diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/nukwr10.txt | 1065 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/nukwr10.zip | bin | 0 -> 21229 bytes |
2 files changed, 1065 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/old/nukwr10.txt b/old/nukwr10.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bfefdd9 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/nukwr10.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1065 @@ +**Project Gutenberg Etext of Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War** +- Some Perspectives + + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check +the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!! + +Please take a look at the important information in this header. +We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an +electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations* + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and +further information is included below. We need your donations. + + +Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War - - - Some Perspectives + +by the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. + +October, 1996 [Etext #684] + + +**Project Gutenberg Etext of Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War** +*****This file should be named nukwr10.txt or nukwr10.zip****** + +Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, nukwr11.txt. +VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, nukwr10a.txt. + + +We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance +of the official release dates, for time for better editing. + +Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an +up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes +in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has +a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a +look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a +new copy has at least one byte more or less. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +fifty hours is one conservative estimate for how long it we take +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-two text +files per month: or 400 more Etexts in 1996 for a total of 800. +If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the +total should reach 80 billion Etexts. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by the December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000=Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only 10% of the present number of computer users. 2001 +should have at least twice as many computer users as that, so it +will require us reaching less than 5% of the users in 2001. + + +We need your donations more than ever! + + +All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/BU": and are +tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (BU = Benedictine +University). (Subscriptions to our paper newsletter go to BU.) + +For these and other matters, please mail to: + +Project Gutenberg +P. O. Box 2782 +Champaign, IL 61825 + +When all other email fails try our Executive Director: +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +We would prefer to send you this information by email +(Internet, Bitnet, Compuserve, ATTMAIL or MCImail). + +****** +If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please +FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives: +[Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type] + +ftp uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu +login: anonymous +password: your@login +cd etext/etext90 through /etext96 +or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information] +dir [to see files] +get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] +GET INDEX?00.GUT +for a list of books +and +GET NEW GUT for general information +and +MGET GUT* for newsletters. + +**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor** +(Three Pages) + + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG- +tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor +Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at +Benedictine University (the "Project"). Among other +things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this +etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors, +officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost +and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or +indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: +[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification, +or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or bydisk, book or any oth +er medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word pro- + cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the + net profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Association / Benedictine + University" within the 60 days following each + date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare) + your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time, +scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty +free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution +you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg +Association / Benedictine University". + +*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END* + + + + + +Scanned by Gregory Walker, gwalker@netcom.com. For an HTML +version of this document and additional public domain documents +on nuclear history, visit Trinity Atomic Web Site: +http://www.envirolink.org/issues/nuketesting/ + + + + + +WORLDWIDE EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR WAR - - - SOME PERSPECTIVES + +U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1975. + + + +CONTENTS + + + Foreword + Introduction + The Mechanics of Nuclear Explosions + Radioactive Fallout + A. Local Fallout + B. Worldwide Effects of Fallout + Alterations of the Global Environment + A. High Altitude Dust + B. Ozone + Some Conclusions + + Note 1: Nuclear Weapons Yield + Note 2: Nuclear Weapons Design + Note 3: Radioactivity + Note 4: Nuclear Half-Life + Note 5: Oxygen, Ozone and Ultraviolet Radiation + + + +FOREWORD + + +Much research has been devoted to the effects of nuclear weapons. But +studies have been concerned for the most part with those immediate +consequences which would be suffered by a country that was the direct +target of nuclear attack. Relatively few studies have examined the +worldwide, long term effects. + +Realistic and responsible arms control policy calls for our knowing more +about these wider effects and for making this knowledge available to the +public. To learn more about them, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency +(ACDA) has initiated a number of projects, including a National Academy of +Sciences study, requested in April 1974. The Academy's study, Long-Term +Worldwide Effects of Multiple Nuclear Weapons Detonations, a highly +technical document of more than 200 pages, is now available. The present +brief publication seeks to include its essential findings, along with the +results of related studies of this Agency, and to provide as well the basic +background facts necessary for informed perspectives on the issue. + +New discoveries have been made, yet much uncertainty inevitably persists. +Our knowledge of nuclear warfare rests largely on theory and hypothesis, +fortunately untested by the usual processes of trial and error; the +paramount goal of statesmanship is that we should never learn from the +experience of nuclear war. + +The uncertainties that remain are of such magnitude that of themselves they +must serve as a further deterrent to the use of nuclear weapons. At the +same time, knowledge, even fragmentary knowledge, of the broader effects of +nuclear weapons underlines the extreme difficulty that strategic planners +of any nation would face in attempting to predict the results of a nuclear +war. Uncertainty is one of the major conclusions in our studies, as the +haphazard and unpredicted derivation of many of our discoveries emphasizes. +Moreover, it now appears that a massive attack with many large-scale +nuclear detonations could cause such widespread and long-lasting +environmental damage that the aggressor country might suffer serious +physiological, economic, and environmental effects even without a nuclear +response by the country attacked. + +An effort has been made to present this paper in language that does not +require a scientific background on the part of the reader. Nevertheless it +must deal in schematized processes, abstractions, and statistical +generalizations. Hence one supremely important perspective must be largely +supplied by the reader: the human perspective--the meaning of these +physical effects for individual human beings and for the fabric of +civilized life. + + Fred C. Ikle + Director + U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency + + + +INTRODUCTION + + +It has now been two decades since the introduction of thermonuclear fusion +weapons into the military inventories of the great powers, and more than a +decade since the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union ceased +to test nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. Today our understanding of the +technology of thermonuclear weapons seems highly advanced, but our +knowledge of the physical and biological consequences of nuclear war is +continuously evolving. + +Only recently, new light was shed on the subject in a study which the Arms +Control and Disarmament Agency had asked the National Academy of Sciences +to undertake. Previous studies had tended to focus very largely on +radioactive fallout from a nuclear war; an important aspect of this new +study was its inquiry into all possible consequences, including the effects +of large-scale nuclear detonations on the ozone layer which helps protect +life on earth from the sun's ultraviolet radiations. Assuming a total +detonation of 10,000 megatons--a large-scale but less than total nuclear +"exchange," as one would say in the dehumanizing jargon of the +strategists--it was concluded that as much as 30-70 percent of the ozone +might be eliminated from the northern hemisphere (where a nuclear war would +presumably take place) and as much as 20-40 percent from the southern +hemisphere. Recovery would probably take about 3-10 years, but the +Academy's study notes that long term global changes cannot be completely +ruled out. + +The reduced ozone concentrations would have a number of consequences +outside the areas in which the detonations occurred. The Academy study +notes, for example, that the resultant increase in ultraviolet would cause +"prompt incapacitating cases of sunburn in the temperate zones and snow +blindness in northern countries . . " + +Strange though it might seem, the increased ultraviolet radiation could +also be accompanied by a drop in the average temperature. The size of the +change is open to question, but the largest changes would probably occur at +the higher latitudes, where crop production and ecological balances are +sensitively dependent on the number of frost-free days and other factors +related to average temperature. The Academy's study concluded that ozone +changes due to nuclear war might decrease global surface temperatures by +only negligible amounts or by as much as a few degrees. To calibrate the +significance of this, the study mentioned that a cooling of even 1 degree +centigrade would eliminate commercial wheat growing in Canada. + +Thus, the possibility of a serious increase in ultraviolet radiation has +been added to widespread radioactive fallout as a fearsome consequence of +the large-scale use of nuclear weapons. And it is likely that we must +reckon with still other complex and subtle processes, global in scope, +which could seriously threaten the health of distant populations in the +event of an all-out nuclear war. + +Up to now, many of the important discoveries about nuclear weapon effects +have been made not through deliberate scientific inquiry but by accident. +And as the following historical examples show, there has been a series of +surprises. + +"Castle/Bravo" was the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated by the United +States. Before it was set off at Bikini on February 28, 1954, it was +expected to explode with an energy equivalent of about 8 million tons of +TNT. Actually, it produced almost twice that explosive power--equivalent +to 15 million tons of TNT. + +If the power of the bomb was unexpected, so were the after-effects. About +6 hours after the explosion, a fine, sandy ash began to sprinkle the +Japanese fishing vessel Lucky Dragon, some 90 miles downwind of the burst +point, and Rongelap Atoll, 100 miles downwind. Though 40 to 50 miles away +from the proscribed test area, the vessel's crew and the islanders received +heavy doses of radiation from the weapon's "fallout”--the coral rock, soil, +and other debris sucked up in the fireball and made intensively radioactive +by the nuclear reaction. One radioactive isotope in the fallout, +iodine-131, rapidly built up to serious concentration in the thyroid glands +of the victims, particularly young Rongelapese children. + +More than any other event in the decade of testing large nuclear weapons in +the atmosphere, Castle/Bravo's unexpected contamination of 7,000 square +miles of the Pacific Ocean dramatically illustrated how large-scale nuclear +war could produce casualties on a colossal scale, far beyond the local +effects of blast and fire alone. + +A number of other surprises were encountered during 30 years of nuclear +weapons development. For example, what was probably man's most extensive +modification of the global environment to date occurred in September 1962, +when a nuclear device was detonated 250 miles above Johnson Island. The +1.4-megaton burst produced an artificial belt of charged particles trapped +in the earth's magnetic field. Though 98 percent of these particles were +removed by natural processes after the first year, traces could be detected +6 or 7 years later. A number of satellites in low earth orbit at the time +of the burst suffered severe electronic damage resulting in malfunctions +and early failure. It became obvious that man now had the power to make +long term changes in his near-space environment. + +Another unexpected effect of high-altitude bursts was the blackout of +high-frequency radio communications. Disruption of the ionosphere (which +reflects radio signals back to the earth) by nuclear bursts over the +Pacific has wiped out long-distance radio communications for hours at +distances of up to 600 miles from the burst point. + +Yet another surprise was the discovery that electromagnetic pulses can play +havoc with electrical equipment itself, including some in command systems +that control the nuclear arms themselves. + +Much of our knowledge was thus gained by chance--a fact which should imbue +us with humility as we contemplate the remaining uncertainties (as well as +the certainties) about nuclear warfare. What we have learned enables us, +nonetheless, to see more clearly. We know, for instance, that some of the +earlier speculations about the after-effects of a global nuclear war were +as far-fetched as they were horrifying--such as the idea that the +worldwide accumulation of radioactive fallout would eliminate all life on +the planet, or that it might produce a train of monstrous genetic mutations +in all living things, making future life unrecognizable. And this +accumulation of knowledge which enables us to rule out the more fanciful +possibilities also allows us to reexamine, with some scientific rigor, +other phenomena which could seriously affect the global environment and the +populations of participant and nonparticipant countries alike. + +This paper is an attempt to set in perspective some of the longer term +effects of nuclear war on the global environment, with emphasis on areas +and peoples distant from the actual targets of the weapons. + + + +THE MECHANICS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS + + +In nuclear explosions, about 90 percent of the energy is released in less +than one millionth of a second. Most of this is in the form of the heat +and shock waves which produce the damage. It is this immediate and direct +explosive power which could devastate the urban centers in a major nuclear +war. + +Compared with the immediate colossal destruction suffered in target areas, +the more subtle, longer term effects of the remaining 10 percent of the +energy released by nuclear weapons might seem a matter of secondary +concern. But the dimensions of the initial catastrophe should not +overshadow the after-effects of a nuclear war. They would be global, +affecting nations remote from the fighting for many years after the +holocaust, because of the way nuclear explosions behave in the atmosphere +and the radioactive products released by nuclear bursts. + +When a weapon is detonated at the surface of the earth or at low altitudes, +the heat pulse vaporizes the bomb material, target, nearby structures, and +underlying soil and rock, all of which become entrained in an expanding, +fast-rising fireball. As the fireball rises, it expands and cools, +producing the distinctive mushroom cloud, signature of nuclear explosions. + +The altitude reached by the cloud depends on the force of the explosion. +When yields are in the low-kiloton range, the cloud will remain in the +lower atmosphere and its effects will be entirely local. But as yields +exceed 30 kilotons, part of the cloud will punch into the stratosphere, +which begins about 7 miles up. With yields of 2-5 megatons or more, +virtually all of the cloud of radioactive debris and fine dust will climb +into the stratosphere. The heavier materials reaching the lower edge of +the stratosphere will soon settle out, as did the Castle/Bravo fallout at +Rongelap. But the lighter particles will penetrate high into the +stratosphere, to altitudes of 12 miles and more, and remain there for +months and even years. Stratospheric circulation and diffusion will spread +this material around the world. + + + +RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT + + +Both the local and worldwide fallout hazards of nuclear explosions depend +on a variety of interacting factors: weapon design, explosive force, +altitude and latitude of detonation, time of year, and local weather +conditions. + +All present nuclear weapon designs require the splitting of heavy elements +like uranium and plutonium. The energy released in this fission process is +many millions of times greater, pound for pound, than the most energetic +chemical reactions. The smaller nuclear weapon, in the low-kiloton range, +may rely solely on the energy released by the fission process, as did the +first bombs which devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The larger +yield nuclear weapons derive a substantial part of their explosive force +from the fusion of heavy forms of hydrogen--deuterium and tritium. Since +there is virtually no limitation on the volume of fusion materials in a +weapon, and the materials are less costly than fissionable materials, the +fusion, "thermonuclear," or "hydrogen" bomb brought a radical increase in +the explosive power of weapons. However, the fission process is still +necessary to achieve the high temperatures and pressures needed to trigger +the hydrogen fusion reactions. Thus, all nuclear detonations produce +radioactive fragments of heavy elements fission, with the larger bursts +producing an additional radiation component from the fusion process. + +The nuclear fragments of heavy-element fission which are of greatest +concern are those radioactive atoms (also called radionuclides) which decay +by emitting energetic electrons or gamma particles. (See "Radioactivity" +note.) An important characteristic here is the rate of decay. This is +measured in terms of "half-life"--the time required for one-half of the +original substance to decay--which ranges from days to thousands of years +for the bomb-produced radionuclides of principal interest. (See "Nuclear +Half-Life" note.) Another factor which is critical in determining the +hazard of radionuclides is the chemistry of the atoms. This determines +whether they will be taken up by the body through respiration or the food +cycle and incorporated into tissue. If this occurs, the risk of biological +damage from the destructive ionizing radiation (see "Radioactivity" note) +is multiplied. + +Probably the most serious threat is cesium-137, a gamma emitter with a +half-life of 30 years. It is a major source of radiation in nuclear +fallout, and since it parallels potassium chemistry, it is readily taken +into the blood of animals and men and may be incorporated into tissue. + +Other hazards are strontium-90, an electron emitter with a half-life of 28 +years, and iodine-131 with a half-life of only 8 days. Strontium-90 +follows calcium chemistry, so that it is readily incorporated into the +bones and teeth, particularly of young children who have received milk from +cows consuming contaminated forage. Iodine-131 is a similar threat to +infants and children because of its concentration in the thyroid gland. +In addition, there is plutonium-239, frequently used in nuclear explosives. +A bone-seeker like strontium-90, it may also become lodged in the lungs, +where its intense local radiation can cause cancer or other damage. +Plutonium-239 decays through emission of an alpha particle (helium nucleus) +and has a half-life of 24,000 years. + +To the extent that hydrogen fusion contributes to the explosive force of a +weapon, two other radionuclides will be released: tritium (hydrogen-3), an +electron emitter with a half-life of 12 years, and carbon-14, an electron +emitter with a half-life of 5,730 years. Both are taken up through the +food cycle and readily incorporated in organic matter. + +Three types of radiation damage may occur: bodily damage (mainly leukemia +and cancers of the thyroid, lung, breast, bone, and gastrointestinal +tract); genetic damage (birth defects and constitutional and degenerative +diseases due to gonodal damage suffered by parents); and development and +growth damage (primarily growth and mental retardation of unborn infants +and young children). Since heavy radiation doses of about 20 roentgen or +more (see "Radioactivity" note) are necessary to produce developmental +defects, these effects would probably be confined to areas of heavy local +fallout in the nuclear combatant nations and would not become a global +problem. + + +A. Local Fallout + +Most of the radiation hazard from nuclear bursts comes from short-lived +radionuclides external to the body; these are generally confined to the +locality downwind of the weapon burst point. This radiation hazard comes +from radioactive fission fragments with half-lives of seconds to a few +months, and from soil and other materials in the vicinity of the burst made +radioactive by the intense neutron flux of the fission and fusion +reactions. + +It has been estimated that a weapon with a fission yield of 1 million tons +TNT equivalent power (1 megaton) exploded at ground level in a 15 +miles-per-hour wind would produce fallout in an ellipse extending hundreds +of miles downwind from the burst point. At a distance of 20-25 miles +downwind, a lethal radiation dose (600 rads) would be accumulated by a +person who did not find shelter within 25 minutes after the time the +fallout began. At a distance of 40-45 miles, a person would have at most 3 +hours after the fallout began to find shelter. Considerably smaller +radiation doses will make people seriously ill. Thus, the survival +prospects of persons immediately downwind of the burst point would be slim +unless they could be sheltered or evacuated. + +It has been estimated that an attack on U.S. population centers by 100 +weapons of one-megaton fission yield would kill up to 20 percent of the +population immediately through blast, heat, ground shock and instant +radiation effects (neutrons and gamma rays); an attack with 1,000 such +weapons would destroy immediately almost half the U.S. population. These +figures do not include additional deaths from fires, lack of medical +attention, starvation, or the lethal fallout showering to the ground +downwind of the burst points of the weapons. + +Most of the bomb-produced radionuclides decay rapidly. Even so, beyond the +blast radius of the exploding weapons there would be areas ("hot spots") +the survivors could not enter because of radioactive contamination from +long-lived radioactive isotopes like strontium-90 or cesium-137, which can +be concentrated through the food chain and incorporated into the body. The +damage caused would be internal, with the injurious effects appearing over +many years. For the survivors of a nuclear war, this lingering radiation +hazard could represent a grave threat for as long as 1 to 5 years after the +attack. + + +B. Worldwide Effects of Fallout + +Much of our knowledge of the production and distribution of radionuclides +has been derived from the period of intensive nuclear testing in the +atmosphere during the 1950's and early 1960's. It is estimated that more +than 500 megatons of nuclear yield were detonated in the atmosphere between +1945 and 1971, about half of this yield being produced by a fission +reaction. The peak occurred in 1961-62, when a total of 340 megatons were +detonated in the atmosphere by the United States and Soviet Union. The +limited nuclear test ban treaty of 1963 ended atmospheric testing for the +United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, but two major +non-signatories, France and China, continued nuclear testing at the rate of +about 5 megatons annually. (France now conducts its nuclear tests +underground.) + +A U.N. scientific committee has estimated that the cumulative per capita +dose to the world's population up to the year 2000 as a result of +atmospheric testing through 1970 (cutoff date of the study) will be the +equivalent of 2 years' exposure to natural background radiation on the +earth's surface. For the bulk of the world's population, internal and +external radiation doses of natural origin amount to less than one-tenth +rad annually. Thus nuclear testing to date does not appear to pose a +severe radiation threat in global terms. But a nuclear war releasing 10 or +100 times the total yield of all previous weapons tests could pose a far +greater worldwide threat. + +The biological effects of all forms of ionizing radiation have been +calculated within broad ranges by the National Academy of Sciences. Based +on these calculations, fallout from the 500-plus megatons of nuclear +testing through 1970 will produce between 2 and 25 cases of genetic disease +per million live births in the next generation. This means that between 3 +and 50 persons per billion births in the post-testing generation will have +genetic damage for each megaton of nuclear yield exploded. With similar +uncertainty, it is possible to estimate that the induction of cancers would +range from 75 to 300 cases per megaton for each billion people in the +post-test generation. + +If we apply these very rough yardsticks to a large-scale nuclear war in +which 10,000 megatons of nuclear force are detonated, the effects on a +world population of 5 billion appear enormous. Allowing for uncertainties +about the dynamics of a possible nuclear war, radiation-induced cancers and +genetic damage together over 30 years are estimated to range from 1.5 to +30 million for the world population as a whole. This would mean one +additional case for every 100 to 3,000 people or about 1/2 percent to +15 percent of the estimated peacetime cancer death rate in developed +countries. As will be seen, moreover, there could be other, less well +understood effects which would drastically increase suffering and death. + + + +ALTERATIONS OF THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT + + +A nuclear war would involve such prodigious and concentrated short term +release of high temperature energy that it is necessary to consider a +variety of potential environmental effects. + +It is true that the energy of nuclear weapons is dwarfed by many natural +phenomena. A large hurricane may have the power of a million hydrogen +bombs. But the energy release of even the most severe weather is diffuse; +it occurs over wide areas, and the difference in temperature between the +storm system and the surrounding atmosphere is relatively small. Nuclear +detonations are just the opposite--highly concentrated with reaction +temperatures up to tens of millions of degrees Fahrenheit. Because they +are so different from natural processes, it is necessary to examine their +potential for altering the environment in several contexts. + + +A. High Altitude Dust + +It has been estimated that a 10,000-megaton war with half the weapons +exploding at ground level would tear up some 25 billion cubic meters of +rock and soil, injecting a substantial amount of fine dust and particles +into the stratosphere. This is roughly twice the volume of material +blasted loose by the Indonesian volcano, Krakatoa, whose explosion in 1883 +was the most powerful terrestrial event ever recorded. Sunsets around the +world were noticeably reddened for several years after the Krakatoa +eruption, indicating that large amounts of volcanic dust had entered the +stratosphere. + +Subsequent studies of large volcanic explosions, such as Mt. Agung on Bali +in 1963, have raised the possibility that large-scale injection of dust +into the stratosphere would reduce sunlight intensities and temperatures at +the surface, while increasing the absorption of heat in the upper +atmosphere. + +The resultant minor changes in temperature and sunlight could affect crop +production. However, no catastrophic worldwide changes have resulted from +volcanic explosions, so it is doubtful that the gross injection of +particulates into the stratosphere by a 10,000-megaton conflict would, by +itself, lead to major global climate changes. + + +B. Ozone + +More worrisome is the possible effect of nuclear explosions on ozone in the +stratosphere. Not until the 20th century was the unique and paradoxical +role of ozone fully recognized. On the other hand, in concentrations +greater than I part per million in the air we breathe, ozone is toxic; one +major American city, Los Angeles, has established a procedure for ozone +alerts and warnings. On the other hand, ozone is a critically important +feature of the stratosphere from the standpoint of maintaining life on the +earth. + +The reason is that while oxygen and nitrogen in the upper reaches of the +atmosphere can block out solar ultraviolet photons with wavelengths shorter +than 2,420 angstroms (A), ozone is the only effective shield in the +atmosphere against solar ultraviolet radiation between 2,500 and 3,000 A in +wavelength. (See note 5.) Although ozone is extremely efficient at +filtering out solar ultraviolet in 2,500-3,OOO A region of the spectrum, +some does get through at the higher end of the spectrum. Ultraviolet rays +in the range of 2,800 to 3,200 A which cause sunburn, prematurely age human +skin and produce skin cancers. As early as 1840, arctic snow blindness was +attributed to solar ultraviolet; and we have since found that intense +ultraviolet radiation can inhibit photosynthesis in plants, stunt plant +growth, damage bacteria, fungi, higher plants, insects and annuals, and +produce genetic alterations. + +Despite the important role ozone plays in assuring a liveable environment +at the earth's surface, the total quantity of ozone in the atmosphere is +quite small, only about 3 parts per million. Furthermore, ozone is not a +durable or static constituent of the atmosphere. It is constantly created, +destroyed, and recreated by natural processes, so that the amount of ozone +present at any given time is a function of the equilibrium reached between +the creative and destructive chemical reactions and the solar radiation +reaching the upper stratosphere. + +The mechanism for the production of ozone is the absorption by oxygen +molecules (O2) of relatively short-wavelength ultraviolet light. The +oxygen molecule separates into two atoms of free oxygen, which immediately +unite with other oxygen molecules on the surfaces of particles in the upper +atmosphere. It is this union which forms ozone, or O3. The heat released +by the ozone-forming process is the reason for the curious increase with +altitude of the temperature of the stratosphere (the base of which is about +36,000 feet above the earth's surface). + +While the natural chemical reaction produces about 4,500 tons of ozone per +second in the stratosphere, this is offset by other natural chemical +reactions which break down the ozone. By far the most significant involves +nitric oxide (NO) which breaks ozone (O3) into molecules. This effect was +discovered only in the last few years in studies of the environmental +problems which might be encountered if large fleets of supersonic transport +aircraft operate routinely in the lower stratosphere. According to a +report by Dr. Harold S. Johnston, University of California at Berkeley-- +prepared for the Department of Transportation's Climatic Impact +Assessment Program--it now appears that the NO reaction is normally +responsible for 50 to 70 percent of the destruction of ozone. + +In the natural environment, there is a variety of means for the production +of NO and its transport into the stratosphere. Soil bacteria produce +nitrous oxide (N2O) which enters the lower atmosphere and slowly diffuses +into the stratosphere, where it reacts with free oxygen (O) to form two NO +molecules. Another mechanism for NO production in the lower atmosphere may +be lightning discharges, and while NO is quickly washed out of the lower +atmosphere by rain, some of it may reach the stratosphere. Additional +amounts of NO are produced directly in the stratosphere by cosmic rays from +the sun and interstellar sources. + +It is because of this catalytic role which nitric oxide plays in the +destruction of ozone that it is important to consider the effects of +high-yield nuclear explosions on the ozone layer. The nuclear fireball and +the air entrained within it are subjected to great heat, followed by +relatively rapid cooling. These conditions are ideal for the production of +tremendous amounts of NO from the air. It has been estimated that as much +as 5,000 tons of nitric oxide is produced for each megaton of nuclear +explosive power. + +What would be the effects of nitric oxides driven into the stratosphere by +an all-out nuclear war, involving the detonation of 10,000 megatons of +explosive force in the northern hemisphere? According to the recent +National Academy of Sciences study, the nitric oxide produced by the +weapons could reduce the ozone levels in the northern hemisphere by as much +as 30 to 70 percent. + +To begin with, a depleted ozone layer would reflect back to the earth's +surface less heat than would normally be the case, thus causing a drop in +temperature--perhaps enough to produce serious effects on agriculture. +Other changes, such as increased amounts of dust or different vegetation, +might subsequently reverse this drop in temperature--but on the other hand, +it might increase it. + +Probably more important, life on earth has largely evolved within the +protective ozone shield and is presently adapted rather precisely to the +amount of solar ultraviolet which does get through. To defend themselves +against this low level of ultraviolet, evolved external shielding +(feathers, fur, cuticular waxes on fruit), internal shielding (melanin +pigment in human skin, flavenoids in plant tissue), avoidance strategies +(plankton migration to greater depths in the daytime, shade-seeking by +desert iguanas) and, in almost all organisms but placental mammals, +elaborate mechanisms to repair photochemical damage. + +It is possible, however, that a major increase in solar ultraviolet might +overwhelm the defenses of some and perhaps many terrestrial life forms. +Both direct and indirect damage would then occur among the bacteria, +insects, plants, and other links in the ecosystems on which human +well-being depends. This disruption, particularly if it occurred in the +aftermath of a major war involving many other dislocations, could pose a +serious additional threat to the recovery of postwar society. The National +Academy of Sciences report concludes that in 20 years the ecological +systems would have essentially recovered from the increase in ultraviolet +radiation--though not necessarily from radioactivity or other damage in +areas close to the war zone. However, a delayed effect of the increase in +ultraviolet radiation would be an estimated 3 to 30 percent increase in +skin cancer for 40 years in the Northern Hemisphere's mid-latitudes. + + + +SOME CONCLUSIONS + + +We have considered the problems of large-scale nuclear war from the +standpoint of the countries not under direct attack, and the difficulties +they might encounter in postwar recovery. It is true that most of the +horror and tragedy of nuclear war would be visited on the populations +subject to direct attack, who would doubtless have to cope with extreme and +perhaps insuperable obstacles in seeking to reestablish their own +societies. It is no less apparent, however, that other nations, including +those remote from the combat, could suffer heavily because of damage to the +global environment. + +Finally, at least brief mention should be made of the global effects +resulting from disruption of economic activities and communications. Since +1970, an increasing fraction of the human race has been losing the battle +for self-sufficiency in food, and must rely on heavy imports. A major +disruption of agriculture and transportation in the grain-exporting and +manufacturing countries could thus prove disastrous to countries importing +food, farm machinery, and fertilizers--especially those which are already +struggling with the threat of widespread starvation. Moreover, virtually +every economic area, from food and medicines to fuel and growth engendering +industries, the less-developed countries would find they could not rely on +the "undamaged" remainder of the developed world for trade essentials: in +the wake of a nuclear war the industrial powers directly involved would +themselves have to compete for resources with those countries that today +are described as "less-developed." + +Similarly, the disruption of international communications--satellites, +cables, and even high frequency radio links--could be a major obstacle to +international recovery efforts. + +In attempting to project the after-effects of a major nuclear war, we have +considered separately the various kinds of damage that could occur. It is +also quite possible, however, that interactions might take place among +these effects, so that one type of damage would couple with another to +produce new and unexpected hazards. For example, we can assess +individually the consequences of heavy worldwide radiation fallout and +increased solar ultraviolet, but we do not know whether the two acting +together might significantly increase human, animal, or plant +susceptibility to disease. We can conclude that massive dust injection +into the stratosphere, even greater in scale than Krakatoa, is unlikely by +itself to produce significant climatic and environmental change, but we +cannot rule out interactions with other phenomena, such as ozone depletion, +which might produce utterly unexpected results. + +We have come to realize that nuclear weapons can be as unpredictable as +they are deadly in their effects. Despite some 30 years of development and +study, there is still much that we do not know. This is particularly true +when we consider the global effects of a large-scale nuclear war. + + + +Note 1: Nuclear Weapons Yield + + +The most widely used standard for measuring the power of nuclear weapons is +"yield," expressed as the quantity of chemical explosive (TNT) that would +produce the same energy release. The first atomic weapon which leveled +Hiroshima in 1945, had a yield of 13 kilotons; that is, the explosive power +of 13,000 tons of TNT. (The largest conventional bomb dropped in World War +II contained about 10 tons of TNT.) + +Since Hiroshima, the yields or explosive power of nuclear weapons have +vastly increased. The world's largest nuclear detonation, set off in 1962 +by the Soviet Union, had a yield of 58 megatons--equivalent to 58 million +tons of TNT. A modern ballistic missile may carry warhead yields up to 20 +or more megatons. + +Even the most violent wars of recent history have been relatively limited +in terms of the total destructive power of the non-nuclear weapons used. +A single aircraft or ballistic missile today can carry a nuclear explosive +force surpassing that of all the non-nuclear bombs used in recent wars. +The number of nuclear bombs and missiles the superpowers now possess runs +into the thousands. + + + +Note 2: Nuclear Weapons Design + + +Nuclear weapons depend on two fundamentally different types of nuclear +reactions, each of which releases energy: + +Fission, which involves the splitting of heavy elements (e.g. uranium); and +fusion, which involves the combining of light elements (e.g. hydrogen). + +Fission requires that a minimum amount of material or "critical mass" be +brought together in contact for the nuclear explosion to take place. The +more efficient fission weapons tend to fall in the yield range of tens of +kilotons. Higher explosive yields become increasingly complex and +impractical. + +Nuclear fusion permits the design of weapons of virtually limitless power. +In fusion, according to nuclear theory, when the nuclei of light atoms like +hydrogen are joined, the mass of the fused nucleus is lighter than the two +original nuclei; the loss is expressed as energy. By the 1930's, +physicists had concluded that this was the process which powered the sun +and stars; but the nuclear fusion process remained only of theoretical +interest until it was discovered that an atomic fission bomb might be used +as a "trigger" to produce, within one- or two-millionths of a second, the +intense pressure and temperature necessary to set off the fusion reaction. + +Fusion permits the design of weapons of almost limitless power, using +materials that are far less costly. + + + +Note 3: Radioactivity + + +Most familiar natural elements like hydrogen, oxygen, gold, and lead are +stable, and enduring unless acted upon by outside forces. But almost all +elements can exist in unstable forms. The nuclei of these unstable +"isotopes," as they are called, are "uncomfortable" with the particular +mixture of nuclear particles comprising them, and they decrease this +internal stress through the process of radioactive decay. + +The three basic modes of radioactive decay are the emission of alpha, beta +and gamma radiation: + +Alpha--Unstable nuclei frequently emit alpha particles, actually helium +nuclei consisting of two protons and two neutrons. By far the most massive +of the decay particles, it is also the slowest, rarely exceeding one-tenth +the velocity of light. As a result, its penetrating power is weak, and it +can usually be stopped by a piece of paper. But if alpha emitters like +plutonium are incorporated in the body, they pose a serious cancer threat. + +Beta--Another form of radioactive decay is the emission of a beta particle, +or electron. The beta particle has only about one seven-thousandth the +mass of the alpha particle, but its velocity is very much greater, as much +as eight-tenths the velocity of light. As a result, beta particles can +penetrate far more deeply into bodily tissue and external doses of beta +radiation represent a significantly greater threat than the slower, heavier +alpha particles. Beta-emitting isotopes are as harmful as alpha emitters +if taken up by the body. + +Gamma--In some decay processes, the emission is a photon having no mass at +all and traveling at the speed of light. Radio waves, visible light, +radiant heat, and X-rays are all photons, differing only in the energy +level each carries. The gamma ray is similar to the X-ray photon, but far +more penetrating (it can traverse several inches of concrete). It is +capable of doing great damage in the body. + +Common to all three types of nuclear decay radiation is their ability to +ionize (i.e., unbalance electrically) the neutral atoms through which they +pass, that is, give them a net electrical charge. The alpha particle, +carrying a positive electrical charge, pulls electrons from the atoms +through which it passes, while negatively charged beta particles can push +electrons out of neutral atoms. If energetic betas pass sufficiently close +to atomic nuclei, they can produce X-rays which themselves can ionize +additional neutral atoms. Massless but energetic gamma rays can knock +electrons out of neutral atoms in the same fashion as X-rays, leaving them +ionized. A single particle of radiation can ionize hundreds of neutral +atoms in the tissue in multiple collisions before all its energy is +absorbed. This disrupts the chemical bonds for critically important cell +structures like the cytoplasm, which carries the cell's genetic blueprints, +and also produces chemical constituents which can cause as much damage as +the original ionizing radiation. + +For convenience, a unit of radiation dose called the "rad" has been +adopted. It measures the amount of ionization produced per unit volume by +the particles from radioactive decay. + + + +Note 4: Nuclear Half-Life + + +The concept of "half-life" is basic to an understanding of radioactive +decay of unstable nuclei. + +Unlike physical "systems"--bacteria, animals, men and stars--unstable +isotopes do not individually have a predictable life span. There is no way +of forecasting when a single unstable nucleus will decay. + +Nevertheless, it is possible to get around the random behavior of an +individual nucleus by dealing statistically with large numbers of nuclei of +a particular radioactive isotope. In the case of thorium-232, for example, +radioactive decay proceeds so slowly that 14 billion years must elapse +before one-half of an initial quantity decayed to a more stable +configuration. Thus the half-life of this isotope is 14 billion years. +After the elapse of second half-life (another 14 billion years), only +one-fourth of the original quantity of thorium-232 would remain, one eighth +after the third half-life, and so on. + +Most manmade radioactive isotopes have much shorter half-lives, ranging +from seconds or days up to thousands of years. Plutonium-239 (a manmade +isotope) has a half-life of 24,000 years. + +For the most common uranium isotope, U-238, the half-life is 4.5 billion +years, about the age of the solar system. The much scarcer, fissionable +isotope of uranium, U-235, has a half-life of 700 million years, indicating +that its present abundance is only about 1 percent of the amount present +when the solar system was born. + + + +Note 5: Oxygen, Ozone and Ultraviolet Radiation + + +Oxygen, vital to breathing creatures, constitutes about one-fifth of the +earth's atmosphere. It occasionally occurs as a single atom in the +atmosphere at high temperature, but it usually combines with a second +oxygen atom to form molecular oxygen (O2). The oxygen in the air we +breathe consists primarily of this stable form. + +Oxygen has also a third chemical form in which three oxygen atoms are bound +together in a single molecule (03), called ozone. Though less stable and +far more rare than O2, and principally confined to upper levels of the +stratosphere, both molecular oxygen and ozone play a vital role in +shielding the earth from harmful components of solar radiation. + +Most harmful radiation is in the "ultraviolet" region of the solar +spectrum, invisible to the eye at short wavelengths (under 3,000 A). (An +angstrom unit--A--is an exceedingly short unit of length--10 billionths of +a centimeter, or about 4 billionths of an inch.) Unlike X-rays, ultraviolet +photons are not "hard" enough to ionize atoms, but pack enough energy to +break down the chemical bonds of molecules in living cells and produce a +variety of biological and genetic abnormalities, including tumors and +cancers. + +Fortunately, because of the earth's atmosphere, only a trace of this +dangerous ultraviolet radiation actually reaches the earth. By the time +sunlight reaches the top of the stratosphere, at about 30 miles altitude, +almost all the radiation shorter than 1,900 A has been absorbed by +molecules of nitrogen and oxygen. Within the stratosphere itself, +molecular oxygen (02) absorbs the longer wavelengths of ultraviolet, up to +2,420 A; and ozone (O3) is formed as a result of this absorption process. +It is this ozone then which absorbs almost all of the remaining ultraviolet +wavelengths up to about 3,000 A, so that almost all of the dangerous solar +radiation is cut off before it reaches the earth's surface. + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg Etext of Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War + diff --git a/old/nukwr10.zip b/old/nukwr10.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..466e152 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/nukwr10.zip |