Updated June 2020:
...and with the border conflict between India and Pakistan heating up yet again, an article by Alan Robock at Rutgers University
and Owen Brian Toon at the University of Colorado at Boulder looks at the
impact of a regional nuclear war between two of the world's lesser nuclear
powers; India and Pakistan.
As most of us recall, in the early 1980s, science
showed that a nuclear war between the Soviet Union and the United States would
drastically change the global ecosystem.
This concept was first proposed by renowned scientist, Carl Sagan, who published a paper in Parade
magazine on October 30, 1983 entitled "The Nuclear Winter: The World After
Nuclear War" which you can find here.
In this model, the smoke from fires resulting from the detonation of
nuclear weapons would envelop the earth and absorb sunlight, resulting in a
cold, dry and dark world. This world
would be incapable of sustaining plant life and would lead to the elimination
of food for the human race.
The research by Robock and Toon looks at the
ecological impact of a smaller scale conflict between India and Pakistan, two
nations which have the following nuclear inventory according to a study by David Albright:
1.) Pakistan (paper authored by David Albright in
2015):
2.) India (paper authored by David Albright et al
in 2015): between 77 and 123 nuclear weapons with the most likely number being
around 97.
Here is a table showing India's stockpile of highly
enriched uranium and plutonium:
According to the Arms Control Association, here is a graphic showing the global stockpile of nuclear weapons including their estimates for both India and Pakistan:
It appears that the yield of the warheads developed
by both India and Pakistan is roughly equivalent to 15-kilotons of TNT, about
the same as the bomb used on Hiroshima.
In this conflict, the authors assume that total of
100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons (roughly 0.4 percent of the world's total
inventory) were detonated on cities and industrial areas in both Pakistan and
India (i.e. 50 detonations for each nation).
The detonations would result in the following:
1.) more than 20 million deaths from the blasts,
fires and radioactivity.
2.) generation of three teragrams of smoke in
Pakistan and four teragrams of smoke in India (one teragram equals one million
metric tons).
Within 9 days, the particular matter from the fires
would blanket the central and southern region of the earth and a significant
part of the Asian continent as shown here:
In the darker coloured areas, less than half of the
sunlight would reach the earth's surface.
Within 7 weeks, the particulate matter would blanket the entire earth,
making the skies look perpetually overcast.
One of the key issues is that the smoke particles, which have an average
diameter of only 0.1 microns, would rise to the stratosphere. This layer of the atmosphere never receives
rain meaning that the microscopic particulate matter would have to slowly
settle out by falling towards the earths surface.
The climatic response to the atmospheric smoke
accumulation is as follows:
1.) reduction in sunlight.
2.) global average cooling of 1.25 degrees Celsius
or 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit - ten years after the nuclear exchange, temperatures
are still 0.5 degrees Celsius cooler than normal. Cooling would be more severe in middle and
high latitudes in both the northern and southern hemispheres.
3.) ten percent reduction in global precipitation
levels - this is due to the reduction in sunlight which reduces the amount of
evaporation, weakening the hydrologic cycle.
Drought was largely concentrated in the lower latitudes (i.e. closer to
the equator) with the volume of Asian monsoon rains falling by as much as 40
percent.
4.) the temperatures in the stratosphere would rise
by more than 50 degrees celsius because the concentration of black smoke
particles would absorb sunlight. This
heating would change the stratospheric wind patterns, carrying ozone-destroying
nitrogen oxides into its upper levels.
The combination of higher temperatures and higher nitrogen levels in the
stratosphere would reduce ozone at surface levels, allowing increased
ultraviolet radiation at ground levels.
As you can see from this posting, even a relatively
small scale regional nuclear exchange could have a substantial impact on
weather patterns. These changes in
temperature, precipitation and sunlight levels, would severely impact the
ability of farmers to grow food to feed billions of humans who already suffer
from food shortages in developing economies.
With the world still having a significant nuclear arsenal as shown here:
...we cannot rule out a scenario where humankind's
destiny is changed forever even if a relatively small nuclear exchange occurs in one small region of the earth.
Yes, there's evil in the world.
ReplyDeleteHow do we deal with it, you ask?
God exists.
PROVE IT.
Evil exists.
PROVE IT.
Lucifer exists.
PROVE IT.
Atheism exists.
PROVE IT.
Just did, bro.
Make Your Choice -SAW
What about the hundreds of thermo nuclear detonations done by the US, France, UK and Russia already into the megatons and not kilo tons?
ReplyDelete