Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     Xia mentions that her study relies on many assumptions and simplifications are about how the complex global food system would be affected by a nuclear war. But the numbers they produced were stark in their implications. Considering even the smallest war scenario studied, of an India-Pakistan conflict that produces only five million tons of soot, calorie production across the planet could drop by seven percent in the first five years after the war. In the forty-seven million ton India-Pakistan soot scenario, global average calories would fall by fifty percent. In the study’s worst-case scenario of a U.S.-Russia war, calorie production would drop by ninety percent three to four years after the war.
     The nations most affected by a nuclear war would be those as high latitudes because they already have a short season for growing crops. They would be cooled more dramatically after a nuclear war than tropical regions would. The U.K. would see sharper drops in food available than a country such as India that is located at lower latitudes. However, France, which is a major exporter of food, would fare relatively well, at least in the lower soot levels scenarios. This is because if their food exports were halted, they would have more food available for their own people.
      Another nation that would not be affected as nations in high latitudes would be Australia. It would be isolated from international trade in the wake of a nuclear war. Australia would likely rely mainly on wheat for food. Wheat would grow relative well in the cooler climate caused by the soot in the atmosphere. Xia and her team drew a world map with color coding indicating probably wide-spread starvation. Many countries are colored red for famine. Australia in contrast remained green for sufficient food even in the worst U.S.-Russia war. Xia said, “The first time I showed my son the map, the first reaction he had is ‘let’s move to Australia,’”
     Deepak Ray is a food-security researcher at the University of Minnesota in Saint Paul.  He said that the new study is an excellent step towards understanding the global food impacts of a regional nuclear war. However more work is required to accurately simulate the complex mix of how crops are produced around the world according to Ray. The research took into consideration national crop production numbers, but reality is much more nuanced, with different crops being grown in different regions of a country for different purposes.
      Nuclear war might appear to be less of a threat than during the Cold War. However, there are still nine countries with more than twelve thousand nuclear warheads among them. Understanding the potential consequences of nuclear war in detail could help nations better assess the risks. “It is rare to happen — but if it happens, it affects everyone. These are dangerous things.”
     It is obvious from the new study that a nuclear war, even a small one, would cause millions of deaths and great human suffering. It would deal a devastating blow to human civilization, crippling it or destroying it.

Climate bill: Could coal communities shift to nuclear? Djournal.com

Pentagon Blasts Russian Provocations at Ukrainian Nuclear Plant as ‘Height of Irresponsibility’ usnews.com

VIDEO: Joe Biden set to revive 2015 Iran nuclear deal abc.net.au

Sizewell C nuclear plant funding approved despite Tory split theguardian.com

Ambient office = 163 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 115 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 112 nanosieverts per hour

Mini Bellas mushroom from Central Market = 80 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 81 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
     I have posted about the devastating aftermath of even a small exchange of nuclear weapons would lead to a worldwide famine according to new research. Soot from burning cities and military targets would spread around the planet and cool it by reflecting sunlight back into space. The result would be a massive failure of crops worldwide. In a worst case scenario, billions of people would die.
     Lili Xia is a climate scientist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick led the team in the new research. She said, “A large percent of the people will be starving. It’s really bad.” Her research was published in the August 15 issue of the journal Nature Food. The report is the latest in a though experiment that has been going on for decades about the global consequences of nuclear war. Considering the danger of a nuclear war triggered by the war in Ukraine, this study is especially relevant. The Ukraine war has already disrupted global food supplies, which emphasizes the far-reaching impacts of a regional conflict.
     Discussions of nuclear war covers a range of lethal impacts form killing people directly in atomic detonations to the linger effects of radiation and other environmental pollution. Xia and her team wanted to look at more remote consequences farther from the scene of a war. They wanted to explore how people all around the plante could also suffer.
      Xia and her team modelled how the climate would change in different parts of the world following a nuclear war. They wanted to know how crops and fisheries would be affected by those changes. Xia’s team analyzed six different war scenarios. Each of these would inject different amounts of soot into the atmosphere. This would result in a drop of surface temperatures from two degrees to twenty degrees Fahrenheit which would last for at least a decade.
     A nuclear war between India and Pakistan which could be  triggered by their dispute over the Kashmir region, could toss between five millions and forty seven tons of soot into the atmosphere. The exact amount of soot would be dependent on how many warheads were exchanged and how many cities destroyed. On the other hand, a full nuclear war between the United States and Russia could produce one hundred and fifty million tons of soot. The global-encircling shroud of soot would last for years until the skies eventually cleared.
      Xia and her team used information from United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization. They calculated how declining crop yields and fishery catches after a nuclear war would affect the number of calories available for people to eat. They studied several options that would affect their calculations such as whether people continued to raise livestock or whether they routed some or all crops meant to feed livestock to feed human beings instead. The study assumed that there would be some repurposing of biofuel crops for human consumption. People would be forced to reduce or eliminate food waste. The researchers also assumed that international trade would stop as countries chose to feed their citizens rather than exporting food.
Please read Part 2 next

Zaporizhzhia nuclear workers: We’re kept at gunpoint by Russians bbc.com

Israel urges US to reject nuclear deal as Tehran signals willingness to sign jpost.com

Western Powers Stress Importance of Nuclear Safety in Ukraine – Downing Street usnews.com

California nuclear power plant extension challenged in legislative proposal business-standard.com

Ambient office = 77 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 91 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 88 nanosieverts per hour

Jalapeno pepper from Central Market = 80 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 80 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 69 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office = 60 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 129 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 132 nanosieverts per hour

Heirloom from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 99 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 85 nanosieverts per hour

China reconnects nuclear reactor after shutdown due to damage Techexplore.com

Ukraine: ‘We’d take a nuclear attack over being a part of Russia’ news.sky.com

Petition against dumping nuclear wastewater in Pacific mvariety.com

Eleven Arrestees Go To Court After Protesting Nuclear Weapons pressenza.com

Investigation blames human error for Seabrook nuclear plant siren nhpr.org

Bill Gates’ company TerraPower raises $750 million for nuclear energy and medicine innovation cnbc.com

One-year delay in Canadian repository site selection world-nuclear-news.org

DFS shows Lance ISL projects as ‘globally competitive’ world-nuclear-news.org

 

Ambient office = 72 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 122 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 123 nanosieverts per hour

Fig from Central Market = 89 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 73 nanosieverts per hour

Dover Sole from Central = 92 nanosieverts per hour