Content deleted Content added
m →Effects of nuclear war on food distribution: Corrected some awkward phrasing + added cleanup tags |
m clean up spacing around commas and other punctuation fixes, replaced: ,c → , c, ; → ; |
||
| (21 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Possible famine caused by nuclear war}}
{{Pollution sidebar|War}}
'''Nuclear famine''' is a [[hypothesis|hypothesized]] famine considered a potential threat following global or regional [[Nuclear warfare|nuclear exchange]]. It is thought that even subtle cooling effects resulting from a regional nuclear exchange could have a substantial impact on agriculture production, triggering a food crisis amongst the world's survivors.
While belief in the "[[nuclear winter]]" hypothesis is both popular and heavily [[nuclear winter#Criticism and debate|debated]], the issue of potential food supply disruption from blast and fallout effects following a nuclear war is less controversial. Several books have been written on the food supply issue, including ''[[Fallout Protection]]'', ''[[Nuclear War Survival Skills]]'', ''[[Philip J. Dolan#Unclassified publications|Would the Insects Inherit the Earth and Other Subjects of Concern to Those Who Worry About Nuclear War]]'', and most recently the extreme nuclear winter and [[impact winter|comet impact]] countermeasuring ''[[Feeding Everyone No Matter What]]''.
Together with these largely introductory texts, more official tomes with a focus on organization, agriculture, and [[radioecology]] include ''Nutrition in the Postattack Environment'' by the [[RAND Corporation]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM5052.html|title=Nutrition in the postattack environment|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150128112108/http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM5052.html|archive-date=2015-01-28|year=1966|last1=Pogrund|first1=Robert Seymour}}</ref> the [[continuity of government]] plans for preventing a famine in ''On Reorganizing After Nuclear Attack'',<ref>{{Cite
Behavior of Radioactive Fallout in Soils and Plants (1963)
</ref> and practical countermeasures that were intended to be taken on the individual level in ''Defense Against Radioactive Fallout on the Farm''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=
==Early work==
Line 23 ⟶ 25:
{{see also|Nuclear winter}}
Based on the faulty studies<ref>{{Cite
Biologists have long analyzed that a number of factors arising from "nuclear winter" will induce a significant impact on agriculture. For instance, nuclear war in growing seasons can bring about sudden episodes of low temperature (-10 degree Celsius or more) for days to weeks, and drawing reference from the "[[Year Without a Summer|year without a summer]]" in 1816, episodes of freezing events are capable of destroying a large quantity of crops.<ref name=nuclearfamine /> In addition, growing season would potentially be shortened, as reported by Robock et al., who calculated that a regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan will substantially reduce freeze-free growing season in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres for several years and devastate agricultural produce as crops do not have sufficient time to reach maturity.<ref name=robock2007a />
In contrast, the natural marine ecosystems, a major supplier of food to human societies, are less vulnerable to sudden temperature fall. However, they are highly sensitive to reduced incident sunlight and increased level of UV-B radiation.<ref name=nuclearfamine /> In the event of a large-scale nuclear war, a mere 25% reduction in ozone is predicted to cause an enhanced UV-B radiation that reduce net photosynthesis in the surface [[euphotic zone]] by 35%, and in the whole euphotic zone by 10% (euphotic zone refers to depths in the ocean with light levels sufficient for active photosynthesis). With a corresponding reduction in light available for photosynthesis, phytoplankton populations were in the 1985 book expected to plummet,<ref name=chap3>{{cite book|last1=Mark|first1=Harwell|last2=Thomas|first2=Hutchinson|title=Environmental Consequences of Nuclear War Volume II: ecological and Agricultural Effects|date=1985|publisher=John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of SCOPE of the ICSU|page=Chapter 3|url=http://dge.stanford.edu/SCOPE/SCOPE_28_2/SCOPE_28-2_1.3_Chapter3_173-267.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100718060423/http://dge.stanford.edu/SCOPE/SCOPE_28_2/SCOPE_28-2_1.3_Chapter3_173-267.pdf|archive-date=2010-07-18}}</ref> and scientists had even speculated that most of the phytoplankton and herbivorous zooplanktons (that feed on phytoplanktons) in more than half of the Northern Hemisphere oceans would die.<ref name=twilight /> More [[Nuclear winter#
==Effects of nuclear war on food distribution==
In addition to the adverse effects on the agroecosystems, socio-economical factors of war and nuclear destructions also possess far-reaching implications on food availability. It was observed in the aftermath of [[Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki|atomic bombings]] in Hiroshima and Nagasaki that food was even more scarce as crops in nearby regions were destroyed and distribution of food from other parts of Japan was cut off as a result of the destruction of railroads, when crop production was already low in previous years due to war and poor weather.<ref name="Downfall">{{cite book|last1=Frank|first1=Richard|title=Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire|date=1999|publisher=Random House|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cJXtAAAAMAAJ|isbn=9780679414247}}</ref> Not long after the war in 1946, the amount of food available in Japan could only provide an average citizen with 1325 calories a day,
Today, 85% of the nations in the world have low to marginal amount of homegrown food to sustain themselves and are increasingly reliant on well-connected food trade networks for imported food.{{Citation needed|date=April 2021}} A recent study{{by whom|date=April 2021}} (2014) examined the consequences of continental-scale disruptions on wheat and rice trade networks that can occur when global food supply is substantially reduced, such as following a large-scale nuclear war. Considering the tendency for exporting countries to withhold their crops in times of food shortage, the prediction model in this study determined that the amount of wheat and rice exports are reduced combined with losses in export networks. Critically, the authors found that the least developed countries will suffer greater import losses due to financial constraints, and the loss of trade networks will eventually lead to a larger population vulnerable to food shortages.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Puma|first1=Michael|last2=Bose|first2=Satyajit|last3=Chon|first3=So Young|last4=Cook|first4=Benjamin|title=Assessing the evolving fragility of the global food system|journal=Environmental Research Letters|date=22 May 2014|volume=10|issue=2|pages=024007|doi=10.1088/1748-9326/10/2/024007|doi-access=free}}</ref>
==Global famine due to regional nuclear conflict==
Line 39 ⟶ 41:
Much of the research to date on potential nuclear war-induced climate change focuses on a hypothetical, large-scale nuclear exchange between modern day Russia and the United States. However, the post-Cold War world also includes a number of other nuclear-armed countries — such as India, Pakistan, and North Korea — that are currently engaged in de facto or frozen armed conflicts with their neighbors. In comparison to "global" nuclear war, a regional conflict between nations with relatively small nuclear arsenals would likely produce less dramatic climate effects. Nonetheless, it has been argued that global cooling resulting from such a conflict could have large-scale impacts on agriculture and food supply systems worldwide.
Several studies led by Alan Robock of Rutgers University describe this possibility. A 2007 analysis using contemporary climate models found that a hypothetical nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan involving 100 Hiroshima-size bombs (less than 0.1% of the explosive yield of the current global nuclear arsenal) would be sufficient to cause drastic global cooling. The model not only predicted effects consistent with the traditional "nuclear winter" concept, but also suggested that climate effects would last longer than previously expected.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Alan|first1=Robock|last2=Luke|first2=Oman|last3=Georgiy|first3=Stenchikov|title=Nuclear winter revisited with a modern climate model and current nuclear arsenals: Still catastrophic consequences|journal=Journal of Geophysical Research|date=Jul 6, 2007|volume=112|issue=D13|pages=D13107|doi=10.1029/2006JD008235|bibcode=2007JGRD..11213107R|doi-access=
A related 2012 study assimilated a dynamic agrosystem model to predict the agricultural effects of an India-Pakistan war. The model in this case showed that a regional nuclear war on a separate continent could lead to a significant drop in yield for both corn and soybean production in the American Midwest, with the greatest crop losses occurring five years following the event.<ref name="Oz2012">{{cite journal|last1=Özdoğan|first1=Mutlu|last2=Robock|first2=Alan|last3=Kucharik|first3=Christopher J.|title=Impacts of a nuclear war in South Asia on soybean and maize production in the Midwest United States|journal=Climate Change|date=22 June 2012|volume=116|issue=2|pages=373–387|doi=10.1007/s10584-012-0518-1|citeseerx=10.1.1.694.6786|s2cid=2837628}}</ref> Over the ten years following the event, corn production was predicted to decline by an average of 10% and soybean by an average of 6–12%, depending on location. Year-to-year variability was expected to be high, and could be affected by anomalies in temperature, rainfall, and sunlight.
Other studies based on a Robock et al. style India-Pakistan war utilize a different agricultural model to predict effects on rice production in China. After taking into consideration the weather conditions and farming practices specific to different provinces, rice production was predicted to decline by an average of 21% for the first four years and by approximately 10% the following six years.<ref name="Xia2013">{{cite journal|last1=Xia|first1=Lili|last2=Robock|first2=Alan|title=Impacts of a nuclear war in South Asia on rice production in Mainland China|journal=Climate Change|date=2013|volume=116|issue=2|pages=357–372|doi=10.1007/s10584-012-0475-8|bibcode=2013ClCh..116..357X|s2cid=13189109|url=http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/XiaRobockNuclearChinaPrint.pdf|access-date=13 February 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160317081920/http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/XiaRobockNuclearChinaPrint.pdf|archive-date=17 March 2016}}</ref> While potential adaptive measures (such as increasing rice plantations in less affected provinces or fertilizer adjustments) could be implemented, these strategies come with their own limitations and consequences—including further environmental pollution. Chinese production of maize and wheat could also be affected.<ref name="Xia2013b">{{cite web|last1=Xia|first1=Lili|last2=Mills|first2=Michael|last3=Stenke|first3=Andrea|last4=Helfand|first4=Ira|title=Global famine after a regional nuclear war|url=http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/NWXIA8AR.pdf|publisher=Submitted to Earth's Future, 2013|access-date=13 February 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160312112951/http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/NWXIA8AR.pdf|archive-date=12 March 2016}}</ref> In particular, wheat production in the wake of such an incident could drop by more than 50% in the first year and decline by an average of 39% in the first 5 years.
A [https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-022-00573-0 new study] developed to evaluate the impact of a famine due to a [[nuclear winter]] for the Nature Food Journal. They hypothesized severe effects on global food security and voiced concerns about various countries that already have issues with acquiring various supplies outside of food. This study was concerned about the possibility of a dust cloud caused by a nuclear exchange that would act like ones that have occurred on mars would cause issues for Earth. Their study had found that 5 Tg of soot and ash would be enough to cause a famine. The severe mass food shortage would be one that livestock and aquatic food production would not be able to compensate for. The extent of climate disruption of various methods of food production would take a heavy amount of lives on Earth. The study estimated 5 billion lives to be lost with the occurrence of a nuclear famine. For comparison, the Earth's population had [[World population|just reached 8 billion on November 15, 2022]]. A nuclear famine would prove to be an apocalypse that many believe should be a concern when considering political and nuclear intrigue.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kallis |first=Giorgos |date=2020-06-24 |title=Limits |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503611566 |doi=10.1515/9781503611566|isbn=9781503611566 }}</ref>
===Vulnerable populations===
The [[International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War]] (IPPNW) reported in 2013 that more than two billion people would be at risk of starvation in the event of a limited nuclear exchange, such as one that could occur between India and Pakistan, or by the use of even a small number of the nuclear weapons held by the US and Russia.<ref name="IPPNWStudy">{{cite web|last1=Helfand|first1=Ira|title=Nuclear Famine: Two Billion People at Risk?|url=http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/nuclear-famine-two-billion-at-risk-2013.pdf|website=International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War|access-date=13 February 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160405015355/http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/nuclear-famine-two-billion-at-risk-2013.pdf|archive-date=5 April 2016}}</ref><ref name="IPPNWPress">{{cite web|last1=Loretz|first1=John|title=Nobel Laureate Warns Two Billion at Risk from Nuclear Famine|url=http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/nuclear-famine-2013-press-release-english.pdf|website=IPPNW|access-date=13 February 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161203024127/http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/nuclear-famine-2013-press-release-english.pdf|archive-date=3 December 2016}}</ref>
This report argued that the world is in a state in which it is particularly vulnerable to even modest declines in food production. In turn, small changes in average global temperature can have disproportionately large effects on crops. Agricultural studies predicting substantial declines in U.S. and Chinese crop production may be conservative, as they do not take into account ozone depletion or daily temperature extremes. They cite the example of the [[Mount Tambora]] volcanic eruption in 1815, which produced an average annual temperature deviation of only −0.7 °C, but which brought mid-summer killing frosts to the mid-Atlantic states<ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Stommel H, Stommel E |year=1979|title= The year without a summer|journal= Scientific American|volume= 240|issue=6|pages=176–186|doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0679-176|bibcode=1979SciAm.240f.176S}}</ref> and caused up to 75% crop losses in northern Europe.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Post, J. |year=1983|title= Climatic change and subsistence crises|journal= Journal of Interdisciplinary History|volume= 14|pages=153–160|doi=10.2307/203521|jstor=203521}}</ref>
In addition, the report authors argue that small perturbations in the food supply are highly amplified for malnourished populations. In particular, about 800 million people are chronically malnourished, and even a 10% decline in their food consumption would put them at risk.<ref name="Hefland2007">{{cite web|last1=Hefland|first1=Ira|title=An Assessment of the Extent of Projected Global Famine Resulting From Limited, Regional Nuclear War|url=http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/helfandpaper.pdf|website=Physicians for Social Responsibility|publisher=Royal Society of Medicine|access-date=13 February 2016|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151110165237/http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/helfandpaper.pdf|archive-date=10 November 2015}}</ref> World reserves of grain stocks could serve as a buffer to this; however, rough estimates suggest that current reserves would only last approximately 68–77 days.<ref name="IPPNWStudy"/>
Famines are also often associated with epidemics. Following the Mount Tambora eruption, an 1816 famine in Ireland
However, as reported in a paper published in the journal ''Public Health Reports'', it is one of a number of prevalent myths that infectious diseases always occur after a disaster in cities.<ref>{{cite journal | pmc = 2496928 | pmid=18828410 | volume=123 | issue=5 | title=Disaster mythology and fact: Hurricane Katrina and social attachment |vauthors=Jacob B, Mawson AR, Payton M, Guignard JC | journal=Public Health Rep | pages=555–66| year=2008 | doi=10.1177/003335490812300505 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.publichealthreports.org/issueopen.cfm?articleID=2091 |title=Archived copy |access-date=2017-12-08 |archive-date=2016-08-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160827183455/http://www.publichealthreports.org/issueopen.cfm?articleID=2091 |url-status=dead }}</ref> {{
==See also==
Line 60 ⟶ 64:
* [[Marshall Islands]]
* [[Cold War II]]
* [[Global catastrophic risk]]
* [[Nuclear holocaust]]
* [[Nuclear terrorism]]
* [[World War III]]
▲* [[Famine]]
==References==
Line 72 ⟶ 76:
{{Doomsday}}
{{Pollution}}
[[Category:Nuclear
[[Category:Famines]]
| |||