Trump Using Nukes Against Hurricanes ?

[Airbrush]

I heard in the news the Trump asked if he could use nukes to stop hurricanes.  Every time I saw it reported there was no argument against it, just scoffing at the idea like it was obviously ridiculous.  I realize that much of what Trump says is ridiculous, but I'd appreciate an explanation of why it is not a good idea to nuke hurricanes.

I suspected in my limited understanding of physics, that a fission bomb would irradiate vast amounts of water that would be an environmental catastrophe, and the prevailing winds would take the radioactive fallout right into the USA.  But what about a fusion bomb?  Would a hydrogen bomb generate as much radioactive fallout as a fission bomb?  I finally heard an expert say that a nuclear explosion wouldn't do anything to weaken the hurricane.  The biggest A bombs are a tiny amount of energy compared to a hurricane.  Heating water only makes a storm worse, right?

How would an expert explain why using a nuke on a hurricane is a BAD idea?

[Sensei]

22 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

but I'd appreciate an explanation of why it is not a good idea to nuke hurricanes.

..because it would contaminate entire hemisphere very quickly... ?

 

[Ghideon]

The idea about bombing hurricanes seems to be quite common; Hurricane research division has a FAQ entry and calculations using nukes: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html.

Energy levels, barometric pressure and amount of air needed makes the use of bombs seem very unrealistic to say the least.

 

Historical side note, here is a scan from 1959: THE USE OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVES IN METEOROLOGY, L. Machta, U. S. Weather Bureau with the introduction on page 54:

Quote

It is inevitable that man should speculate on the possibilities of weather modification when he achieves energy releases through nuclear explosives

reference  https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015077324005. 
 

[Curious layman]

31 minutes ago, Sensei said:

..because it would contaminate entire hemisphere very quickly... ?

 

What about using a 100 of these instead. 

MOAB (mother of all bombs)

might not do much but would be pretty awesome to watch.

[Airbrush]

2 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

What about using a 100 of these instead. 

MOAB (mother of all bombs)

might not do much but would be pretty awesome to watch.

That's a good question.  Let's wait and see what an expert has to say. 

I would guess that the heat only adds to the hurricane's power, but would the blast force disrupt the storm?

[StringJunky]

Quote

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 20x1013 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 1013 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.  https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html

 

[Janus]

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

 Would a hydrogen bomb generate as much radioactive fallout as a fission bomb? 

A hydrogen bomb needs a fission bomb primary to initiate the reaction.  A fusion-only bomb is purely hypothetical at this time.

[Curious layman]

29 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

"According to the 1993 world almanac, the entire human race used energy at a rate 1013 watts in 1990, a rate of less than 20% of the power of a hurricane"

Seriously Impressive, 

Never thought about the heat released  from a hurricane before. Makes me think about the Great Red Spot on Jupiter.

We really are puny when compared to Mother Nature, if there's a God, we'll call her Mother for sure.

 

[StringJunky]

7 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

Seriously Impressive, 

Never thought about the heat released  from a hurricane before. Makes me think about the Great Red Spot on Jupiter.

We really are puny when compared to Mother Nature, if there's a God, we'll call her Mother for sure.

 

It is and how much energy are we going to send into freefall when we push it over the edge with our geocidal activities

Edited August 27, 2019 by StringJunky

[koti]

48 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

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 20x1013 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 1013 watts in 1990, a rate less than 20% of the power of a hurricane.  https://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html

Impressive.

Edited August 27, 2019 by koti

[John Cuthber]

And then there's the other reason...

It is unlikely that nuking an embryonic hurricane would actually stop it.

But it is possible that you would alter the path.

 

Now imagine that a "nuked" storm  hits a city.

It would have missed if you hadn't tried nuking it, so it is now your fault that the city got hit.

You are now personally responsible for all the deaths, injury and damage.

I hope you have a good lawyer.

[Airbrush]

On 8/27/2019 at 2:00 PM, John Cuthber said:

It would have missed if you hadn't tried nuking it, so it is now your fault that the city got hit.

You are now personally responsible for all the deaths, injury and damage.
I hope you have a good lawyer.

Trump has many lawyers, assigned to multiple lawsuits.

[John Cuthber]

Hopefully, one of them will explain to him that this is a dumb idea.

[Phi for All]

7 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Hopefully, one of them will explain to him that this is a dumb idea.

They must spend a fortune on custom-made hand puppets for this type of briefing.

[ScienceNostalgia101]

What about vertical structures designed to capture the moving air and use it to turn turbines? Would that be more practical?

[Airbrush]

On 8/29/2019 at 11:02 AM, John Cuthber said:

Hopefully, one of them will explain to him that this is a dumb idea.

The story I heard in the news is that Trump asked this question multiple times.  Did he forget the answer was "it's a bad idea," or was he trying to find different opinions on the subject of nuking a hurricane?

[Phi for All]

36 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Did he forget the answer was "it's a bad idea," or was he trying to find different opinions on the subject of nuking a hurricane?

A third option is that he didn't understand any of the opinions offered, and kept fishing for something that made sense to him. This president often finds himself out of his depth and willfully uninformed. 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Airbrush said:

The story I heard in the news is that Trump asked this question multiple times.  Did he forget the answer was "it's a bad idea," or was he trying to find different opinions on the subject of nuking a hurricane?

That assumes there’s anyone (or anyone left) on his staff who would tell him he had a bad idea. 

[Curious layman]

What if we nuked a hurricane?

(Go to 2:27) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=erCiaINsRFU

 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Curious layman