Here's what the earth would be like after a nuclear war

Study assesses impact of 100 nuclear warheads dropping over India and Pakistan


News Desk October 13, 2016
PHOTO: AFP

The Earth could face dire consequences should there be a nuclear war. Knowledge of nuclear consequences will hopefully lead to the realisation that a nuclear war rhetoric is not something to throw around as a threat.

Russian news broadcaster Dmitry Kiselyov has warned of nuclear implications that may result as a consequence of "any impudent behaviour" by Washington towards Moscow.

No plans to pursue "no-first-use" policy: Pentagon chief

His remarks came after US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russia and Syria must be subjected to a war crimes investigation for recent attacks on Syrian civilians.

Kiselyov's remarks can be considered fairly inflammatory between the two nuclear-armed super powers. A study outlining the effects of a nuclear war show the severe impact on planet earth.

Defying UN, North Korea vows to strengthen nuclear capability

The study estimated the consequences to the planet after a limited, regional nuclear war, which assessed the impact of 100 nuclear warheads dropping over India and Pakistan -- a conflict considerably smaller than a Russo-American one.

The results of the nuclear outbreak in the study are extremely unpleasant, to say the least. Along with the hundreds of thousands of deaths, five megatons of black carbon are thrust into the atmosphere. Black carbon absorbs heat from the sun before it reaches the earth, while some of it comes back down as rain.

India, Pakistan could skid into nuclear war, top expert warns

This has an adverse effect because it causes atmospheric cooling. The effect on the temperature is profound. Earth's falling temperature would cause, among other things, less rain -- nine per cent less than usual five years after the strikes -- which would have an effect on crops, combined with increased frost.

Over time, Earth's ozone layer will be depleted by around 20 to 25 per cent in five years. More sunburns and skin cancer will occur because of this, and fewer crops will grow. This can lead to food shortages, even famine in some regions.

Therefore, it is fairly reasonable to conclude that, in light of the study, nuclear war is pretty bad and should be refrained from at all costs.

This article originally appeared on The Independent

COMMENTS (4)

Conscience | 7 years ago | Reply India never talks about its nuclear option. It even has a declared No First Use policy. It is the Pakistani Government, Military and other senior officials, who keep irresponsibly threatening India with using nuclear weapons. This has to stop totally if we really don't want nuclear holocaust in the subcontinent. In fact, even such a respectable newspaper like the Tribune is indirectly carrying the threat from the Pakistani Establishment of India and Pakistan "sliding" into a nuclear war if Kashmir is not resolved in Pakistan's favour. This is utterly irresponsible. Over Kashmir, between terrorism and talks, Pakistan chose terrorism. Now they are saying they want to talk. I think Pakistan needs to make up its mind: Talks or terror?
Conscience | 7 years ago | Reply India never talks about its nuclear option. It even has a declared No First Use policy. It is the Pakistani Government, Military and other senior officials, who keep irresponsibly threatening India with using nuclear weapons. This has to stop totally if we really don't want nuclear holocaust in the subcontinent. In fact, even such a respectable newspaper like the Tribune is indirectly carrying the threat from the Pakistani Establishment of India and Pakistan "sliding" into a nuclear war if Kashmir is not resolved in Pakistan's favour. This is utterly irresponsible.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ