Climate change, nuclear war, and what not
That the climate of our planet has become unpredictably erratic is no longer a debate. If the process behind it is not understood, its effect can be felt by virtually everyone - directly or otherwise.
All these brouhahas about the unpredictability of climate is caused by something that looks so minute on the surface but is significant in impact - a rise in the average global temperature. Otherwise known as global warming.
Ordinarily, the earth should be icily cold. But for the activities of greenhouse gases. These gases are able to form a blanket in the earth's atmosphere and prevent reflected solar radiation from escaping back to space.
The amount of reflected solar radiation trapped by greenhouse gases is directly proportional to their concentrations in the atmosphere. In the past, everything is in equilibrium. The atmosphere has just enough greenhouse gas concentration to give us the required warmth.
Do you get the drift now?
Through our activities, we have been silently emitting more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. What you see is surely what you get. Our planet, thus, keep getting warmer by the day.
So what is the fuss about getting warmer?
Temperature is central and directly or indirectly controls other climatic factors - wind, precipitation, just name it. Just a 1 degree Celsius rise in the global average temperature may have huge and unpredictable multiplier effects on other climatic factors.
Do you see all the flooding, diminishing glaciers, rise in sea levels, and other global disasters that the world has been experiencing? Yea, those are some of the direct consequences of climate change. The indirect consequences? You really don't wanna know. Let me just hint that the increase in the global hunger index is one of them.
Way forward?
It seems we have crossed the rubicon. Unless, perhaps, a miracle happens. Scientists have bellowed, plead, predicted, and sacrificed but all to no avail. Many are just not ready to modify their lifestyle to save the planet. Profit seekers are also hell-bent on continuing their profiteering.
Unfortunately, most of the recommended solutions to reverse global warming (and climate change) seem to have outlived their usefulness. It's not like we adopted these solutions wholeheartedly anyway - when we still had the chance.
What about a small nuclear fallout?
When the war between Russia and Ukraine broke out, everyone was cautious of a potential nuclear war. Words like nuclear winter were thrown around. The truth is that the fear is justified.
Let's even put the direct effects of a nuclear bomb aside. The fallout dust from a nuclear explosion is particularly concerning. Depending on the mass of the nuclear warhead, the entire planet could be thrown into total darkness for months or even years.
A small nuclear fallout, however, may do the planet some benefits by limiting the amount of solar radiation that gets to the earth. This means the global average temperature could be lowered. Once this happens, climate change could be reversed.
In other words, if two nuclear superpowers decide to face off, this planet and its inhabitant is doomed. A face-off between two nuclear lilliputians is what is potentially beneficial.
This is exactly what some NASA scientists have been modeling. According to them, about 0.03% of the world's nuclear armory could reverse the warming the world is currently experiencing. Specifically, it could lower the current average by as much as 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit in some parts of the world.
There is a caveat though.
There are several harms inherent. The ozone layer could be further destroyed, and a sudden decline in temperature could be disastrous to crop production, precipitation could be disrupted, and so on.
In other words, the climate will simply not just return to its normal predictable self with a reverse of global warming. In actual fact, the planet and its inhabitants could be worse off.
It is not yet Uhuru for the plant even with a small-scale nuclear winter.
What do you think?
Resources
Posted with STEMGeeks
Thanks for this text. I have a few remarks on it, if you allow for them.
First, the problem with climate change is mostly the rate at which it happens. It is way too fast compared with any other equivalent phenomenon in the planet's history. In addition, I do not think it is too late to react and try to fix a few things. However, we, as humans, should react. This is by far unclear.
Second, whatever will happen (climate changes, nuclear war) won't change anything for the planet. The planet will survive no matter what. On the other hand, we cannot say the same for the human race. I think that this precision should be said more. Maybe this will trigger something in people's minds. Who knows.
Cheers!
I totally agree with your assertions. The idea behind this post is to see a potential in controlled detonation of nuclear warheads to create a dust that will limit solar radiation and reverse global warming.
Like I said at the end, the cons outweigh the pros. So, it is a no-no, for now.
Definitely :)
Thanks for your contribution to the STEMsocial community. Feel free to join us on discord to get to know the rest of us!
Please consider delegating to the @stemsocial account (85% of the curation rewards are returned).
You may also include @stemsocial as a beneficiary of the rewards of this post to get a stronger support.
I agree with what lemouth said the planet will survive , we in the other hand not sure! Climate change is a best term for that!
!1UP
You have received a 1UP from @gwajnberg!
@stem-curator, @vyb-curator, @pob-curator, @neoxag-curator, @pal-curator
And they will bring !PIZZA 🍕.
Learn more about our delegation service to earn daily rewards. Join the Cartel on Discord.