Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How To Survive A Small Nuclear Bomb

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How To Survive A Small Nuclear Bomb

    http://theweek.com/article/index/259...-should-you-do

    If a nuclear bomb exploded in downtown Washington, what should you do?


    APRIL 14, 2014, AT 6:33 AM



    That won't do. Photo: (Bettman/Corbis)


    • Funny question in the headline, yes?


    But since President Obama worries more about the threat of terrorists' improvised nuclear device going off in a major American city than anything Russia can throw at us, I was wondering if the government had deigned to share with us citizens any tips for, you know, surviving something their own intelligence points to as the likeliest unlikely Black Swan event.

    Well, no. And yes.

    No — very few people in Washington, D.C., who work for the government have any idea what they would do if a 10-kiloton nuclear device exploded at the intersection of 16th and K streets.

    You can always look to movies to figure this stuff out, right? And in movies, since nuclear radiation is BAD, the thing to do is to get away from it as quickly as possible. In the movies, electronics are fried, too, the response is chaotic, and hundreds of thousands of people die.
    Interestingly enough, though, the government has done quite a bit of work to figure out what exactly would happen if a suitcase nuke — which, I know, doesn't really exist, but, for the sake of this example, bear with me — actually did explode a few blocks from the White House.
    And curiously, and perhaps hearteningly, it turns out that there is quite a lot that you or I can do if we get stuck in Washington when something like that happens. Choices we make could very well make the difference between our imminent death and a relatively full and happy life, assuming the bomb is a one-off.
    The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory released a report in 2011 that spells all this out. It hasn't gotten nearly the attention it deserves.
    It's called the "National Capital Region Key Response Planning Factors for the Aftermath of Nuclear Terrorism" and it makes for fascinating reading.
    Did you know, for example, that:
    1. The WORST thing for someone to try to do, in the aftermath of a nuclear explosion that they survive, is to get in a car and drive away.
    2. Unless you're within about a third to a half a mile radius of ground zero and the shelter options are poor, the BEST thing for someone to do is to find a stable location inside a well-built apartment or office building — the majority of which will remain standing outside that half mile radius — and stay there for 24 hours.
    And if you were very close to ground zero and you did survive — and a lot of folks will — the best thing for you to do is to:
    A. Take immediate shelter somewhere, because fallout will rain down on you if you don't.
    B. Wait an hour.
    C. Then, walk about a half-dozen blocks laterally until you find intact large buildings to shelter you.
    3. The electromagnetic pulse from a ground burst will NOT, in fact, knock out all types of communication. Some? Maybe.
    4. If you live in a single-family house with thin walls, your chances of surviving in the immediate aftermath of a blast and not getting cancer later are exponentially higher than if you seek shelter in a bigger building, even one that might literally be next door.
    5. Rescuers should NOT put on radiation protection gear if it will slow them down. So long as the fallout has stopped falling, they're best advised to turn out in their normal gear.
    6. Though thousands of people will die from the blast effects, almost all — about 96 percent — of the other potential casualties could be avoided if people understood the basics of what to do in the event of mass radiation exposure.
    7. Did I mention that the worst place to be in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear blast is in a car trying to get away? The so-called DFZ — the Dangerous Fallout Zone — will extend out as much as 20 miles, but it is likely to be extremely narrow. (If it's not, that means the concentration of radioactive particles will be lower.) The vector and location of this zone depends on the wind. And its size will shrink with every passing hour.
    8. Penetrating trauma from broken glass is probably the largest treatable cadre of blast injuries.
    I admit that I don't know what forum the president or anyone else could use to educate people in major cities about this stuff. Government never wants to alarm people. But maybe a little bit of alarmism is worth it, if it turns out that a terrorist's nuclear blast is a lot more survivable than we might think, if only we do certain things.


  • #2
    Re: How To Survive A Small Nuclear Bomb

    My generation here in the UK, (I am 70 next month), were always keeping in mind the possibility of such an event. I even have friends that have built their own bomb and fallout shelter, as also, I did once, convert a small cellar as a fallout shelter.

    As I understand survival; it pays to have a simple plan for every possible event. No need for paranoia, just to keep in mind what to do if............

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: How To Survive A Small Nuclear Bomb

      anybody else think this article is 'preparing' us for something....

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: How To Survive A Small Nuclear Bomb

        Originally posted by The Week
        Interestingly enough, though, the government has done quite a bit of work to figure out what exactly would happen if a suitcase nuke — which, I know, doesn't really exist, but, for the sake of this example, bear with me — actually did explode a few blocks from the White House.
        Maybe not a 10 kT suitcase nuke, but this ~1 kT backpack nuke definitely existed, as did(do?) equivalent Russian munitions.

        Comment


        • #5
          think shielding

          Originally posted by vt View Post
          http://theweek.com/article/index/259...-should-you-do

          If a nuclear bomb exploded in downtown Washington, what should you do?


          APRIL 14, 2014, AT 6:33 AM



          That won't do. Photo: (Bettman/Corbis)


          • Funny question in the headline, yes?




          Get as much mass between you and the nuke as possible.

          inside a car is better than outside a car.

          Better yet,

          Get into a basement with concrete or brick sides. If you have time, pile up sheet metal and bricks all around you.

          Short of an actual fall out shelter, the bottom floor of an underground parking garage is as good as it gets.
          Last edited by Polish_Silver; April 15, 2014, 02:34 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: think shielding

            7. Did I mention that the worst place to be in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear blast is in a car trying to get away? The so-called DFZ — the Dangerous Fallout Zone — will extend out as much as 20 miles, but it is likely to be extremely narrow. (If it's not, that means the concentration of radioactive particles will be lower.) The vector and location of this zone depends on the wind. And its size will shrink with every passing hour.

            This one doesn't make sense. It seems like it is the worst case to be if you don't look at the prevailing winds and you inadvertently travel directly in line with the plume of the DFZ....but how about if you are immediately outside of the DFZ and traveling in the opposite direction?

            Well, as they say, where there's smoke, there's fire.

            I understand from work (consulting) that one of the areas of "growth" in providing services to the federal gov't is helping manage the response to an extreme event such as this....including elements such as managing immediate repairs to major deficiencies in the infrastructure (power, fresh water, etc).

            Whether or not this is all likely or unlikely, there's clearly a push within the gov't to prepare ever moreso.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: think shielding

              "7. Did I mention that the worst place to be in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear blast is in a car trying to get away? The so-called DFZ — the Dangerous Fallout Zone — will extend out as much as 20 miles, but it is likely to be extremely narrow. (If it's not, that means the concentration of radioactive particles will be lower.) The vector and location of this zone depends on the wind. And its size will shrink with every passing hour."

              This one doesn't make sense. It seems like it is the worst case to be if you don't look at the prevailing winds and you inadvertently travel directly in line with the plume of the DFZ....but how about if you are immediately outside of the DFZ and traveling in the opposite direction?

              Well, as they say, where there's smoke, there's fire.

              I understand from work (engineering/consulting) that one of the areas of "growth" in providing services to the federal gov't is helping manage the response to an extreme event such as this....including elements such as managing immediate repairs to major deficiencies in the infrastructure (power, fresh water, etc).

              Whether or not this is all likely or unlikely, there's clearly a push within the gov't to prepare ever moreso.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: think shielding

                altho anybody who thinks they can 'get away' from anything even remotely resembling a 'disaster' by getting into a car - and fleeing on an interstate highway - is dreaming...

                one look at ANY 'freeway' in ANY metro area after about 2pm ought to convince one of that inconvenient truth...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: think shielding

                  Originally posted by Polish_Silver View Post
                  Get as much mass between you and the nuke as possible.

                  inside a car is better than outside a car.

                  Better yet,

                  Get into a basement with concrete or brick sides. If you have time, pile up sheet metal and bricks all around you.

                  Short of an actual fall out shelter, the bottom floor of an underground parking garage is as good as it gets.
                  i was going to say basement too. The OP mentions large buildings but what I think it really means is steel and concrete vs wood and drywall.??

                  Lek I couldnt help but think the caution about driving is possibly self-serving. Dont want those roads jammed while the VIPs get out of town.

                  Either way this is about managing the people as a whole, not necessarily what is best for each individual. I live north of Atlanta. A bomb goes off in South Atlanta with prevailing easterly winds. How am I worse off going north, or west, etc? The nearest "big" concrete building is miles away. Sorry but Im getting out of Dodge if that turns out to be the best choice for me and the family. But I can see why the authorities would want everyone to sit tight. We cant all leave at once now can we? But I'm under no illusions that VIPs would receive the same advice.
                  Last edited by flintlock; April 15, 2014, 09:03 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: think shielding

                    Originally posted by flintlock View Post
                    i was going to say basement too. The OP mentions large buildings but what I think it really means is steel and concrete vs wood and drywall.??

                    Lek I couldnt help but think the caution about driving is possibly self-serving. Dont want those roads jammed while the VIPs get out of town.

                    Either way this is about managing the people as a whole, not necessarily what is best for each individual. I live north of Atlanta. A bomb goes off in South Atlanta with prevailing easterly winds. How am I worse off going north, or west, etc? The nearest "big" concrete building is miles away. Sorry but Im getting out of Dodge if that turns out to be the best choice for me and the family. But I can see why the authorities would want everyone to sit tight. We cant all leave at once now can we? But I'm under no illusions that VIPs would receive the same advice.
                    vt's post has a link to a PDF of the study, and it's very interesting how they made casualty estimates for different scenarios. It doesn't have a single recommendation that everyone is supposed to follow. Instead, you're supposed to adopt a strategy that depends upon the quality of your structure and other factors like whether you know the fallout pattern. For instance, it compares different combinations of shelter and evacuation strategies, such as "shelter in stick-built house for an hour, then get out of Dodge" versus "shelter in a stick-built house for three hours, then get out of Dodge". It also has some figures for the effective shielding value of different places within different types of structures. My take-away was (a) if you're far enough away from the blast not to get zapped by the prompt effects, fallout is your main concern; (b) although some fallout components have long half-lives, a lot of the dangerous material decays on the time scale of minutes or hours, so the radiation from fallout is much more intense immediately after the blast -- this is what you can potentially avoid by sheltering immediately after the blast; (c) because the radiation from fallout falls rapidly at first, but then sort of levels out after the short-half-life isotopes have decayed, sticking around in a poorly shielded shelter after the first several hours is a losing proposition, whereas staying put in a well-shielded spot makes sense for longer. The paper gave the following order of precedence:

                    For "poor shelter", which is a regular stick-built house without a below-grade basement:
                    • Sheltering in place for 1 hour followed by evacuation that doesn't pass through the hot zone is best
                    • Sheltering in place for 3 hours and then evacuation that avoids the hot zone is 2nd best
                    • Sheltering in place for an hour and then accidentally wandering through the hot zone on your way out of Dodge is 3rd best
                    • Sheltering in place for 3 hours and then evacuating through the hot zone is equally poor
                    • Sheltering in place indefinitely is worst


                    However, if you have a stick-built house with a below-grade basement and can get against a wall with earth on the other side, you're doing like 10 times better than a house without a basement. Part of the issue is that the greater the distance between you and the fallout, the less radiation you'll receive, due to the 1/r2 law. Thus, upper floors near the roof, or above-grade floors near walls, are really bad. If you're down in a basement against a wall, you'll still be receiving radiation from fallout on the roof, but you'll be "shadowed" by the earth from fallout most other places.

                    For "adequate shelter", which is a regular stick-built house with a below-grade basement, all outcomes are better than any of the strategies for "poor shelter", but:
                    • Sheltering in place for 3 hours followed by evacuation that doesn't pass through the hot zone is best
                    • Sheltering in place for 1 hour and then evacuation that avoids the hot zone is 2nd best (but almost as good)
                    • Sheltering in place indefinitely is pretty good
                    • Sheltering in place for 3 hours and then evacuating through the hot zone is still pretty good
                    • Sheltering in place for 1 hour and then accidentally wandering through the hot zone is worst, but still better than any of the "poor shelter" options

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: think shielding

                      Originally posted by ASH View Post
                      vt's post has a link to a PDF of the study, and it's very interesting how they made casualty estimates for different scenarios. It doesn't have a single recommendation that everyone is supposed to follow. Instead, you're supposed to adopt a strategy that depends upon the quality of your structure and other factors like whether you know the fallout pattern.
                      I assume you mean this link, https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=702738 , which isn't currently working.
                      A google search on the title turned up this: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf

                      For anyone with the former, do they appear to be the same??

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: think shielding

                        Originally posted by LazyBoy View Post
                        I assume you mean this link, https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=702738 , which isn't currently working. A google search on the title turned up this: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf For anyone with the former, do they appear to be the same??
                        Yes, I think so, the title is the same. Also, I think this is an earlier version from 2009: https://narac.llnl.gov/uploads/IND_R...-410067web.pdf

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: think shielding

                          Originally posted by LazyBoy View Post
                          I assume you mean this link, https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=702738 , which isn't currently working.
                          A google search on the title turned up this: http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf

                          For anyone with the former, do they appear to be the same??
                          Yes, that's the same document.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: think shielding

                            Originally posted by Slimprofits View Post
                            Yes, I think so, the title is the same. Also, I think this is an earlier version from 2009: https://narac.llnl.gov/uploads/IND_R...-410067web.pdf

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: think shielding

                              This page has some useful info. http://www.ki4u.com/guide.htm There are a few diagrams illustrating how to protect yourself and family from fallout with its penetrating gamma rays.
                              "I love a dog, he does nothing for political reasons." --Will Rogers

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X