By: Brandon Chynoweth

Shockwaves cause blast damage

Fireball and thermal radiation cause scorching and

burning of organic materials

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmYUf8uxgac

 Fallout: radioactive particles that fall to earth as a

result of a nuclear explosion

Occurs in two major types:

Early Fallout (occurs up to 24 hours after explosion)

Delayed Fallout (occurs days to years later)

 Particles range from 1

mm to 4 mm in size
Forms when irradiated
soil is thrown into the
atmosphere
Consists of over 300
radioactive specimens
Exact pattern depends on
prevailing winds and
descent rate of particles

 Particles are normally no

larger than a few

micrometers
Residence time: the
duration that a chemical
substance stays in a
certain locality
Stratosphere: 1 - 3 years
Troposphere: 1 - 2
months

 Returns to earth through precipitation

Can circumnavigate the earth in about 2 weeks
Animals and plants covered in a radioactive layer of

dust

 Mixing between

hemispheres more
uniform
Most fallout occurs
in temperate
climates
Longer residence
time means less
radioactivity
Large accumulations
of strontium-90

 Effects on animals

similar to humans
Genetic disorders
Reproductive
complications
Cancer
Complications for
crustaceans and shellfish

Dose in Grays

 Sea salt is contaminated

Sea floor in shallow

waters can be activated

Contaminated seawater
creates radioactive fish
After Bravo test, Japanese
fishing boats caught fish
that were too
contaminated for human
consumption

 Mark Harwell, et. al., Environmental Consequences of

Nuclear War: Volume II Ecological and Agricultural

Effects, John Wiley & Sons, 1989.
T.P. Ackerman et. al, Environmental Consequences of
Nuclear War: Volume I Physical and Atmospheric
Effects, John Wiley & Sons, 1989.
J.P. Robinson, Effects of Weapons on Ecosystems,
Pergamon Press, 1979.
Paul P. Craig & John A. Jungerman, Nuclear Arms
Race, McGraw Hill 1986,

Observed environmental effects from Hiroshima and

Nagasaki

 Model
Since it could be checked against subsequent real world

conditions, it is generally presumed to be roughly

accurate.
Problems with applying model to general cases include:
Different bomb type
Terrain
Weather conditions
Etc

 Bombs destroy by:

Primary Effects
Heat
Pressure changes
Secondary Effects
Impact of debris
Tertiary Effects
Impact of body into other things
Miscellaneous effects
Radiation
Exposure to dust
Blast induced fires

Heat and Pressure

 Hiroshima blast created fireball:

1200 ft in diameter
7200 degrees Fahrenheit
Obviously, anything flammable in this area was immediately
destroyed
This includes both flora and fauna

But, along with the other effects, the fire propagated beyond

this line.
It is, however, difficult to estimate the environmental impact,
since anything that could flee would have.

 Nagasaki blast created fireball:

Almost 2 kilometers in diameter
Also reached around 7000 degrees Fahrenheit
This would have a similar effect on the environment as the
bomb dropped over Hiroshima
The fire itself was contained somewhat due to the hilly
terrain
Tremendous amounts of damage were still done

 In addition to the fires the explosions created a

pressure wave in all directions, faster than the speed of

sound.
This pressure wave weakened as it spread away from
the point of explosion, but still wrought tremendous
damage on life forms, since a drastic change to
homeostasis is very dangerous.

 Pressure rose to around 5 psi at 1 mile from center of

Hiroshima blast

All mammals smaller than dogs within that radius

significantly harmed/killed from pressure

This roughly applies to non-mammals of similar size
Slightly farther for Nagasaki blast
While this bomb was stronger, its destructive power was

mitigated by the hilly terrain

 In animals that do not die, health concerns still exist:

These include damage to the lungs, heart, eardrums,

and eyes
In lab tests, orbital fractures occurred in between 6%
and 25% of dogs due to the eyeball and other
intraorbital tissues hydraulically transmitting the
pressure load to the walls of the orbit

Impact of Debris

 Another risk in a nuclear blast is from flying debris

Glass shards from windows, shattered by pressure wave

or fireball
Pieces of wood or metal or rocks

While both would be a hazard for animals in a city, those in

more rural areas could still be affected by pieces of wood

from trees

 Tests have been conducted on dogs to determine how

much of a hazard this could be.

Tests focused mostly on glass, though other debris does

exist.
Those tests assumed that any wound that punctured the
body cavity was serious, due to risk of infection.

Throwing the Body

 In addition to the danger of being hit by debris, there

is also the danger that the animal/plant itself will be

thrown around.
This is a danger due to rapid acceleration or rapid

deceleration upon impact with something.

Information on this is hard to find, but in general it

seems that an animal is more likely to be injured by

something else before it is injured by this

The Rest of the Story

 As we saw in a previous presentation:

Lethal dose for
Mammals ~350-800 rem
Bacteria ~5000 rem
Insects as high as 100-500 kilorem
Plants require high dosage

 Lizards, on the other hand

 Generally, this was not a good place to be.

 Generally, this was not a good place to be either.

 Generally, this was not a good place to be either.

 Given that Catholic social teaching and Just War theory are

against scorched earth policies, and nuclear weapons

have an undeniable effect on the environment, should their
use be limited or banned, or do they do a good that
outweighs these concerns?
In conflicts such as Vietnam, nuclear weapons were not
used. However, the environment suffered as much or
more, due to the use of things such as Agent Orange. Does
this change your answer to the above question? Is it
unavoidable that the environment suffer during wartime?
Is it irresponsible to focus on environmental effects in light
of the human tragedy that is associated with the dropping
of the bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

By Chase Cavanaugh

 Nuclear Winter is a theory that predicts a massive

global cooling due to byproducts of a nuclear war

being injected into the atmosphere.
Contrary to the theorys name, damage is not caused
by radiation, but rather the fires and dust put into the
atmosphere after a nuclear explosion.

 Looking at the effects of a nuclear explosion, we focus

on the ground based effects, mainly concerning heat,

force, and radiation.
Fires: release massive amounts of smoke and ash
This dust and ash gets into the upper atmosphere,
blocking out the sun and lowering the temperature
worldwide.

Similar Temperature Drop Scenarios

Needless to say, ashes and dust from the
fires of a nuclear weapon arent the only
way that the world can experience such a
global temperature drop.
There have been similar scenarios in
Earths past that have had the same
effect.
Examples:
-Krakatoa Eruption: 1883
Lowered Global Temperature by 1.2
degrees C for a year
Chixlub Crater (K-T impact)
-Meteorite that hit the Yucatan 65 million
years ago (over 180 km across)
-Winter brought on by the impact event
caused the extinction of the dinosaurs.

 Scientists had been

investigating the atmospheric

effects of nuclear weapons
before, but the term wasnt
coined until the 80s.
Carl Sagan coined the term in
1983, when he, with 4 other coauthors, published the TTAPS
study, which modeled the
atmospheric effects of a
nuclear war.

 TTAPS origninally predicted that if a full-scale nuclear

exchange occurred, global temperatures could

decrease by 15-25 degrees centigrade
Effects of the cooling could be catastrophic. Mass
agricultural failure, large drop in temperature, heating
of upper atmosphere would deplete ozone layer, smoke
could remain in upper stratosphere for years
Sagan Interview with Ted Turner, 1989
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lZUhz3Ss4U

 It should be noted that before Sagan, theorists had

already been predicting cooling effects from nuclear

fires
In 1982, Dr. Paul Crutzen of the Max Planck Institute
and Dr. John Birks of the University of Colorado had
already proposed such an effect
Sagan was just the one to bring it to public
consciousness.

 Due to the extreme predictions of the TTAPS study,

there was criticism in the scientific community of their

methodology.
In a revised paper published in 1990, Climate and
Smoke: An Appraisal of Nuclear Winter, the 5
scientists revised their predictions to a global drop of
only 5-10 degrees.
Critics of the original study said this change would just
be a nuclear autumn.

 Using modern methods of climate modeling, such as

those used to analyze global climate change, different

results have emerged, indicating that even a regional
nuclear war could have significant effects.
In 2007, a study by Brian Toon and Alan Robock.
Subject: India and Pakistan nuclear exchange
Arsenal: 50 nuclear warheads at each other
Result: Global Temperature drop of 1.25 C for 3 years
Only .03% explosive power of global arsenal
5 Megatons of smoke produced

 Even a small scale nuclear war will have profound

atmospheric effects on temperature and smoke in the

atmosphere.
The more nuclear weapons used, and the larger the
war, the worse the climatic effects.
With the increase in proliferation, the risk of regional
conflicts rises greatly, increasing the probability for
even a small-scale nuclear exchange.

 Before this presentation, what had you previously

heard about nuclear winter?

Do you think that with this new research, governments
will take the consequences of nuclear weapons usage
more seriously?
How do you think the threat of nuclear winter will
affect nonproliferation discussions between regional
powers.