NUCLEAR WAR

The misery of a “limited” nuclear exchange

Any level of nuclear conflict will be horrific

Photo by author (Beach near Manzanita, Oregon, 2021)

The fear of nuclear war has been reawakened, and for good reason. I’ve heard a few commentators refer to the idea that such an event could kill “all life on earth.” While that’s an exaggeration (at the very least some microfauna would survive even in a worst case), a major exchange could certainly kill all humans, many immediately, and the rest the aftermath from fallout. I grew up in Omaha, which was on the target list because of the Strategic Air Command was based nearby, and we were told we’d be vaporized.

Destruction at this massive scale, much of it instantaneous, is certainly a horrific possibility, but its completeness is somehow perversely reassuring. Like, it would be over quick. But less drastic situations would be nightmarish in their own way, and could cause long-term suffering and social breakdown without the “relief” of extinction.

A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2020 modelled a scenario in which India and Pakistan fight a regional nuclear war and blow up just 50 bombs [see story]. They estimated that the particulates kicked up into the atmosphere by the blasts and the firestorms would cause a limited “nuclear winter” situation bad enough to significantly reduce food…