What will people be like after a nuclear war. What will happen during and after a nuclear war: consequences. The ozone layer will be torn apart

I had a dream... not everything in it was a dream.

The bright sun went out - and the stars

Wandering aimlessly, without rays

In space eternal; icy ground

Worn blindly in the moonless air.

The hour of the morning came and went,

But he did not bring the day after him ...

Darkness, George Byron

According to the theory of the demographer of the era of romanticism, T. Malthus, the birth rate of any kind increases exponentially, while the food supply grows only in arithmetic progression, that is, much more slowly. War is one of the natural and most likely means of controlling the birth rate and the size of humanity.

Today, the planet is already overpopulated - 6.8 billion people live on it, and almost a billion of them are continuously hungry. Wars take place regularly, and they are still going on now, even in states close to Europe, such as, for example, in neighboring, heavily overpopulated and poor Ukraine.

But, global wars, affecting all of humanity, and even with the use of weapons of mass destruction, yet. It is too dangerous and governments are trying to avoid such conflicts as best they can. But, known for almost half a century, somewhat playful, and in many ways the correct Murphy's law says - if something can happen, it will definitely happen. Moreover, events will go according to the worst scenario for us. It turns out that nuclear war could happen one day.

Several times in a row humanity has already avoided a nuclear apocalypse. Today, when there are already a lot of countries possessing the technology of creating atomic (hydrogen, neutron) bombs and their means of delivery, and humanity, it would seem, should be a thousand times more careful, the most acute international political crisis is developing again, associated with the already mentioned war in Ukraine, which may, in the end, lead, if not to the apocalypse, then to a local nuclear conflict.

I personally have no doubt that if the Ukrainian strategists had a "nuclear button" at hand, they would not hesitate to use it. Remember the phrase of Yulia Tymoshenko that Russians “should be shot with nuclear weapons” or the words of the former Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Valery Heletey, who, in an interview, suggested that during the storming of the Lugansk airport “Russian troops” (which, of course, he , did not see) shot nuclear mines from self-propelled mortar 2S4 "Tulip".

But the former prime minister, like former minister defense - the elite of Ukrainian society. If there were others in their place, they would not even argue. At the same time, the words “thrown into the world” about nuclear weapons look like an attempt to seek protection from the West and ... help with an “adequate response”?

In this regard, it is worth remembering the previous situations that almost ended in fatal consequences for humanity.

Operation Trojan

The first nuclear attack, on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was conceived and carried out by the United States of America. Then, in 1945, a secret directive of the Joint Military Planning Committee on the preparation of an atomic bomb appeared. major cities on the territory of the USSR. They were supposed to drop 196! atomic bombs.

When the USSR nevertheless managed to steal and create its own technology for the production of nuclear weapons, the United States developed the Trojan plan, which involved an attack on the USSR on New Year, January 1, 1950. nuclear arsenal Soviet Union was then much more modest than the American and the Washington hawks were almost sure of victory. So, it is quite likely that the USSR could already then become a testing ground for full-scale tests american bombs. Yes, but the Americans calculated in time that they would lose half of their bombers, and the plan would not be fully implemented. That's what kept them back. By the way, there is an opinion that the world was saved by one of the first supercomputers in the world ENIAK, which was involved by the Pentagon in calculating the results of the operation.

And later, in 1961, after testing the Tsar Bomba AN 602 in the USSR, the United States abandoned the idea of ​​a preventive nuclear strike.

Khrushchev, Kennedy and the art of diplomacy

The world came to the brink of destruction for the second time as a result of the Cuban Missile Crisis, in October 1962. Then, in response to the deployment of missiles medium range in Turkey, the USSR established tactical nuclear missiles R-12 in Cuba. The United States, in response, organized a naval blockade of Cuba and began preparations for an invasion of the island.

Only thanks to the magnificent art of diplomacy shown by both sides of the conflict, the war was avoided. But then the USSR practically had no chance in front of military machine USA. If we talk only about missiles, then there were 75 ready for launch in the country. ballistic missiles- insufficiently reliable, requiring lengthy prelaunch preparation. Moreover, only 25 missiles could take off at the same time. The United States already had 700 ballistic missiles then. In terms of other weapons, the forces were also not equal, it seemed to be anti-missile defense.

Are the forces equal?

Now Russia has a serious nuclear potential, which is sufficient to deter any aggression. According to a military expert, former leader Israeli intelligence agencies, even in the event of a local exchange of nuclear strikes, the damage to the United States would be unbearable. That is why a direct war between the two largest possessors of nuclear weapons, Russia and the United States, has been postponed for the time being.

Quite another matter is local conflicts. Today, many states with developing economies, such as Pakistan and India, have already joined the "nuclear" club. North Korea has received its "bomb" and is preparing to join the "nuclear club" and orthodox Iran.

That is why there is a danger that a local conflict will break out somewhere, which will draw the largest nuclear powers into its orbit. And here already - expect trouble.

And, of course, you can use conventional weapons. The United States, for example, is now ready to fight with non-nuclear, but only precision-guided weapons. According to Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Rogozin, for more than ten years the concept of a lightning-fast " global impact". It provides for "strike with non-nuclear weapons at any point on the planet within one hour." “According to the results of the war game held at the Pentagon at the end of last year, with the help of 3.5-4 thousand units of precision-guided weapons, the United States can destroy the main infrastructure facilities of the enemy in 6 hours and deprive him of the ability to resist.”

If such a strike is inflicted on Russia, then the main targets will be the forces of strategic nuclear deterrence. “According to existing in the USA expert opinion, as a result of such a strike, from 80 to 90 percent of our nuclear potential could be destroyed, ”said the Deputy Prime Minister.

Nevertheless, Russia, of course, will respond with a nuclear strike...

If there is a war...

Thousands of fiction and research books have been written on the topic of the post-nuclear apocalypse, hundreds of films have been shot. Directors and writers see the apocalypse in different ways, but they are united in one thing - people, in their opinion, will be able to survive on earth. But such an interpretation requires the plot. And how will it really be?

There are several theories today about what the post-nuclear world will be like. According to a study by American scientists Owen, Robock and Turco, who tried to simulate a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons between India and Pakistan, 6.6 million tons of soot will be released into the atmosphere. This will reduce the average temperature on Earth by 1.25 degrees Celsius. Fallout will fall for some time around the world, why people will die and be seriously ill even in countries that are prosperous and remote from the conflict.

About a billion people will die from radioactive contamination and lack of medical care, and as a result of a decrease in productivity in the world (due to early post-nuclear frosts, lower temperatures and reduced rainfall), the number of hungry on the planet will increase by another one and a half billion (today 850 million are starving on the planet). of people). The cost of food will rise substantially all over the world. Such a scenario is called "nuclear fall" by scientists. But this, as they say, is still “flowers”.

Option one

A number of scientists believe that if Russia and the United States “clash” in a nuclear conflict, a nuclear winter will begin, humanity may die, and the existence of higher forms of life on our planet will be impossible. Such conclusions, at one time, were independently reached by scientists V. V. Aleksandrov and G. S. Stenchikov in 1983, in the USSR and the team of Carl Sagan from Cornell University in the USA.

Thousands of nuclear explosions will lift hundreds of millions of tons of earth, dust and soot from fires into the air. Cities will die from fiery tornadoes that will give rise to fires. They say that the height of such a tornado can reach five kilometers, it draws in everything that comes across and does not end until everything around it burns to the ground.

Fine dust from tornadoes will enter the troposphere, and since there is no convection there, the dust will “hang” for years, obscuring sunlight. Sun. Darkness descends on the earth. In the middle of summer, even in the tropics there will be frosts. The ground will freeze several meters deep, the rains will stop. Due to the temperature difference between the slowly cooling water in the ocean and the heated land, unprecedented storms will begin.

But to feel and see all this, according to the authors of the hypothesis, there will be, in general, no one. No one will see the nuclear spring. Plants, animals and insects that did not die from the explosions will be burned by radiation, the rest will die out from lack of food and water. The surface of unfrozen rivers, seas, and after a while slowly cooling oceans will be littered with terribly stinking fish and dead marine animals, even plankton will die.

All food chains will be broken. Perhaps some lower forms of life will remain on the planet - protozoa, moss, lichens. But the higher ones - including, by the way, rats and cockroaches - will die.

Theory two - alternative

It is described in detail in the article by I. Ibduragimov "On the failure of the concept of "nuclear night" and "nuclear winter" due to fires after a nuclear defeat."

The main postulate that draws attention to itself is that hundreds of nuclear tests have already been carried out, which did not give a cumulative effect, did not create fire tornadoes and did not emit thousands of tons of dust into the atmosphere. Moreover, the explosions of the largest volcanoes on the planet, the power of which is many times greater than the power of any man-made nuclear devices. And the dust did not close the atmosphere, although its emissions were monstrous. The earth's atmosphere is too large to be polluted completely even as a result of a nuclear war.

A situation similar to that which, according to the authors of the hypothesis, causes fiery tornadoes in cities, also arises as a result of large-scale forest fires when millions burn at the same time square kilometers forests. But tornadoes are not observed there, and the emission of soot as a result of such fires is ten times less than calculated by the creators of the "nuclear winter" theory. Why? The combustible mass is distributed over large area rather than concentrated in one place. It will be approximately the same in cities where combustible substances are sorted into shelves in different places for apartments and buildings. In this case, up to 20% of all combustible materials are burned - and no more. There is not enough energy for more, even the biggest fire. This means that there may not be fiery tornadoes that will fill the troposphere with dust.

Even if a firestorm does form, there will be a powerful flow of air into the turbulence zone, the combustion efficiency will increase and ... there will be much less soot. Not to mention that in the epicenters nuclear explosion and at a certain distance from them, almost everything will burn out, without any soot.

Now - about radiation. Of course, radioactive contamination is extremely dangerous and fatal to humans. And this terrible threat will not disappear anywhere. But still, people, even now, manage to survive in conditions of increased background radiation, for example, in the Chernobyl zone, where I myself have been. In the summer, unless, of course, you know about the infection, any traveler will be shocked by the beauties untouched nature these places. Vegetation is raging in the zone, many animals, reservoirs are teeming with fish. So, at least, the flora and fauna there didn’t exactly disappear anywhere - they adapted.

It turns out, in principle, that there may not be a nuclear winter at all? Quite. There is a hypothesis that the “nuclear winter” studies, carried out and popularized in the 1980s, were inspired by the intelligence of the United States and the USSR in order to delay a nuclear war and (or) stimulate disarmament and keep the conflicting parties from increasing the production of nuclear weapons. The technology of such manipulations is called "Overton Window" and is a Western development, which also leads to certain reflections.

A real "nuclear war" may be a difficult and inevitable episode in the development of mankind, but by no means fatal. It, like the consequences of the “nuclear winter”, can be experienced in places unaffected by strikes or, for example, in appropriate bunkers.

Survive in the bunker

Modern studies (more precisely, full-scale tests) show that as a result of nuclear explosions (they will be immediately crushed by a seismic wave), only those underground shelters that will be less than a hundred meters from the epicenters.

Therefore, in well-equipped underground concrete bunkers, a fairly large number of people can survive for a long time - maybe even thousands. Even if at first they have nowhere to go out, if it is impossible to stay outside due to dust and radioactive contamination, it is possible to hold out in such a shelter for up to a decade (and more nuclear winter is unlikely to continue).

According to the writer Dmitry Glukhovsky, people will be able to survive even somewhere in the subway and underground utilities. Although this is a very controversial statement. Tunnels exist thanks to a developed infrastructure for their repair and maintenance. Even if there is a terrorist attack or a disaster, for the metro it is a tragedy with casualties and destruction. And without supervision, after a while, the subway tunnels will begin to deteriorate and collapse on their own ... Fuel reserves in non-specialized underground structures will not last long. If there is ventilation with anti-radiation filters, this is, of course, good, but it will also not last long without repair. In short, this scenario needs to be carefully tested by the "mythbusters" Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage.

The only problem that can arise in the confined space of a bunker or subway tunnel is social relationships. There will be nowhere to go from the bunker, therefore, the strongest may well become the leader there - for example, the head of security or the senior officer on duty. And he will force all the rest to obey him by force and threats. And arrange a nightmare, worse than what will happen upstairs. For example, he will create a harem of wives and daughters of elderly politicians who are trying to wait out the nuclear nightmare. Someone living underground may not stand it, go crazy or break loose and kill someone or everyone who is in the bunker. This is especially likely if there is social inequality between different groups of people.

Perhaps, to the reader, such an assumption will seem like a mocking satire, but unfortunately, it is quite real.

It is not obvious how reliable the connection between such a bunker and the survivors outside will be. This social paradox was hinted at in his book "Parabellum" by the notorious Alexander Zinoviev.

Better in peace...

Of course, it is best if the horrors of nuclear war bypass us. And without this nightmare, the life of mankind is difficult and full of dangers. Still, it's better to remember what might happen one day...

The mid-1970s became something like a turning point for the people of the Earth, when many finally began to understand all the likely consequences of an interstate nuclear exchange that could surpass all the worst forecasts.

Scientists foresee three possible effects of world conflict with the use of nuclear weapons. Firstly, as a result of the global decrease in temperature by tens of degrees, as well as a decrease in the illumination of the planet, the so-called nuclear winter and nuclear night will come. All vital processes on Earth will be cut off from the main source of energy - the sun. Secondly, as a result of the destruction of storage facilities for radioactive waste and nuclear power plants, pollution of the entire world territory will occur. The third factor is planetary famine. Thus, nuclear war will lead to the reduction of agricultural plants.

The nature of the impact of a nuclear war of universal scope on the world is such that, whenever it arises, the result is the same - a global biological catastrophe, one might say the end of the world.

The mid-70s became for the people of the Earth something like turning point when many finally began to understand all the likely consequences of an interstate exchange of nuclear strikes, which are capable of surpassing all the worst forecasts. However, despite this, all the attention of scientists was riveted to the study of direct damaging ground factors, the influence of air explosions of a nuclear nature, in fact, they studied thermal radiation, a shock wave and radioactive fallout. Moreover, scientists began to take into account global environmental problems.

If a nuclear war starts on the planet, as a result of which explosions of nuclear bombs occur, this will lead to thermal radiation, as well as radioactive fallout of a local nature. Indirect consequences, such as the destruction of energy distribution systems, communications systems and social fabrics, are likely to lead to serious problems. As long as there is a possibility that a nuclear war will break out, the catastrophic impact of such a tragedy on the biological sphere should not be left to chance, because the consequences may not be predictable.

Influence of consequences of nuclear war on freshwater ecosystems.

Probable climate change make the ecosystem of continental water bodies vulnerable.

Reservoirs that contain fresh water are divided into two types: flowing (streams and rivers) and stagnant (lakes and ponds). A sharp drop in temperature and a decrease in precipitation will affect the rapid reduction in the number fresh water, which is stored in lakes and rivers. Groundwater will be affected less noticeably and more slowly.

The qualities of lakes are determined by their content nutrients, underlying rocks, sizes, bottom substrates, amount of precipitation and other parameters. The main indicators of the response of freshwater systems to climate change are the likely decrease in temperature and decrease in insolation. The leveling of temperature fluctuations is predominantly expressed in large reservoirs with fresh water. However, fresh water ecosystems, unlike the ocean, are forced to suffer significantly from temperature changes, as a consequence of the fact that a nuclear war will occur.

The possibility of exposure to low temperatures over a long period can lead to the formation of a thick layer of ice on the surface of water bodies. As a result, the surface of a shallow lake will be covered with a significant layer of ice, covering most of its territory.

Over the past years, Russian specialists have gradually accumulated statistical data on lakes, which include information on the area and volume of water bodies. It should be noted that most of the lakes, from among those that are known and accessible to man, are listed as small. Such reservoirs are in a group that will be subject to freezing almost to the entire depth.

The study, conducted by Ponomarev together with his collaborators, within the framework of the Scope-Anyway project, is considered one of the main directions in assessing the consequences of a nuclear war for lake ecosystems. This study involved simulation model the relationship between lakes and their watersheds, as well as the impact on the state of lakes of industry, developed by the Research Center for Computing Technologies of St. Petersburg at the Academy of Sciences. The study considered three biotic components - zooplankton, phytoplankton and detritus. They directly interact with phosphorus, nitrogen, insolation, air temperature and radiation. According to various sources, the alleged nuclear war began either in July or February.

Changes in climatic conditions will lead to longer-term and serious consequences of a nuclear war. In the course of this development, light and temperature will return to their original levels, as winter approaches.

If a nuclear war occurs in winter and causes climatic disturbances during this period, in places where the water of lakes has normal temperature, approximately zero, this will lead to an increase in the ice cover.

The threat to shallow lakes is too obvious, since water may freeze to the very bottom, which will lead to the death of the main number of living microorganisms. Thus, real climate disturbances in winter period will affect freshwater ecosystems that do not freeze under normal conditions, and will lead to very serious biological consequences. Current climate disturbances, which began in the spring or were delayed as a result of a nuclear war, could delay the melting process.

With the arrival of frost at the end spring period, perhaps, there will be a global death of the living components of ecosystems under the influence of a decrease in temperature and a decrease in illumination. If the temperature drops to below zero in the summer, the consequences may not be so disastrous, because many stages of development life cycles will be behind. The severity of the consequences will depend on the duration of the cold. Next spring, the duration of the impact will be especially acute.

Climate disturbances in autumn will lead to the least consequences for the ecosystem of northern water bodies, because at that time all living organisms will have time to go through the stages of reproduction. Even if the number of phytoplankton, invertebrates and decomposers decreases to a minimum level, this is not the end of the world, as soon as the climate returns to normal, they will be reborn. But all the same, residual phenomena can still manifest themselves for a long time on the functioning of the entire ecosystem, and irreversible changes are quite likely.

Consequences of a nuclear war

The likely consequences of a nuclear war for living organisms and the environment have been the focus of attention of many researchers for 40 years after Japan was exposed to atomic weapons.

As a result of the analysis of data on the susceptibility of ecosystems to the consequences that a nuclear war will entail on the ecological environment, the following conclusions become obvious:

The planet's ecosystems are vulnerable to extreme climate disturbances. However, not the same, but depending on their geographical location, the type of system and the time of year in which the disturbances occur.

As a result of the synergy of causes and the spread of their impact from one ecosystem to another, shifts occur much larger than could be expected with a separate action of disturbances. In the case when atmospheric pollution, radiation and an increase in UV radiation act separately, they do not lead to large-scale catastrophic consequences. But if these factors appear at the same time, the result can be detrimental to ecosystems with a sensitive nature due to its synergy, which is comparable to the end of the world for living organisms.

If a nuclear war happens, the fires that arose as a result of the exchange of atomic bombs can occupy a significant part of the territory.

The revival of ecosystems after the impact of climatic cataclysms of the acute stage, following a nuclear war on a huge scale, will depend on the level of adaptation to natural disturbances. In some types of ecosystems, the primary damage can be quite large, and renewal is slow, and absolute revival to the original untouched state is generally impossible.

Episodic radioactive fallout can have an important degree of impact on ecosystems.

Significant temperature fluctuations can lead to very big damage, even if they act for a short period of time.

The ecosystem of the seas is vulnerable enough for a long-term decrease in illumination.

To describe biological responses to stresses on a planetary scale, it is necessary to develop the next generation of ecosystem models and create a capacious database on their individual components and all ecosystems in general, subject to various experimental disturbances. It has been a long time since important attempts were made to experimentally describe the effects of nuclear war and its effect on biological circuits. Today, this problem is one of the most important that met on the path of human existence.

A nuclear war is usually called a hypothetical clash between countries or military-political blocs that have thermonuclear or nuclear weapons and put them into action. Nuclear weapons in such a conflict will become the main means of destruction. The history of nuclear war, fortunately, has not yet been written. But after starting cold war in the second half of the last century, a nuclear war between the US and the USSR was considered a very likely development.

• What happens if a nuclear war breaks out?
• Doctrines of nuclear war in the past
• US nuclear doctrine during the thaw
• Russian nuclear doctrine

What happens if a nuclear war breaks out?

Many fearfully asked the question: what will happen if a nuclear war breaks out? This is a major environmental hazard:

• Explosions would release a huge amount of energy.
• Ashes and soot from fires would block the sun for a long time, which would lead to the effect of "nuclear night" or "nuclear winter" with a sharp drop in temperature on the planet.
• The apocalyptic picture was to be supplemented by radioactive contamination, which would have no less catastrophic consequences for life.

It was assumed that most of the countries of the world would inevitably be drawn into such a war, directly or indirectly.

The danger of a nuclear war is that it would lead to a global environmental catastrophe and even the death of our civilization.

What will happen in the event of a nuclear war? powerful explosion This is just part of the disaster

1. A nuclear explosion produces a giant fire ball, the heat from which chars or completely burns all life at a sufficiently large distance from the epicenter of the explosion.
2. A third of the energy is released in the form of a powerful light pulse, which is a thousand times brighter than the radiation of the sun, so it instantly ignites all flammable materials (fabrics, paper, wood), and causes third-degree burns to people.
3. But the primary fires do not have time to flare up, because they are partially extinguished by a powerful blast wave. Flying burning debris, sparks, household gas explosions, short circuits and burning oil products cause extensive and already long-lasting secondary fires.
4. Separate fires merge into a terrifying fiery tornado that can easily burn down any metropolis. Such fiery tornadoes, arranged by the allies, destroyed Dresden and Hamburg during the Second World War.
5. Since heat is released in large quantities in mass fires, the heated air masses rush upward, forming hurricanes near the surface of the earth, bringing new portions of oxygen to the focus.
6. Dust and soot ascend to the stratosphere, forming a giant cloud there that blocks the sunlight. A prolonged blackout leads to a nuclear winter.

After a nuclear war, the Earth would hardly have remained at least a little like its former self, it would be scorched, and almost all living things would die.

An instructive video about what will happen if a nuclear war starts:

Doctrines of nuclear war in the past

The first doctrine (theory, concept) of nuclear war arose immediately after the end of World War II, in the United States. Then it was invariably reflected in the strategic concepts of NATO and the United States. However, military doctrine The USSR also assigned nuclear missiles a decisive role in the next big war.

Initially, a massive nuclear war scenario was envisaged with the unlimited use of all available nuclear weapons, and their goals would be not only military, but also civilian objects. It was believed that in such a conflict, the advantage would be given to the country that was the first to launch a massive nuclear strike against the enemy, the purpose of which was to pre-emptively destroy his nuclear weapons.

But there was the main problem nuclear war - preventive nuclear attack could not be as effective, and the enemy would be able to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike on industrial centers and large cities.

Since the late 1950s, the United States has new concept"limited nuclear war". In the 1970s, according to this concept, various weapons systems could be used in a hypothetical armed conflict, including operational-tactical and tactical nuclear weapons, which had limitations on the scale of use and means of delivery. Nuclear weapons in such a conflict would only be used to destroy military and important economic facilities. If a distortion of history could happen, nuclear wars in the recent past could actually follow a similar scenario.

One way or another, but the United States is still the only state that in practice used nuclear weapons in 1945 not against the military, but dropped 2 bombs on the civilian population of Hiroshima (August 6) and Nagasaki (August 9).

Hiroshima

On August 6, 1945, under the guise of the Potsdam Declaration, which set an ultimatum regarding the immediate surrender of Japan, the American government sent an American bomber to the Japanese Islands, and at 08:15 Japanese time it dropped the first nuclear bomb on the city of Hiroshima, which had the code name "Kid".

The power of this charge was relatively small - about 20,000 tons of TNT. The explosion of the charge occurred at an altitude of about 600 meters above the ground, and its epicenter was above the Sima hospital. Hiroshima was not chosen by chance as the target of a demonstrative nuclear strike - it was there at that time that General base The Japanese Navy and the Second General Staff of the Japanese Army.

• The explosion destroyed a large part of Hiroshima.
• Over 70,000 people were killed instantly.
• Near 60,000 died later from wounds, burns and radiation sickness.
• Within a radius of about 1.6 kilometers there was a zone of complete destruction, while fires spread over an area of ​​11.4 square meters. km.
• 90% of the city's buildings were either completely destroyed or badly damaged.
• The tram system miraculously survived the bombardment.

In the six months following the bombing, they died from its consequences. 140,000 people.

This “insignificant”, according to the military, charge once again proved that the consequences of a nuclear war for humanity are devastating, as for a race.

Sad video about the nuclear attack on Hiroshima:

Nagasaki

On August 9, at 11:02 am, another American plane dropped another nuclear charge on the city of Nagasaki - "Fat Man". It was blown up high above the Nagasaki Valley, where industrial enterprises. The second consecutive American nuclear attack on Japan caused new catastrophic destruction and loss of life:

• 74,000 Japanese were killed instantly.
• 14,000 buildings were completely destroyed.

In fact, these terrible moments can be called the days when a nuclear war almost started, since bombs were dropped on civilians, and only a miracle stopped the moment when the world was on the brink of nuclear war.

US nuclear doctrine during the thaw

After the end of the Cold War, the American doctrine of limited nuclear war was transformed into the concept of counterproliferation. It was first voiced by US Secretary of Defense L. Espin in December 1993. The Americans considered that with the help of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons it was no longer possible to achieve this goal, therefore, at critical moments, the United States reserved the right to inflict "disarming strikes" on nuclear facilities of objectionable regimes.

In 1997, a directive was adopted according to which the US Army must be ready to strike at foreign facilities for the production and storage of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. And in 2002, the concept of counterproliferation was included in the US national security strategy. Within its framework, the United States intended to destroy nuclear facilities in Korea and Iran or take control of Pakistani facilities.

Russian nuclear doctrine

The military doctrine of Russia also periodically changes its wording. In the latter version, Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if not only nuclear or other types of weapons of mass destruction, but also conventional weapons were used against it or its allies, if this threatens the very foundations of the existence of the state, which may become one of the causes of nuclear war. This indicates the main thing - the likelihood of a nuclear war is currently quite acute, but the rulers understand that no one can survive in this conflict.

Russian nuclear weapons

An alternative story with a nuclear war developed in Russia. The US State Department for 2016 estimated, based on the data provided under the START-3 treaty, that 508 strategic nuclear launchers were deployed in the Russian army:

• intercontinental ballistic missiles;
• strategic bombers;
• submarine missiles.

In total, there are 847 nuclear charge carriers, on which 1796 charges are installed. It should be noted that nuclear weapons in Russia are being reduced quite intensively - in half a year their number is reduced by 6%.

With such weapons and more than 10 countries in the world that have officially confirmed the presence of nuclear weapons, the threat of nuclear war is global problem, the prevention of which is a guarantee of life on Earth.

Are you afraid of nuclear war? Do you think it will come and how soon? Share your opinion or guesses in the comments.

CONSEQUENCES OF A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION.

Introduction
In the history of human development, there are many events, discoveries, accomplishments that we can be proud of, bringing good and beauty to this world. But in contrast to them, the entire history of human civilization is overshadowed by a huge number of cruel, large-scale wars that destroy many good undertakings of man himself.
Since ancient times, man has been fascinated by the creation and improvement of weapons. And as a result, the most deadly and destructive - nuclear weapons - were born. Since its inception, it has also changed. Ammunition was created, the design of which allows you to direct the energy of a nuclear explosion to enhance the chosen damaging factor.
The rapid development of nuclear weapons, the large-scale creation and accumulation of them in huge quantities, as the main "trump card" in possible wars of the future, prompted humanity to the need to assess the probable consequences of its use.
In the seventies of the twentieth century, studies of the consequences of possible and real nuclear strikes showed that a war with the use of such weapons will inevitably lead to the destruction of most of the people, the destruction of the achievements of civilization, the contamination of water, air, soil, and the death of all living things. Research was carried out not only in the field of studying the direct factors of damage to explosions of various directions, but also took into account possible environmental consequences, such as the destruction of the ozone layer, abrupt climate changes, etc.
In further research environmental impact Russian scientists took a significant part in the mass use of nuclear weapons.
The conference of scientists in Moscow in 1983 and the conference "The World after a Nuclear War" in Washington in the same 1983 made it clear to mankind that the damage from a nuclear war would be irreparable for our planet, for all life on Earth.

At present, our planet has assembled nuclear charges millions of times more powerful than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The international political and economic climate today dictates the need for a prudent approach to nuclear weapons, but the number " nuclear powers"everything is increasing and although the number of bombs they have is small, but their charge is enough to destroy life on planet Earth.

climatic effects
For a long time, when planning military operations using nuclear weapons, mankind consoled itself with the illusion that nuclear war may end in the victory of one of the warring parties. Studies of the consequences of nuclear strikes have established that the most terrible consequence will not be the most predictable radioactive defeat, but the climatic consequences, which were least thought about before. Climate change will be so strong that humanity will not be able to survive it.
In most studies, a nuclear explosion was associated with a volcanic eruption, which was presented as a natural model of a nuclear explosion. During an eruption, as well as during an explosion, a huge amount of small particles are thrown into the atmosphere, which do not let sunlight through, and, consequently, lower the temperature of the atmosphere.

Consequences of the explosion atomic bomb were equated with the explosion of the Tambor volcano in 1814, which had a greater explosive force than the charge dropped on Nagasaki. After this eruption in the northern hemisphere, the most low temperatures in summer time.

The explosion of bombs with a total equivalent of about 7 thousand megatons of TNT will create soot and dust clouds over the northern hemisphere, allowing no more than one millionth of the sunlight that usually reaches the earth to pass through. A constant night will come on the earth, as a result of which, its surface, devoid of light and heat, will begin to cool rapidly. The publication of these scientists' findings gave rise to the new terms "nuclear night" and "nuclear winter".As a result of the formation of soot clouds, the surface of the earth, deprived of heating by the sun's rays, will quickly cool down. Already within the first month average temperature near the surface of the land will drop by about 15-20 degrees, and in areas remote from the oceans by 30-35 degrees. In the future, although the clouds will begin to dissipate, for several more months, the temperature will decrease, and the illumination will still remain low. "Nuclear night" and "nuclear winter" will come. Precipitation will cease to fall in the form of rain, and the surface of the earth will freeze several meters deep, depriving the surviving living beings of fresh water. drinking water . At the same time, almost all higher forms of life will perish. Only the lowest will have a chance of survival.

At what one should not expect a rapid settling of a soot cloud. And restore heat transfer.
Due to the dark cloud of soot and dust, the reflectivity of the planet will decrease significantly. Therefore, the Earth will begin to reflect less solar energy than usual. The thermal balance will be disturbed and the absorption of solar energy will increase. Heat will be concentrated in upper layers atmosphere, causing the soot to rise up instead of settling.

The constant influx of additional heat will greatly heat the upper atmosphere. The lower layers will remain cold and cool even more. A significant vertical temperature difference is formed, which does not cause movement air masses, but on the contrary, additionally stabilizing the state of the atmosphere. Consequently, soot deposition will slow down by an order of magnitude. And at the same time, the "nuclear winter" will drag on.
Of course, everything will depend on the power of the blows. But explosions of average power (about 10 thousand megatons) are capable of depriving the planet of sunlight for almost a year, which is necessary for all life on earth.

Destruction of the ozone layer
The settling of soot and dust and the restoration of illumination, which will happen sooner or later, most likely will not be such a blessing.

At present, our planet is surrounded by the ozone layer - a part of the stratosphere at an altitude of 12 to 50 km, in which, under the influence of ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, molecular oxygen dissociates into atoms, then combined with other O molecules. 2, forming ozone O 3 .
In high concentration, ozone is able to absorb hard ultraviolet radiation and protect all life on earth from harmful radiation. There is a theory that the presence of the ozone layer made it possible for the emergence of multicellular life on land.
The ozone layer is easily destroyed by various substances.

Nuclear explosions in large numbers, even in a limited area, will lead to the rapid and complete destruction of the ozone layer. The explosions themselves and the fires that occur after them will create temperatures at which transformations occur. chemical substances, impossible in normal conditions or flowing sluggishly.

For example, the radiation of an explosion leads to the formation of nitric oxide, one of powerful destroyers ozone, most of which will reach upper layers atmosphere. Ozone is also destroyed by reacting with hydrogen and hydroxyls, a large amount of which will rise into the air along with soot and dust, and will also be delivered to the atmosphere by powerful hurricanes.

As a result, after cleansing the air from aerosol pollution, the surface of the planet and all life on it will be under harsh ultraviolet radiation.

Large doses of ultraviolet radiation in humans, as well as in animals, cause burns and skin cancer, damage to the retina, blindness, affect the hormonal background, and destroy the immune system. As a result, the survivors will get sick much more. UV light blocks normal DNA replication. What causes the death of cells or the appearance of mutated cells that are not able to perform their functions correctly.

The consequences of ultraviolet irradiation for plants are no less severe. In them, ultraviolet radiation changes the activity of enzymes and hormones, affects the synthesis of pigments, the intensity of photosynthesis and the photoperiodic reaction. As a result, photosynthesis can practically stop in plants, and such representatives of the flora as blue-green algae can disappear altogether.

Ultraviolet radiation has a destructive and mutagenic effect on microorganisms. Under the action of ultraviolet radiation, cell membranes and cell membranes are destroyed. And this entails the death of the microworld, which is under the action of the sun's rays.
The most terrible consequence of the destruction of the ozone layer will be that its restoration may become almost impossible. This may take several hundred years, during which the surface of the earth will be exposed to constant ultraviolet radiation.

Radioactive contamination of the planet
One of the main factors affecting the environment, entailing serious consequences for life, after a nuclear war is contamination with radioactive products.
The products of nuclear explosions will form a stable radioactive contamination of the biosphere in areas of hundreds and thousands of kilometers.

Mass death of living beings
Severe cold, which will be established in the first months after the explosions, will cause enormous damage flora. Photosynthesis and plant growth will practically cease. This will be especially noticeable in tropical latitudes where most of the world's population lives.

Cold, lack of drinking water, poor lighting - will lead to mass death of animals.
Powerful storms, frosts that will lead to the freezing of shallow reservoirs and coastal waters, and the cessation of plankton reproduction will destroy the food base for many species of fish and aquatic animals. The remaining food sources will be so heavily contaminated with radiation and chemical products that their use will be as destructive as other factors.
The cold and the death of plants will lead to the impossibility of farming. As a result, human food supplies will be depleted. And those that still remain will also undergo severe radiation contamination. This will especially affect the territories that import food products.

Conclusion: