WASHINGTON, April 8, 2008
Study: Small Nuclear War Would Shred Ozone
Massive Fires From Even Limited Conflicts Could Devastate Atmosphere, Scientists Say
-
In this photo released by Pakistan's Defense Ministry, Pakistan's ballistic missile Hatf VI (Shaheen II) capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, lifts off at an undisclosed location in Pakistan, April 29, 2006. Scientists calculated that the hypothetical blasts during a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would send as much as five million metric tons of soot as high as 50 miles into the atmosphere. (AP Photo)
-
Interactive Nuclear Armed World The world's nuclear weapons powers, missile defense and a history of the nuclear weapons age.
-
Interactive Eye On The Environment Find out how global warming, air pollution and alternative forms of energy impact our world.
- Stories
- Iran Touts More Nuclear Advances
The countries involved would be devastated as well as fall victim to the ozone disaster, the scientists' analysis says.
Massive fires resulting from even a limited conflict would blast enough soot into the atmosphere to create an ozone hole over heavily populated areas, the researchers warned in a paper published Monday in the online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
A region of depleted ozone over the Antarctic, known as an ozone hole, has been a worry to scientists for years as it allows damaging ultraviolet radiation from the sun to reach Earth's surface. Some chemicals have been banned from use to help eliminate that hole.
Unlike the Antarctic, a nuclear-induced ozone hole would affect much of the world, causing damage to plants and animals and adding to skin cancer, eye damage and other effects in millions of people, according to researchers led by Michael J. Mills of the University of Colorado.
Mills' team used complex computer programs to model what would happen in the atmosphere in the event of a war between India and Pakistan in which each detonated 50 Hiroshima-sized nuclear explosives.
They calculated that the blasts would send as much as five million metric tons of soot as high as 50 miles into the atmosphere.
The soot and the heat from solar radiation would cause a series of chemical reactions that would break down the stratospheric ozone layer that protects Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation, they said.
"We would see a dramatic drop in ozone levels that would persist for many years," Mills said in a statement. "At mid-latitudes the ozone decrease would be up to 40 percent, which could have huge effects on human health and on terrestrial, aquatic and marine ecosystems."
They calculated that a 40 percent ozone decrease would result in a 132 percent increase in light damage to plants and a 213 percent increase in DNA damage associated with skin cancer.
The mid-latitudes are the regions between the tropics and the Arctic and are home to the largest numbers of people.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From SciTech
Add a Comment See all 66 Comments
- It is odd that all the nuclear testing done with some VERY VERY big nukes, bigger then even the major super powers would really use today, that somebody says that a handfull of crappy wanna-be nuke power detonations would truly disrupt the upper atmosphere as said in the claim.
There are better arguments to seek a goal of a world without nukes. If the world were to become a democracy, there would no justification for a few to be able to mass kill the many. One man, one gun, one vote. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by ubrew12 at 10:30 PM : Apr 08, 2008
So?
We''re still coming out of the last Ice age.
Greenland had settlements in the medieval period.
This fluctuation of climate has been going for eons,
too bad we''re getting too gullible,or maybe the snake oil salesmen are smarter. - Reply to this comment
- demslie said: "Global Warming was incorrect because the whole Earth is not warmer. "
Yes, the whole earth IS warmer. Satellites put up by NASA confirm that. - Reply to this comment
- Oh, sorry. Now it is called Global Climate Change because the proof for the warming went cold.
Posted by DemWatcher
Finally, someone with sanity. Global Warming was incorrect because the whole Earth is not warmer. Some parts of Africa and the Asian continent are much colder than averages for 10 and 20 years. Of course Democrats only want you to know that its all Bush''s fault so we cannot talk about climate change before January 20th 2001. - Reply to this comment
- Paging Jack Bauer!!
Posted by easeup at 09:34 PM : Apr 08, 2008
.............
He''s at a Greenpeace rally... he''ll get back to you soon!
LOL! - Reply to this comment
- Paging Jack Bauer!!
- Reply to this comment
- American scientists have determined that a regional nuclear war
- Reply to this comment
- Ooh! A made0up story of doom and gloom.
Just like Al Gore''s man-made GLOBAL WARMING!
Oh, sorry. Now it is called Global Climate Change because the proof for the warming went cold. - Reply to this comment
- Yet,our beloved prophet-Goracle-has no position whatsoever on the huge pile of firecrackers we stand on.
I guess is easier to stick to whatever sells in this day and age. - Reply to this comment
- No different than if a large volcano blows up, the one that blew up in 1816 affected weather and crops for years after.
"Some chemicals have been banned from use to help eliminate that hole."
BFD, my hairspray in comparison to the SPACE SHUTTLE taking useless trips spewing burnt hydrazine and other rocket propellents high into the atmosphere.
Another thing, this is not a HOLE, that is a misleading term its only a THINNING of the concentration, and it fills back in every year. - Reply to this comment
- "SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!!
sig heil, (more of the same) McCain!!!!
----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------
Posted by walt1944 at 05:52 PM : Apr 08, 2008"
Ya know, if a tenth of what you claim is true, then you''''re dead meat. They''''ll get the logs from CBS, track down your IP, and you''''d never be heard from again.
So, there is a bright side to it after all.
Posted by TheGateway1 at 08:07 PM : Apr 08, 2008
I''ll help hide him away somewhere if it comes to that. Whether you agree with him or not Walt''s posts are a great read. - Reply to this comment
- I am surprised we have not had a terrorist nuclear detonation by now.
A lot of US cities have been quietly practicing for just such an event.
Posted by donbl1 at 07:34 PM : Apr 08, 2008
Greetings loyal listener!
I too am very surprised terrorist have not nuked a major city or at the very least gassed the city. I have three rolls of duct tape under my desk (red, white, blue) in case I need to keep the toxic fumes out!! - Reply to this comment
- "SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!!
sig heil, (more of the same) McCain!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by walt1944 at 05:52 PM : Apr 08, 2008"
Ya know, if a tenth of what you claim is true, then you''re dead meat. They''ll get the logs from CBS, track down your IP, and you''d never be heard from again.
So, there is a bright side to it after all. - Reply to this comment
- There using fear wake up. Stop believing the BS
- Reply to this comment
- I am surprised we have not had a terrorist nuclear detonation by now.
A lot of US cities have been quietly practicing for just such an event. - Reply to this comment
- Ahhh, this is just theory. I think we need to actually drop a few nukes on Iran to really prove we know what we''''re talking about.
Posted by michaelt302 at 05:32 PM
How about we just drop a few small bombs on your house and then take pictures? I think that would do the trick. - Reply to this comment
- I agree with walt... how does one define "small" when it comes to a nuclear war?!
Really, would a country with dozens to thousands of nuclear missiles just stop at a couple, if such a war was to break out?
It''s like asking a fat person to only eat a couple of potato chips! - Reply to this comment
- When the nuclear war does come it''''ll be Cheney attacking Iran.
Posted by SgtRDS at 06:32 PM : Apr 08, 2008
He''ll use the Death Star instead. - Reply to this comment
- When the nuclear war does come it''ll be Cheney attacking Iran.
- Reply to this comment
- It will stop Global Cooling though.
- Reply to this comment
How gold pays for 
