“Un-natural” Calif.’s wildfires; AI & school shootings; Hiroshima anniversary, and more

A double-flash from the past and Israel’s nuclear arsenal (Leonard Weiss, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
On September 22, 1979, a US Vela satellite, designed to detect clandestine nuclear tests, recorded a “flash” off the coast of South Africa that every nuclear scientist monitoring the satellite’s detectors at the time believed fit the classic description of a nuclear explosion. Independent scientific studies of the event have reinforced the growing circumstantial evidence that the Vela event was an atmospheric nuclear test, and that Israel was the perpetrator, with possible assistance from apartheid South Africa’s navy. The US government’s position, held to this day, was to neither admit nor deny that a test took place. A panel of scientists carefully selected by the Carter White House produced a report in 1980 that did not rule out a test, but said the probability of its being something other than a test was more likely. That conclusion is now derided by nearly all independent observers who have studied and reported on the issue.
Important new and dispositive evidence that the “flash” was a nuclear test has been added recently by two respected scientists, writing in the journal Science & Global Security.
The new study should receive wide attention because it provides a test of the commitment by the international community to nuclear arms control and nonproliferation norms. At a time when public demands for nuclear transparency are loudly and justifiably trumpeted toward Iran and North Korea, which are pariahs in many Western eyes, it is illogical at best and hypocritical at worst for the world, and particularly the United States, to maintain public silence on Israel’s nuclear program, especially in the face of a violation of an important nuclear norm. For the sake of future progress on arms control, on steps to reduce nuclear risk, and on honest public as well as private communication among governments and their constituents to achieve such progress, it is time to end an existing double standard that has allowed Israel to escape accountability for developing advanced nuclear weapons by violating a major international treaty.

As the IoT grows, so do the risks (FCW)
The advent of the Internet of Things brings with it a host of benefits to the public sector: greater efficiency in operations, expanded machine-to-machine communications, instantaneous access to new data points and much more. In addition to the high-tech advances, however, widespread IoT adoption brings about a new concern of a comparatively low-tech variety for government entities: the impact on logical and physical security.

Solar geoengineering may be our last resort for climate change. What if it doesn’t work? (David Wallace-Wells, New York Magazine)
Over the last few years, as the climate news has grown increasingly bleak — not just in terms of what used to be called natural disasters but from academic research surveying likely future effects — this has become a somewhat common feeling among climate scientists and others most concerned about the fate of the planet: Worse comes to worst, we can pump some sulfur dioxide (SO2) into the air. Geoengineering used to be dismissed as sci-fi fantasy, an obviously foolish strategy with so many drawbacks it would be silly, if not suicidal, to consider as an alternative to dramatically cutting back on emissions. More and more, it is being talked about as a last-resort backstop, to be deployed when all our other interventions fail. And, more and more, that backstop seems at least like a real possibility, considering that, climate awareness and green-energy revolution notwithstanding, globally our emissions are not only not shrinking dramatically, as they need to, they are not shrinking at all. In fact, they are growing.
Today, those counting on that backstop got some bad news. In a new paper, published in Nature, Jonathan Proctor, Solomon Hsiang, Jennifer Burney, Marshall Burke, and Wolfram Schlenker offer what is the first study of geoengineering ever to appear in the journal. Their study is not a complete assessment of the risks of suspending sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere, focusing only on the likely agricultural effects. But their findings are not encouraging: The negative impact on plant growth, they say, would almost entirely cancel out the positive impact of cooling. In other words, at least in terms of agriculture, solar geoengineering promises no net benefit in addressing the impacts of global warming.

California lawmakers resume deliberations over wildfire safety, utilities’ response (Guy Kovner, The Press Democrat)
Pacific Gas & Electric is pushing hard for a change in the policy that would exempt PG&E from paying damages for fires in which the utility had acted responsibly.

Gov. Edwards repeats call for officers in every school, but still sizing up the need, expense (Charles Lussier, The Advocate, Baton Rouge)
A 19-member commission is in the midst of surveying and evaluating the safety measures currently in place at every public school in Louisiana.

The Hiroshima anniversary: 5 things you should know about nuclear weapons today (Michael Krepon, Vox)
Seventy-three years after the first use of the atomic bomb in wartime, commitment to arms control is fading.