So they are again beefing up a terrorism drama for simple third world copper theft problems, as they happen in all third world countries.
No terrorist would try to attack 100 minor power stations, they rather attack 1-2 big lines or grid stations.
What is much more dangerous is this marketing tactic to attack the problem ("terrorists") and the ongoing erosion of core infrastructure, like water, streets and the electric grid by simple neglection, probably caused by outsourcing support for it.
The US power grid quality is only comparable to India. You cannot trust them, and there are constant outages. Over- and undercurrents happen all the time, and consumers have to pay for the damages and outages.
Copper thieves are everywhere. Fight them, but don't call it terrorism. America will go dark, but not by terrorists. Don't blame the foreigners, they are homemade problems.
Government indifference (at all levels) to this risk is scary.
"The Metcalf substation (San Jose, CA, USA), while undergoing security upgrades, was hit again in August 2014. Intruders cut through fences and burglarized equipment containers, triggering at least 14 alarms over four hours. Utility employees didn’t call police or alert guards, who were stationed at the site, according to a state inquiry."
The problem is compounded by a large (and growing) number of electrical outages caused by copper thieves ripping out wiring; it becomes more difficult to distinguish mere theft from terrorism.
If it's difficult to distinguish mere theft from terrorism, then here's a hint: it isn't terrorism.
The "terror" in "terrorism" is there for a reason. If nobody can tell that you stole the wiring because you resent the British rule of the Northern Territories/the French occupation of Algeria/US bases in the middle east/whatever, then even if you intended your act to terrify others into getting their government to comply with your wishes, you have failed pretty badly.
But if it is not "terrorism" you don't funding, resources, support, publicity, page views. Everyone will learn this eventually and even though they all realize that it isn't really "terrorism" they'll say it is, because it ends up better for them if they do so.
The bigger problem with that article snippet is that the on-site guards weren't notified about the on-site alarms directly. If they are going to the expense of having guards on-site, why route the alarms to some other utility workers who then have to track down the on-site guards to tell them about a local alarm?
I'm not sure how your quote reflects "government indifference". The substation is owned by a private company (PG&E). Employees of this company failed to respond to the alarms and notify police.
If they called police and police failed to respond, then that would be a government failure. A private company's employees not responding, it's more unclear how that's indifference on the government's part.
There are almost certainly people in the FBI and other agencies who have considered the risk and have thought about it and watch for people trying to do this maliciously.
They just don't write things up and tell you what they have thought about and what they have in mind to handle it.
Hopefully, when things like substations go down and alarms go off people do, quietly, think about what the impact could have been.
However, it doesn't mean that an attack couldn't succeed.
That's what the OP is saying. Terrorists are likely to target infrastructure such as power stations, but a power outage caused by copper thieves looks much the same as a power station being taken down by terrorists.
Not to be confused with Zero Days (2016), which is also worth a watch.
Edit: I mis-read, you actually are talking about Zero Days (2016), which - I meant - shouldn't be confused with an earlier documentary called Zero Days - Security Leaks For Sale.
It really is. I can't imagine the havoc that an actually-trained strike team with some real equipment could cause.
I was reading Band of Brothers recently, and the description of how accurate and deadly their mortar-men were in a number of engagements was impressive. A light mortar is not the most high-tech weapon, is mass-produced by every army in the world, and does not take a huge amount of training to handle effectively. Not to mention that it can strike from up to a mile away, from a position without direct line-of-sight to the target; with an accomplice acting as an FO to send adjustments by text. Or skip the accomplice, and use a drone (Is the army doing this? Seems like a natural application). I don't want to imagine the indiscriminate horror that could be inflicted at any kind of open-air event.
The US army already has small portable tube-launched drones that function as a sort of guided mortar, although I can't remember the name at the moment.
Explosives need to be encased in something for best effect. You could use drones for a delivery device, but you would be limited in location selection due to what was both accessible and vulnerable.
So an obvious maybe long term solution here is to eliminate the need for a grid. The transition to battery solar powered homes would reduce the need for the upstream power supply and larger and transmission lines...
So an obvious long-term solution is to reduce the need for the grid. Many commercial and industrial facilities could run at least partly on local wind or solar, and the more decentralised capability there is, the less the vulnerability.
(I'm actually not just thinking about terrorists and suchlike. I'm also thinking about other risks, such as another Carrington event.)
Right but the same logic applies. Rather than 1 single point of failure you now have millions of mini power generators. The impact of one going is significantly less.
Years ago, I would listen to a daylight only AM radio station located in Boulder, Colorado. If I turned on the radio and didn't hear it, I assumed that a squirrel had taken out their power. This seemed to happen every few months. I think that squirrels may have hit upstream from our home or office power once on twice back then.
Which leads to an interesting question: if I pitch the problem as scary enough, can I get a DHS grant to deal with squirrels I suspect of aiming to nest in my gutters or attic?
Readit News
What is much more dangerous is this marketing tactic to attack the problem ("terrorists") and the ongoing erosion of core infrastructure, like water, streets and the electric grid by simple neglection, probably caused by outsourcing support for it. The US power grid quality is only comparable to India. You cannot trust them, and there are constant outages. Over- and undercurrents happen all the time, and consumers have to pay for the damages and outages.
Copper thieves are everywhere. Fight them, but don't call it terrorism. America will go dark, but not by terrorists. Don't blame the foreigners, they are homemade problems.
"The Metcalf substation (San Jose, CA, USA), while undergoing security upgrades, was hit again in August 2014. Intruders cut through fences and burglarized equipment containers, triggering at least 14 alarms over four hours. Utility employees didn’t call police or alert guards, who were stationed at the site, according to a state inquiry."
The problem is compounded by a large (and growing) number of electrical outages caused by copper thieves ripping out wiring; it becomes more difficult to distinguish mere theft from terrorism.
The "terror" in "terrorism" is there for a reason. If nobody can tell that you stole the wiring because you resent the British rule of the Northern Territories/the French occupation of Algeria/US bases in the middle east/whatever, then even if you intended your act to terrify others into getting their government to comply with your wishes, you have failed pretty badly.
Deleted Comment
If they called police and police failed to respond, then that would be a government failure. A private company's employees not responding, it's more unclear how that's indifference on the government's part.
They just don't write things up and tell you what they have thought about and what they have in mind to handle it.
Hopefully, when things like substations go down and alarms go off people do, quietly, think about what the impact could have been.
However, it doesn't mean that an attack couldn't succeed.
Please stop using that word so freely. Someone carving out a bunch of wire to make a few bucks at the scrap yard is not a terrorist.
Went to a SmartGrid conference in 2009. What I learned:
. $1T infrastructure is scheduled to be replaced,
. Power Co's operate on a 30 year amortization cycle,
. Utility regulations can not only change from state-to-state, but from county-to-county,
. The grid is hackable (known in 2009)
[Edit] spelling
Edit: I mis-read, you actually are talking about Zero Days (2016), which - I meant - shouldn't be confused with an earlier documentary called Zero Days - Security Leaks For Sale.
http://archive.is/HCwUJ
I was reading Band of Brothers recently, and the description of how accurate and deadly their mortar-men were in a number of engagements was impressive. A light mortar is not the most high-tech weapon, is mass-produced by every army in the world, and does not take a huge amount of training to handle effectively. Not to mention that it can strike from up to a mile away, from a position without direct line-of-sight to the target; with an accomplice acting as an FO to send adjustments by text. Or skip the accomplice, and use a drone (Is the army doing this? Seems like a natural application). I don't want to imagine the indiscriminate horror that could be inflicted at any kind of open-air event.
The US army already has small portable tube-launched drones that function as a sort of guided mortar, although I can't remember the name at the moment.
(I'm actually not just thinking about terrorists and suchlike. I'm also thinking about other risks, such as another Carrington event.)
Years ago, I would listen to a daylight only AM radio station located in Boulder, Colorado. If I turned on the radio and didn't hear it, I assumed that a squirrel had taken out their power. This seemed to happen every few months. I think that squirrels may have hit upstream from our home or office power once on twice back then.
Which leads to an interesting question: if I pitch the problem as scary enough, can I get a DHS grant to deal with squirrels I suspect of aiming to nest in my gutters or attic?
Deleted Comment