, it would cost about two billion dollars— the amount of foreign aid we give to Pakistan — to harden the nation's power grid to minimize the damage from either a nuclear EMP or a solar flare. "If we suspended that [aid] for one year and put it toward hardening the electrical grid," Pry says, "we could protect the American people from this threat."
Is this Science Fiction or Reality?
All of the events described above are plausible and have their roots in history. What could happen? Global Panic. Martial Law. Travel Restrictions. Food and Water Shortages. An Overload of the Medical System. Societal Collapse. Economic Collapse.
This is why we prep. Prepping is insurance against both natural and man-made catastrophic events. The government now requires you to carry medical insurance. Your homeowner's insurance may include damage from tornadoes. Even though you may never incur damage from a tornado, you pay for that coverage monthly nonetheless. This is what preppers do. We allocate time and resources to protect our families, in the event of seemingly unlikely events, but events that are occurring daily or have historical precedent.
At Freedom Preppers, we hope none of these catastrophic events occur, but what if?
Cyber Warfare
We explored this concept in depth with the first book released into the Prepping for Tomorrow series, entitled Cyber Warfare. A #1 bestseller in an unprecedented eight Amazon categories, Cyber Warfare is a primer on the threats that we face as a nation, from the bad actors mentioned earlier. It explores the history of cyber attacks and discusses the nuances of the terminology. The United States and its allies have evolved over the past decade in their policies. Throughout the book, the problem of attribution is explored as cyber space allows hackers a convenient place to hide.
The all-important issue is raised: When does a cyber attack become an act of war?
After a thorough review of the threat that a devastating cyber attack poses for America, in particular, the critical infrastructure, Cyber Warfare provides preparedness solutions. Like Cyber Warfare, this guide will also help you answer the question:
What if the preppers are right?
Simply put, a cyber attack is a deliberate exploitation of computer systems. Cyber attacks are used to gain access to information, but can also be used to alter computer code, insert malware, or take over the operations of a computer-driven network.
Why would terrorists bother with an elaborate and dangerous physical operation—complete with all the recon and planning of a black ops mission—when they could achieve the same effect from the comfort of their home? An effective cyber attack could, if cleverly designed, produce a great deal of physical damage very quickly. The sheer amount of interconnections in digital operations would mean that such an attack could bypass fail-safes in the physical infrastructure that would normally stop cascading failures.
A single string of ones and zeros could have a significant impact. If a computer hacker could command all the circuit breakers in a utility to open, the system would be overloaded. Power utility personnel sitting in the control room could do that, but a proficient cyber-terrorist could do it as well. In fact, smart-grid technologies are more susceptible to common computer failures. New features that have been added to make the system easily manageable, might render it more vulnerable.
At least one major public official downplays the cyber attack scenario. The nation's top disaster responder, FEMA director, Craig Fugate shrugs at the threat of a power grid collapse.
"When have people panicked? Generally what you find is
the birth rate goes up nine months later," he said, then turned more serious: "People are much more resilient than the professionals would give them credit for. Would it be unpleasant? Yes. Would it be uncomfortable? Have you ever seen the power go out, and traffic signals stop working? Traffic's hell, but people figure it out."
Fugate's big worry in a mass outage is communication, he has said. When people can get information and know how long power will be out, they will handle it much better.
Don’t worry, the government will take care of you. Naïve.
Is there a precedent for the use of a cyber attack to take down a nation’s power grid? Let’s look at 2015.
On March 31, 2015, the majority of homes and businesses in Turkey lost power as the result of alleged cyber attack by Iranian proxies. Analysts initially declared this the first full-blown blackout utilizing Cyber Warfare. Months later, Turkey announced the blackout was caused by an equipment malfunction, not by a cyber attack. One has to wonder if the Turkish government denied the cyber intrusion in order to avoid admission of the vulnerability of its critical infrastructure to cyber attack.
On December 23, 2015, when a cyber attack on the power grid in Ukraine thrust that part of the nation into darkness, nearly 80,000 homes in Ukraine’s Ivano-Frankivsk region were without power. Believed to be part of Ukraine-Russian hostilities in the region, initial reports pointed to Russian hackers armed with a malware called BlackEnergy. This is the most recent successful attack on a power grid by hackers with the largest impact on a nation.
Reports reveal that a Russian proxy group known as Sandworm carried out the attack by remotely switching breakers to cut power, following the installation of the BlackEnergy malware in order to prevent technicians from identifying the attack. The attack also included a denial of service to the utility's phone systems. Robert Lee, a former US Air Force cyber warfare operations officer who helped compile the report, was quoted by Reuters as saying, "This was a multi-pronged attack against multiple facilities. It was highly coordinated with very professional logistics. They sort of blinded them in every way possible."
In poll after poll, one of the threats that concerns preppers is the use of a cyber attack to cause a grid-down scenario. There are many bad actors on the international stage. Each one is capable of wreaking havoc in the US, by shutting down our power grid and enjoying the resulting chaos.
No bombs. No bullets. No swordfights. Just a few keystrokes on the computer, and we're done.
What if?
EMP: Electromagnetic Pulse
EMP: Electromagnetic Pulse is a primer on the threats we face as a nation from an attack delivered by an Electromagnetic Pulse weapon. The constant barrage of cyber intrusions into the public and private sector have captured the news headlines in recent years, but it is time to refocus on the threat an EMP poses for our nation’s critical infrastructure.
Senator Ron Johnson, of Wisconsin, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, began hearings in the summer of 2015 on the threat of an EMP detonation over the United States.
The witnesses included, among others; James Woolsey, former Director of Central Intelligence, Joseph McClelland, Director of the Office of Energy Infrastructure Security at FERC, and Christopher Currie, Director of Homeland Security and Justice with the Government Accountability Office.
Their conclusion: The threat is real, and the need for the U.S. to prepare for this eventuality is critical. Chairman Johnson, in his opening remarks, stated that although the issue of EMP has been on the government radar for years, it has largely gone ignored. He pointed out the fact that not one of the suggestions put forward by the congressionally mandated EMP Commission, formed in 2002, has been put in place.
The science behind an electromagnetic pulse might be considered complicated and frightening to some. An EMP event can occur either naturally, (through solar flares, as discussed above) or artificially, as the result of a high-altitude nuclear explosion. The high-energy particles from such an explosion would cascade down to Earth, interacting with the planet’s magnetic field and destroying the electronic systems below. The resulting pulse of energy could destroy millions of transformers in America’s power grid, as the pulse travelled along transformer lines.
The possibility of man-made EMP events has grown in relation to the technological sophistication of America’s adversaries. It is a widely known fact, that both Russia and China already have this capability, and both countries have carried out serious work relating to the generation of EMP in recent years, as part of their respective military modernization programs.
Now, America’s enemies like Iran and North Korea may not be that far behind. Iran, for example, is known to have simulated a nuclear EMP attack several years ago, using short-range missiles launched from a freighter. In 2015, the Iranians fired a medium-range missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. North Korea, meanwhile, has acquired the blueprints to build an EMP warhead. In July of 2013, a North Korean freighter made it all the way to the Gulf of Mexico, through the Panama Canal, carrying two nuclear-capable missiles in the ship’s hold.
All of these countries have successfully orbited a number of satellites that could potentially evade U.S. early warning radars. The Strategic Defense Initiative, or Star Wars, as former President Ronald Reagan once called it, was widely panned as bizarre by political opponents and the mainstream media. Today, satellites carrying nuclear warheads are at the ideal altitude to generate an EMP across the entire continental US. Perhaps, President Reagan was right.
Scientists concur that such an attack, if it occurred, would have devastating consequences. A nuclear warhead detonated three hundred miles above St. Louis, Missouri, could collapse the entire nation's power grid. According to the EMP Commission, the recovery time from such a nationwide EMP event might be anywhere from one to ten years. In the meantime, ninety percent of Americans would likely die from starvation, disease, or societal collapse.
Are the threats of an EMP attack and Cyber Warfare mutually exclusive? Not necessarily. North Korea’s recent nuclear test and dictator Kim Jong Un’s claim that he has a hydrogen bomb, has shifted focus away from the cyber threat and onto EMP once again. Although the focus of attention has shifted, at least temporarily, away from cyber threats, the North Korean nuclear threat is just another dimension of the threat from cyber warfare.
Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea have all adopted an asymmetric warfare capability. Cyber warfare is not limited to computer viruses and hacking but is a combined-arms operation that includes the coordinated use of physical sabotage and an EMP attack. Our enemies consider a high-altitude nuclear EMP attack as the ultimate weapon. North Korea’s recent low-yield nuclear test, and its claim that it has a hydrogen bomb, are confirmation of the Congressional EMP Commission’s findings that North Korea is attempting to acquire a super-EMP weapon —a low-yield hydrogen bomb.
There are solutions, and the clarion bell has been rung. Our nation’s leaders have a duty to protect the homeland. This book is intended to raise awareness of the threat, and provide the reader with preparedness solutions. EMP: Electromagnetic Pulse will also help you answer the question:
What if?
EMP: A threat from above to America's soft underbelly below. The clock is ticking.
Books in the Prepping for Tomorrow Series
Cyber Warfare
EMP: Electromagnetic Pulse
Economic Collapse
THE DOOMSDAY SERIES
Author’s Introduction to the Doomsday Series
Are we on the brink of destroying ourselves?
Some argue that our nation is deeply divided, with each side condemning the other as the enemy of America. By way of example, one can point to the events leading up to the Civil War in the latter part of the 1850s, right up until the first cannon fire rained upon Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina. It’s happened before, and it could happen again.
The war of words has intensified over the last
several decades, and now deranged people on the fringe of society have taken matters into their own hands. Ranging from pipe bomb packages mailed to political leaders and supporters, to a gunman shooting congressmen at a softball practice, words are being replaced with deadly, violent acts.
To be sure, we’ve experienced violence and intense social strife in this country as a result of political differences. The Civil War was one example. The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., followed by the raging street battles over civil rights and the Vietnam War, is another.
This moment in America’s history feels worse because we are growing much more divisive. Our shared values are being forgotten and a breakdown is occurring between us and our government, and between us and the office of the presidency.
Our ability to find common ground is gradually disappearing. We shout at the television or quit watching altogether. Social media has become anything but social. We unfollow friends or write things in a post that we’d never dream of saying to someone’s face.
Friends and family avoid one another at gatherings because they fear political discussions will result in an uncomfortable, even hostile, exchange. Many in our nation no longer look at their fellow Americans as being from a different race or religion, but rather, as supporting one political party or another.
This is where America is today, and it is far different from the months leading up to the Civil War. Liberal historians label the conflict as a battle over slavery, while conservative historians tend to argue the issue was over state’s rights. At the time, the only thing agreed upon was the field of battle—farms and open country from Pennsylvania to Georgia.
