VOOZH about

URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12741?error=cookies_not_supported&code=95a4575c-4f68-454a-aa97-9c895b81a167

⇱ A 500-kiloton airburst over Chelyabinsk and an enhanced hazard from small impactors | Nature

Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Abstract

Most large (over a kilometre in diameter) near-Earth asteroids are now known, but recognition that airbursts (or fireballs resulting from nuclear-weapon-sized detonations of meteoroids in the atmosphere) have the potential to do greater damage1 than previously thought has shifted an increasing portion of the residual impact risk (the risk of impact from an unknown object) to smaller objects2. Above the threshold size of impactor at which the atmosphere absorbs sufficient energy to prevent a ground impact, most of the damage is thought to be caused by the airburst shock wave3, but owing to lack of observations this is uncertain4,5. Here we report an analysis of the damage from the airburst of an asteroid about 19 metres (17 to 20 metres) in diameter southeast of Chelyabinsk, Russia, on 15 February 2013, estimated to have an energy equivalent of approximately 500 (±100) kilotons of trinitrotoluene (TNT, where 1 kiloton of TNT = 4.185×1012 joules). We show that a widely referenced technique4,5,6 of estimating airburst damage does not reproduce the observations, and that the mathematical relations7 based on the effects of nuclear weapons—almost always used with this technique—overestimate blast damage. This suggests that earlier damage estimates5,6 near the threshold impactor size are too high. We performed a global survey of airbursts of a kiloton or more (including Chelyabinsk), and find that the number of impactors with diameters of tens of metres may be an order of magnitude higher than estimates based on other techniques8,9. This suggests a non-equilibrium (if the population were in a long-term collisional steady state the size-frequency distribution would either follow a single power law or there must be a size-dependent bias in other surveys) in the near-Earth asteroid population for objects 10 to 50 metres in diameter, and shifts more of the residual impact risk to these sizes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

$199.00 per year

only $3.90 per issue

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Light curve of the Chelyabinsk airburst.
Figure 2: Observed and predicted shock characteristics for the Chelyabinsk airburst.
Figure 3: The estimated cumulative flux of impactors at the Earth.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boslough, M. B. & Crawford, D. A. Low-altitude airbursts and the impact threat. Int. J. Impact Eng. 35, 1441–1448 (2008)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Harris, A. W. What Spaceguard did. Nature 453, 1178–1179 (2008)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chapman, C. R. & Morrison, D. Impacts on the Earth by asteroids and comets: assessing the hazard. Nature 367, 33–40 (1994)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Collins, G. S., Melosh, H. J. & Marcus, R. A. Earth Impact Effects Program: a web-based computer program for calculating the regional environmental consequences of a meteoroid impact on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 40, 817–840 (2005)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chyba, C. F., Thomas, P. J. & Zahnle, K. J. The 1908 Tunguska explosion: atmospheric disruption of a stony asteroid. Nature 361, 40–44 (1993)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hills, J. G. & Goda, M. P. The fragmentation of small asteroids in the atmosphere. Astron. J. 105, 1114–1144 (1993)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Glasstone, S. & Dolan, P. J. The Effects of Nuclear Weapons 3rd edn, 100–105 (US Gov. Printing Office, 1977)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Harris, A. The value of enhanced NEO surveys. IAA-PDC13–05–09 (Planetary Defence Conference, IAA, 2013)

  9. Werner, S. C., Harris, A. W., Neukum, G. & Ivanov, B. A. The near-Earth asteroid size-frequency distribution: a snapshot of the lunar impactor size-frequency distribution. Icarus 156, 287–290 (2002)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Borovička, J. et al. The trajectory, structure and origin of the Chelyabinsk asteroidal impactor. Nature http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature12671 (this issue)

  11. Brown, P. G. et al. Analysis of a crater-forming meteorite impact in Peru. J. Geophys. Res. 113, 1–13 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Toon, O. B., Zahnle, K. J., Morrison, D., Turco, R. P. & Covey, C. Environmental perturbations caused by the impacts of asteroids and comets. Rev. Geophys. 35, 41–78 (1997)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Revelle, D. O. On meteor-generated infrasound. J. Geophys. Res. 81, 1217–1230 (1976)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. ReVelle, D. O. in Proc. Int. Astron. Union Symp. No. 236 (NEOs, our Celestial Neighbors: Opportunity and Risk) (eds Milani, A., Valsecchi, G. B. & Vokrouhlický, D. ) 95–106 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007)

  15. Boslough, M. B. & Crawford, D. Shoemaker-Levy 9 and plume-forming collisions on Earth. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 822, 236–282 (1997)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Brown, P. G., Spalding, R. E. & ReVelle, D. O. Tagliaferri, E. & Worden, S. P. The flux of small near-Earth objects colliding with the Earth. Nature 420, 294–296 (2002)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ens, T. A., Brown, P. G., Edwards, W. N. & Silber, E. Infrasound production by bolides: a global statistical study. J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 80, 208–229 (2012)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Silber, E. & ReVelle, D. O. Brown, P. G. & Edwards, W. N. An estimate of the terrestrial influx of large meteoroids from infrasonic measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 114, E08006 (2009)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ben-Menahem, A. Source parameters of the Siberian explosion of June 30, 1908, from analysis and synthesis of seismic signals at four stations. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 11, 1–35 (1975)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bland, P. A. & Artemieva, N. The rate of small impacts on Earth. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 41, 607–631 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ceplecha, Z. Influx of interplanetary bodies onto Earth. Astron. Astrophys. 263, 361–366 (1992)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ward, S. & Asphaug, E. Asteroid impact tsunami: a probabilistic hazard assessment. Icarus 145, 64–78 (2000)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Brachet, N. et al. in Infrasound Monitoring for Atmospheric Studies (eds Le Pichon, A., Blanc, E. & Hauchecorne, A. ) 77–118 (Springer, 2010)

  24. Brown, P. G. et al. The fall of the Grimsby meteorite—I: Fireball dynamics and orbit from radar, video, and infrasound records. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 46, 339–363 (2011)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Borovička, J. et al. The Košice meteorite fall: atmospheric trajectory, fragmentation, and orbit. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. http:dx.doi.org/10.1111/maps.12078 (2013)

  26. Tagliaferri, E., Spalding, R., Jacobs, C., Worden, S. P. & Erlich, A. in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids (ed. Gehrels, T. ) 199–221 (Univ. Arizona Press, 1994)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rabinowitz, D. Helin, E. Lawrence, K. & Pravdo, S. A reduced estimate of the number of kilometer-sized near-Earth asteroids. Nature 403, 165–166 (2000)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by the NASA co-operative agreement NNX11AB76A and the Czech institutional project RVO:67985815. D.P.D. acknowledges support from the Office of Naval Research. We appreciate discussions with F. Gilbert (of UCSD), J. Stevens (of SAIC), P. Earle and J. Bellini (of USGS). D. Dearborn provided assistance with video reductions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 3K7, Canada,

    P. G. Brown, M. Campbell-Brown, J. Gill, E. Silber, D. Uren, R. J. Weryk & Z. Krzeminski

  2. Centre for Planetary Science and Exploration, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5B7, Canada,

    P. G. Brown

  3. Département Analyse Surveillance Environnement (CEA/DAM/DIF), Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique, Bruyères-le-Châtel, 91297 Arpajon Cedex, France,

    J. D. Assink, N. Brachet & A. Le Pichon

  4. Laboratory for Atmospheric Acoustics, Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0225, USA,

    L. Astiz, C. de Groot-Hedlin, M. Hedlin & G. Laske

  5. Marshall Information Technology Services (MITS)/Dynetics Technical Services, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, 35812, Alabama, USA

    R. Blaauw & D. E. Moser

  6. Sandia National Laboratories, PO Box 5800, Albuquerque, 87185, New Mexico, USA

    M. B. Boslough & R. E. Spalding

  7. Astronomical Institute, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ 251 65 Ondrejov, Czech Republic,

    J. Borovička & P. Spurný

  8. International Data Center, Provisional Technical Secretariat, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty OrganizationPO Box 1200, A-1400 Vienna, Austria,

    D. Brown & P. Mialle

  9. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Stilleweg 2, 30655 Hannover, Germany,

    L. Ceranna

  10. Meteoroid Environments Office, EV44, Space Environment Team, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, 35812, Alabama, USA

    W. Cooke & A. Saffer

  11. Space Science Division, Naval Research Laboratory, 4555 Overlook Avenue, 20375, Washington DC, USA

    D. P. Drob

  12. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Hazard Information Service, 7 Observatory Crescent, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0Y3, Canada,

    W. Edwards

  13. Seismology Division, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, Wilhelminalaan 10, 3732 GK De Bilt, The Netherlands,

    L. G. Evers & P. Smets

  14. Department of Geoscience and Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN Delft, The Netherlands,

    L. G. Evers & P. Smets

  15. Infrasound Laboratory, University of Hawaii, Manoa 73-4460 Queen Kaahumanu Highway, 119 Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740-2638, USA,

    M. Garces

  16. ERC Incorporated/Jacobs ESSSA Group, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, 35812, Alabama, USA

    A. Kingery

  17. ET Space Systems, 5990 Worth Way, Camarillo, 93012, California, USA

    E. Tagliaferri

  18. Los Alamos National Laboratory, EES-17 MS F665, PO Box 1663 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, USA,

    R. Whitaker

Authors
  1. P. G. Brown
  2. J. D. Assink
  3. L. Astiz
  4. R. Blaauw
  5. M. B. Boslough
  6. J. Borovička
  7. N. Brachet
  8. D. Brown
  9. M. Campbell-Brown
  10. L. Ceranna
  11. W. Cooke
  12. C. de Groot-Hedlin
  13. D. P. Drob
  14. W. Edwards
  15. L. G. Evers
  16. M. Garces
  17. J. Gill
  18. M. Hedlin
  19. A. Kingery
  20. G. Laske
  21. A. Le Pichon
  22. P. Mialle
  23. D. E. Moser
  24. A. Saffer
  25. E. Silber
  26. P. Smets
  27. R. E. Spalding
  28. P. Spurný
  29. E. Tagliaferri
  30. D. Uren
  31. R. J. Weryk
  32. R. Whitaker
  33. Z. Krzeminski

Contributions

P.G.B., N.B., D.B., L.C., W.E., L.G.E., M.G., A.L.P., J.D.A., P.M., P. Smets and R.W. performed various aspects of the identification, measurement and interpretation of infrasound records. L.A., C.d.G.-H., M.H. and G.L. collected and identified the airburst signals in seismic recordings as well as analysing and interpreting the seismic data. P.G.B., R.B., J.B., W.C., J.G., A.K., D.E.M., R.W., A.S. and P. Spurny helped in identifying important videos and their geolocation and various aspects of their measurements. M.B.B. and M.C.-B. performed bolide entry modelling. D.P.D. provided atmospheric model data and interpretation. Z.K., J.G. and R.J.W. performed video lightcurve analysis and calibrations and helped with their interpretation as well as performing measurements of video dust cloud features. R.E.S. and E.T. facilitated and interpreted US Government Sensor data. D.U. performed window breakage analysis. P.G.B. and E.S. performed analysis of acoustic propagation and associated computer code development. P.G.B. wrote the manuscript. All authors commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. G. Brown.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information (download PDF )

This file contains Supplementary Tables 1-5, Supplementary Figures 1-7 and Supplementary Text and Data 1-7 comprising: 1. Infrasonic measurements and analysis procedures used to measure airburst yield; 2. Seismic measurements and analysis procedures used to estimate airburst yield; 3. - Analysis procedures for US Government sensor data and a discussion of the choice of radiative efficiencies; 4. Observational information, analysis and interpretation related to airblast window damage used to estimate overpressure; 5. Procedures used to calibrate the video-derived lightcurve; 6. Details of a fragmentation model; 7. Details of the CTH Hydrocode model. (PDF 2740 kb)

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, P., Assink, J., Astiz, L. et al. A 500-kiloton airburst over Chelyabinsk and an enhanced hazard from small impactors. Nature 503, 238–241 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12741

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12741

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

👁 Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing