Their conclusions suggested that nuclear-induced climatic effects would last much longer than first expected, resulting in what they dubbed a nuclear winter.Įnough sunlight would not penetrate the dark blanket of smoke to keep temperatures high on the ground, causing a harsh winter “in any season”.ĭisruptions from dust and soot would then be followed by longer term shifts in the atmosphere that were partly unpredictable, and then patterns resulting in a global cooling. They were concerned that a nuclear exchange could produce many fires with smoke so thick that it would produce an atmosphere-engulfing layer that reduced sunlight penetration, a concept they called ‘nuclear twilight’ (or nuclear dawn).Ī year later, five scientists based in the United States - including the atmospheric scientist Richard Turco and the astronomer Carl Sagan - took to better understanding these predictions through computer modelling. The climatic effect expected from a nuclear war was first studied in 1982 by the Dutch atmospheric scientist Paul Crutzen and his British colleague John Birks.
Younger generations may think of a scene from the Fallout video games.īut those who lived through the 1980s, a decade marked by renewed international tensions and crises, the largest global nuclear stockpile ever recorded in history, and books and films imagining nuclear doomsday, will remember what it was like to be on the cusp of nuclear catastrophe and an environmental disaster. In the remote scenario that the conflict in Ukraine escalates to nuclear exchange, the consequences would be dire and not just because of the enormous and horrific death toll.Įven a limited nuclear conflict in Ukraine that sees just one percent of the world’s nuclear stockpile exchanged is likely to bring devastation to the climate that would spread suffering and death globally.
0 kommentar(er)
