skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Nuclear winter: the continuing debate. Student essay

Abstract

This essay examines the debate over the climatic consequences of global nuclear war as related in the so-called Nuclear Winter hypothesis. This review examines the major components of the theory and traces development of the scientific knowledge leading to a second phase of the controversy two years after the first hypothesis. The conclusions of the essay are that the original nuclear winter findings have been altered by later scientific study and, therefore, the political conclusions drawn by Carl Sagan in 1983 can no longer be supported by theory or facts. Continued use of the Crutzen-Birks (Ambio, 1982) and TTAPS (Science, December 1983) studies worst-case evidence from NCAR (Foreign Affairs, Summer 86) represents selective science. Arguing for strategic policy changes based on nuclear winter risks constitutes anti-nuclear rhetoric and not scientific reasoning.

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Army War Coll., Carlisle Barracks, PA (USA)
OSTI Identifier:
6182430
Report Number(s):
AD-A-182785/6/XAB
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEFENSE; NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS; PHYSICAL RADIATION EFFECTS; NUCLEAR WINTER; REVIEWS; WARFARE; DOCUMENT TYPES; EXPLOSIONS; RADIATION EFFECTS 450202* -- Explosions & Explosives-- Nuclear-- Weaponry-- (-1989)

Citation Formats

Nida, A.V. Nuclear winter: the continuing debate. Student essay. United States: N. p., 1987. Web.
Nida, A.V. Nuclear winter: the continuing debate. Student essay. United States.
Nida, A.V. 1987. "Nuclear winter: the continuing debate. Student essay". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_6182430,
title = {Nuclear winter: the continuing debate. Student essay},
author = {Nida, A.V.},
abstractNote = {This essay examines the debate over the climatic consequences of global nuclear war as related in the so-called Nuclear Winter hypothesis. This review examines the major components of the theory and traces development of the scientific knowledge leading to a second phase of the controversy two years after the first hypothesis. The conclusions of the essay are that the original nuclear winter findings have been altered by later scientific study and, therefore, the political conclusions drawn by Carl Sagan in 1983 can no longer be supported by theory or facts. Continued use of the Crutzen-Birks (Ambio, 1982) and TTAPS (Science, December 1983) studies worst-case evidence from NCAR (Foreign Affairs, Summer 86) represents selective science. Arguing for strategic policy changes based on nuclear winter risks constitutes anti-nuclear rhetoric and not scientific reasoning.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 1987,
month = 3
}

Technical Report:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that may hold this item. Keep in mind that many technical reports are not cataloged in WorldCat.

Save / Share:
  • The difficulty of providing adequate protection to the civilian population with some kind of civil defense program is magnified by the technology available in the nuclear age. The United States expanded its civil defense program in the 1950's to include a measure of protection in the event of the explosion of nuclear devices. However, the history of the United States civil defense program has been generally characterized by inadequate funding and little interest at all levels of government. Most recently, the civil defense program has been associated and considered a component of nuclear deterrence. Under the direction of the Federalmore » Emergency Management Agency, the government will rely on crisis relocation as the primary means of protecting the population in the event of a nuclear attack or detonation. This plan envisions that evacuation of the population from high-risk areas to safer host areas. Does crisis relocation provide the country with a credible component to our nuclear deterrence. Do the leaders and citizens have confidence in the nation's ability to protect the civilian population. Have the leaders been completely forthright in preparing the population for the possibility of a nuclear war. These and related issues are discussed in this essay.« less
  • The unprecedented buildup of Soviet conventional and nuclear forces has created a dilemma for the West to successfully adhere to the strategy of deterrence with a flexible stop the Soviets conventionally or face the likely prospect of a strategic nuclear response. The author postulates that through the use of the lost art of deception, coupled with dedicated offensive actions to destroy Soviet theater nuclear systems, the USSR can be placed in a perceived position of theater nuclear inferiority and, therefore, war can be terminated on terms favorable to the West. There is a plethora of successful examples of the usemore » of deception in the history of warfare and the Soviets are masters of the use of this low-cost high-return combat multiplier. Research also indicates that there are few viable systems rather than air power available to the theater commander to attack and destroy Soviet theater nuclear assets and in all cases, it is a high risk venture with a very iffy chance of success. However, future initiatives such as force modernization, the Strategic Defense Initiative, arms reduction talks and others may make this concept more attractive.« less
  • This essay takes a critical look at Soviet short-range nuclear forces in an effort to identify Soviet capabilities to fight a limited nuclear war with NATO. From an analysis of Soviet military art, weapon-system capabilities and tactics, the author concludes that the Soviets have developed a viable limited-nuclear-attack option. Unless NATO reacts to this option, the limited nuclear attack may become favored Soviet option and result in the rapid defeat of NATO.
  • Because of the massive destructiveness of nuclear weapons, many nuclear ethicists have asserted that their use in war is contrary to just-war traditions which have guided Western moral thought since at least the Fifth Century. This position creates a significant dilemma for US officials who must keep their fingers on the nuclear trigger as part of our national defense strategy. This essay examines the dimensions of that dilemma by reviewing the principles of the just-war tradition and applying them to modern total-war concepts. It concludes by examining three possible solutions to the dilemma, (1) deployment of a strategic defense system,more » such as that contemplated by SDI; (2) arms control; and (3) establishment of a world police authority under the auspices of the United Nations to enforce nuclear disarmament and to intervene, if necessary, to prevent a total conventional war between the great powers.« less
  • Nuclear war has been feared by the entire world since the end of World War II. Since the early 1960s, the Soviet Union has been continually improving both its capability to wage nuclear war and, more important, to protect its population. Population protection or civil defense is the principal issue discussed, with emphasis on Soviet accomplishments and fluctuation of US policy. This issue is discussed from the viewpoint of many noted authors. The conclusion reached indicates that there can be deterrence to nuclear war through civil protection. This conclusion is reinforced with the efforts of the Soviets and the gainsmore » made by the US over the past three years.« less