Ambient office = 74 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 97 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 90 nanosieverts per hour

Kalura lettuce from Central Market = 88 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 76 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 60 nanosieverts per hour

      Nuclear famine is a hypothesized famine considered a potential threat following global or regional detonations or nuclear weapons. It is thought that even subtle cooling effects resulting from a regional nuclear exchange could have a significant impact on agriculture production, triggering a food crisis amongst the world’s survivors. the primary mechanism for human fatalities would likely not be from nuclear blast effects, nor from thermal radiation burns, and not from ionizing radiation, but, rather, from mass starvation.
      Many processes could be involved leading up to a massive food shortage on a global scale. Crops, stored food and agricultural supplies such as fertilizers and pesticides could be instantly destroyed in nuclear blasts; nuclear contamination of soil, air and water could render food unsafe to eat, and crops unable to grow properly; and uncontrollable fires could impede normal agricultural or food gathering activities.
     A new study found that five island nations could produce enough food in spite of reduced sunlight and cooler temperatures caused by soot in the atmosphere following a nuclear war in the Northern Hemisphere.
     Professor Nick Wilson from the University of Otago, Wellington and independent researcher Doctor Matt Boyd from Adapt Research carried out the research for the new study. The study concluded that New Zealand, Australia, Iceland, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands were likely to have robust food self-sufficiency, even in an extreme nuclear winter.
     Dr. Boyd said that other countries might be able to produce enough food, However, other factors such as the collapse of industries and social functioning placed their resilience in doubt.
      Professor Wilson added that their findings are consistent with a 1980s study on the impact of nuclear war on New Zealand. However, the resilience of the country has declined since then as its dependence on imported diesel and digital infrastructure has grown.
      Wilson said, “Islands such as New Zealand are often very dependent on imports of refined liquid fuel, may lack energy self-sufficiency and are susceptible to breakdowns and shortages of critical commodities. While New Zealand could divert a high proportion of its dairy exports to supply the local market, it lacks the ability to manufacture many replacement parts for farm and food processing machinery.”
      Boyd said that the report also highlighted the precarious position many countries could find themselves in during a global catastrophe. He added that “New Zealand has the potential to preserve an industrial society through this kind of catastrophe, but it is not ‘plug-and-play. A decent amount of strategic planning needs to happen and across a long period of time, but this planning would have benefits in dealing with a wide range of extreme risks.” He noted that their report also indicates that there is a need to analyze nuclear winter and other abrupt sunlight-reducing scenarios as part of a comprehensive nation risk assessment.
      Boyd went on to say that “We are not aware of any plan for this kind of global catastrophe, including whether priorities for rationing have been considered. With the Government expected to release New Zealand’s first National Security Strategy this year, it is important the catastrophic risks associated with abrupt sunlight-reducing scenarios do not slip through the cracks.”

Ambient office = 95 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 114 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 114 nanosieverts per hour

English cucumber from Central Market = 63 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 96 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     Pink hydrogen already has some possible significant backers. These include EDF Energy which has suggested the possible production of pink hydrogen at Sizewell C, a three gigawatt nuclear power station being planned for the U.K. The EDF website says, “At Sizewell C, we are exploring how we can produce and use hydrogen in several ways. Firstly, it could help lower emissions during construction of the power station. Secondly, once Sizewell C is operational, we hope to use some of the heat it generates (alongside electricity) to make hydrogen more efficiently. Hydrogen produced from nuclear power can play a substantial role in the energy transition.” EDF is part of the multinational EDF group.
     EDF admits that there were challenges facing the sector and its development. It said, “Hydrogen is currently a relatively expensive fuel and so the key challenge for low carbon electrolytic hydrogen, whether produced from renewable or nuclear energy, is to bring down the costs of production. This needed supportive policies which encourage investment in early hydrogen production projects and encourage users to switch from fossil fuels to low carbon hydrogen. Growing the market for low carbon hydrogen will deliver the economies of scale and ‘learning by doing’ which will help to reduce the costs of production.”
     There is excitement about the possible role nuclear could play in hydrogen production and the wider energy transition. The IEA says that nuclear power has “significant potential to contribute to power sector decarbonization”. However, it goes without saying that it is not favored by all.
     Critics of pink hydrogen include Greenpeace. The environmental organization says, “Nuclear power is touted as a solution to our energy problems, but in reality it’s complex and hugely expensive to build. It also creates huge amounts of hazardous waste.”
     Rothman has spoken about the bigger picture and the role different types of hydrogen production might play. Could there ever be a time when the level of blue and grey hydrogen drops to zero?
     Rothman said, “It depends how long a timeframe you’re looking at. In an ideal world, they will eventually drop very low. Ultimately, we ideally get rid of all of our grey hydrogen, because grey hydrogen has a large carbon footprint and we need to get rid of it. As we improve carbon capture and storage, there may be a space for blue hydrogen and that’s yet to be evaluated, depending on the … developments there. The pink and green we know there has to be a space for because that’s where you really get the low carbon [hydrogen], and we know it should be, it’s possible to get there.”
     Fiona Rayment is the chief scientist at the U.K. National Nuclear Laboratory. It is a member of the trade association Hydrogen U.K. EDF is also a member. Rayment stressed that it will be important to have a range of options available for hydrogen generation in the years ahead. She added that “The challenge of net zero cannot be underestimated; we will need to embrace all sources of low carbon hydrogen generation to replace our reliance on fossil fuels.”

Ambient office = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 118 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 121 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 66 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 77 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
    There has been a lot of well-known public figures talking about the role that hydrogen may play in the global shift to a more sustainable future. Some have expressed skepticism about the usefulness of hydrogen but many think it could help reduce emissions in a number of sectors, including transportation and heavy industry. There has been a lot of media debate recently about hydrogen and its importance as a tool in securing a low-carbon future. However, the vast majority of its current production is still based on fossil fuels. According to a September 2022 tracking report from the international Energy Agency, low-emission hydrogen production in 2021 accounted for less than one percent of global hydrogen production. If hydrogen is going to have any role in the planned energy transition, then hydrogen generation needs to change in a big way.
     Rachael Rothman is co-director of the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Sheffield. She said, “The first thing to say is that hydrogen doesn’t really exist naturally, so it has to be produced. It has a lot of potential to help us decarbonize going forwards, but we need to find low-carbon ways of producing it in the first place.” Hydrogen production methods are identified by different colors. “About 95% of our hydrogen today comes from steam methane reforming and has a large associated carbon footprint, and that’s what’s called ‘grey’ hydrogen.”
     According to the energy firm National Grid, grey hydrogen is created from natural gas or methane. The greenhouse gases associated with the process are not captured. This constitutes the big carbon footprint that Rothman refers to. The dominance of such a method of hydrogen production is clearly not in keeping with net-zero goals. As a result, an array of sources, systems and colors of hydrogen are now being suggested as alternatives.
      These methods include green hydrogen, which refers to hydrogen produced using renewables and electrolysis in which electric current splits water into oxygen and hydrogen.
     Blue hydrogen indicates that natural gas was used in generation with carbon capture utilization and storage. There has been an intense debate about the role that blue hydrogen could play in the decarbonization of society.
      Pink hydrogen has been attracting attention lately. Its process incorporates electrolysis. However the key difference between it and green hydrogen is that pink generation depends on nuclear power.
      Rothman said, “If you split … water, you get hydrogen and oxygen. But splitting water takes energy, so what pink hydrogen is about is splitting water using energy that has come from nuclear. This means that the whole system is low carbon, because … there’s no carbon in water … but also the energy source is also very low carbon because it’s nuclear.”
     Rothman pointed out that while electrolysis could be used with nuclear power, something called a thermochemical cycle could also be driven by nuclear power. She explained that the thermochemical cycle uses extreme temperatures to split water into oxygen and hydrogen.
Please read Part 2 next

Ambient office = 103 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 135 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 137 nanosieverts per hour

Avocado from Central Market = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 83 nanosieverts per hour