July 28, 2006

Thinking About The Unthinkable

Bou has up a short post on nuclear math, and links to a post by _jon of We Swear looking at what would happen if Iran (or other party) engaged in a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv. It is an article well worth reading, but it brings to mind some other thoughts that must be considered. This is simplified a bit, but is at least accurate -- I leave precision for the experts.

First up, for anyone truly interested in what happens, how it happens, and how to prepare for any form of nuclear event (or any other major disaster), allow me to highly recommend Pulling Through by Dean Ing. Dean is a master of practical preparedness, as well as a master of speculative fiction. Myself, well, I've been dabbling in thinking about the unthinkable since a high school science fair project that was the design of an ultimate shelter intended to survive a full-scale exchange and multiple near misses.

Second, I'm not going to sit here and bore you with math and other exercises because exactly what happens is extremely dependent on how it happens. The latter is the key, and is the point most often missed in many discussions.

To start with, it depends on what type of nuclear event takes place. Was it a fission bomb? Fusion? Dirty? A fission bomb splits apart the atom, and is what took out Hiroshima. A fusion bomb is commonly known as a hydrogen bomb, and instead of splitting it fuses, harnessing the same process that fuels our sun. A dirty bomb is using nuclear waste or other materials spread by some form of conventional explosive. For this post, we will ignore special effects and jacketed weapons.

A fission bomb, because it splits, creates radioactive isotopes both in itself and with surrounding materials. A fusion bomb is considered cleaner, but is far more powerful. A dirty bomb is indeed dirty, but with luck will only affect a relatively small area and is simply an area denial munition writ nasty.

The next factor to consider is where detonation occurs. Air bursts are going to be the cleanest events, since they don't send as much secondary material into the air. They will have the largest blast and damage radii. Ground bursts are going to do less area damage, but will put a large amount of secondary material (fallout) into the air. A hypothetical penetration round that detonates below ground but breaches the surface will do the least area damage, but will leave a very nasty area and put up the largest amount of fallout.

Terrain features do count. Valleys can contain blast effects, limit initial radiation, and contain thermal effects. Mountains are going to block things, and even cause interesting "bounces" in shock waves and create blast shadows. The type of soil, underlying bedrock, and amounts of water present will also impact everything from blast effects to fallout.

The effects of either a fission or fusion are four-fold. First comes a thermal wave, moving at or near the speed of light. This is followed by a blast/pressure wave, which is really two parts. The first is the outward burst, followed by a return blast of air as the effective vacuum at/near the center of the blast pulls the air back (look at footage from blast tests to see what I mean). What happens next is usually a firestorm, as all the debris ignites and turns into a literal storm. The final stage is fallout, which varies based on the factors discussed above.

This also brings up a pet peeve of mine: radiation. The fact is, we are surrounded by radiation all the time, in the form of radio waves, visible light, invisible light (infrared and ultraviolet), and all the other flavors of the electromagnetic spectrum. I used to have fun when I taught a science course at a small college by waving a "detector" around and calling out oh-my-gosh-we're-surrounded-by-radiation. That tended to get their attention and participation. Radiation is not the problem, for without it life is not possible. The problem is with ionizing radiation.

There are three basic types of ionizing radiation: alpha, beta, and gamma. Alpha particles can be blocked by a sheet of paper or the skin; beta particles need a bit more shielding, such as wood; and gamma are the truly nasty things, needing concrete, thick earth, or such to stop them. None of them are good for you if they enter your body, but gamma is -- of course -- the worst.

When a nuclear blast takes place, your radiation exposure (and survival) depend on a number of factors. If you are close to the blast, above ground, etc., well, you are most likely toast. The further away you are, the better your chances of avoiding LD50 or an outright fatal dose. Also, if you are shielded by earth, concrete, etc., even if close, you may well be golden. The trick then is to avoid fallout, and the good news is that depending on your distance away you may have anywhere from about 30 minutes (close to the blast) to several hours to prepare for the fallout if downwind of the blast.

There is, of course, a lot more and I may cover it in a longer post. The short version is try to get out of major fallout path, stay below ground, filter air, and if you go out wear heavy clothing and a broad-brimmed floppy hat. Some form of breath filter is a great idea, as are safety glasses. Lot more there, just not up to it today.

A strike on Tel Aviv? Well, there is just no accurate way to plot it ahead of time without knowing the size of the weapon, the type of the weapon, how high (or low) it detonates, co-ordinates of detonation, etc. The short version -- it will be bad, and not just in terms of damage and loss-of-life. Keep in mind that Israel is reported to have nuclear weapons, and if they get nuked, they are quite likely to return the favor, possibly in spades.

Nuclear winter? No, a discredited concept based on a faulty two-dimensional model. The effects of any single blast will be detectable world-wide, though actual damage/harm from such is likely to be quite low (or even effectively non-existent), though the more bombs/nastier the bombs, the greater the effects. The psychological effects are quite likely to be the worst, not only in terms of panic by people poisoned by years of misinformation on radiation and such, but also in stepping over a line we have avoided for more than half a century. The more things fly, the easier it will be for others to join in. That scares me the most.

LW

Posted by wolf1 at July 28, 2006 01:35 AM | TrackBack
Comments

That last line is what truly scares me the most too. Once one country does it, nobody has to worry about being the first. I'm afraid it will be a commmon tool, if you will. Instead of trying to diplomatically solve things, instead of stretching the bounds of their tolerance because they don't want to send forces in or expend the money in a war, they'll think this is a quick tool from their armament tool box.

Nations such as the US and Europe don't think that way, but I fear 3rd world countries and whack jobs like the leader of N. Korea will.

I'm more nervous now than I was growing up during the cold war, and trust me, I was pretty nervous then at times.

Posted by: Bou at July 28, 2006 01:48 PM

.. thanks for this, LW... and yes, your last line is the most scary part...

Posted by: Eric at July 28, 2006 10:03 PM

"Pulling Through" is OOP by itself. However, Baen Books has it available as part of "The Rackman Files" (ISBN 0-7434-7183-0). Baen also offers it as one of their eBooks (at a nice price). It's made up of "Pulling Through", "Inside Job", "Vital Signs".

Posted by: Fred Kiesche at July 29, 2006 01:10 AM

And I would have included a link to my blog, but anything for blog spot dot com appears to be blocked.

So just look for me by searching for "The Eternal Golden Braid"!

Posted by: Fred Kiesche at July 29, 2006 01:11 AM

Scary hypothesis... Who knows, maybe the safest places in Israel are the West Bank settlements. They are the least likely places to be nuked by Arab terrorists...

Posted by: sonia belle at July 31, 2006 10:40 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?