29 September 2016

Notes - lots of opinions / writing fiction: a reason or two



       Mid-morning. You did some chores – swept the back deck and attached the outdoor thermometer to the vertical board frame on the gutter in the shade below the roof of the porch so it can be easily seen from the front door window. Joe and Jason have not yet arrived. You thought they would be early Carol did not. – Amorella

       0935 hours. The weather is a cool sixty-degree and it is quite damp. Supposedly we will have more rain today, my arthritis says that personally this is not good news. I would just as soon be taking a nap right about now. This morning I awoke thinking about my Uncle Jay Schick and Uncle Dee Schick both older brothers of my mother and Aunt Ruthie who will be 88 this Halloween. Two more people I very early named with letters J and D. In those days the family was still around Westerville. Uncle Jay moved to Abilene, Texas to work his father-in-law’s oil wells. Uncle Jay eventually moved to California and made a success business of selling high-end home appliances. Their real first names were James and Eugene. Another brother was Curtis. I didn’t see him so often as he lived in Toledo. Eventually, I called him Uncle Curtie so once I was in first grade I used real names for people not letters. The letter business must have bothered me during sleep as I remembered it first thing. I don’t like being reminded of my ignorance as to how the world works early on. I tended on listening to myself rather than other people’s explanations as to how things are like they are. Grandma Schick always had this saying on the wall about “having the wisdom to know the difference” – I forget the rest of it. And, about “feeling bad for not having shoes until I meet a man who has no feet.” I forget the rest of that too. Somewhere around four or five I liked Grandma Schick for having words on the wall as well as pictures. Obviously, I am abnormally attached to them. This is not going to change in my 74th year. (1000)

       Joe is not coming until about three for about an hour. Carol is working on the checkbooks. Eventually you are out to lunch. – Amorella

       1227 hours. We spent over an hour watching MSNBC on the train accident at the Hoboken Terminal.

       Mid-afternoon. Joe and Jason just left and have most work done. They installed a cement board on top of the three/quarter plywood base that the granite will sit on surrounding the tub and on the connected seat in the shower. Monday, Nick (granite), Joe and Jason will be here working. Nick will install all the granite, bath, vanity and shower. Joe and Jason will finish up the floor base under the bath so the cement can be poured under the tub base for added stability for the tub. – Amorella

       1541 hours. The master bath is coming along well. I like their construction methods – it is a little more money overall but Kessler is known for his upscale upgrades in southwest Ohio. Ours is not that upscale (some people spend a hundred thousand dollars on an upgraded master bath). We are well below half of that. Why I ever thought this could be done in two weeks is beyond me. This project is getting more exciting now that we can see the progress. Carol is on the phone with Kim and all sounds well. Kim is working fifteen hours a week as a consultant with Team Telos now rather than ten and she loves it.

       Late afternoon. You had a revelation last night before sleep that ‘angel or alien’ constructions have long been a personal focus to help humanity survive better on planet Earth because you do not have the confidence in human nature itself. The reasons are for the same for many people your age – nuclear and biological weaponry.

       1658 hours. This is information I gathered from Quora:

** **

How much damage could the world's most powerful nuclear weapon inflict?

i.e. how much has the nuclear bomb progressed since Hiroshima and Nagasaki - how much more damage could the world's most advanced nuclear weaponry inflict today?

**

Randall Waibel, BS and MS in Aero and Astro Engr with 41 years in aerospace industry
Written Aug 23, 2015


It is believed that the largest nuclear weapons currently deployed are a 5 Megaton (MT) Chinese warhead on Dong Feng (East Wind) 5 (DF-5) missiles and a Russian 5MT warhead on the UR-100N (NATO reporting name SS-19 Stiletto) missiles. The Chinese may have already replaced the single warhead with three Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) each with a 300 Kiloton (KT) warhead. The Russians are expected to do the same upgrading to MIRVs with 400 KT warheads. This would leave the Chinese with the largest deployed warhead of 3.3 MT on the DF-4 missiles.

The destructive potential of these weapons can be estimated from empirical equations found on the site “Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions” (author: Carey Sublette) (Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions) (see Section 5).

The empirical equations estimate the potential destructiveness of a nuclear weapon based on its yield equivalent of TNT. They give a radius of lethality for prompt ionizing radiation (not “fallout”), thermal pulse, and blast. For radiation this lethal unshielded threshold is 500 rem. For the thermal pulse, the lethal unshielded threshold is assumed to be 8 cal/cm^2 which would result in 3rd degree burns. For the blast effect, the equation yields the radius of a 4.6 psi overpressure assuming the weapon is detonated at an optimum height.

For a 5MT weapon these radii are:
Rradiation = 4.2 km
Rthermal = 22.6 km
Rblast = 12.3 km

***

Jeff Kay, Modern Renaissance Man / Top Writer 2015/16
Updated Apr 26, 2011


Little Boy, the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima was equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT.  The bomb detonated at 580 meters above the city.  Buildings were structurally damaged in a 1 mile radius.  As many as 150, 000 people died as a direct and indirect result of the bomb.

The Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear device ever detonated, is the equivalent of 50,000,000 tons of TNT.  This is 3333.33 times more powerful than Little Boy.  If this bomb were dropped on a city the size of New York or London,   The damage would extend well over several hundred miles, and the death toll could easily be in the tens of millions, depending on location, wind direction and height of detonation.

One other factor is a massive electro magnetic pulse (EMP) that would wipe out communications and transportation for many thousands of square miles, extending the damage much farther.


***

Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty, Mostly Classified
Written Aug 16


Explosive power of a nuclear weapon is usually expressed in kiloton (kt) or Megaton (Mt) TNT equivalent. The first nuclear weapon used during the Trinity Test (16 July 1945) had a yield of 19 kt. The Mk-I Little Boy on Hiroshima had  yield of 12.5 kt and the Mk-IIIA Fat Man used on Nagasaki 25 kt.

The largest weapon ever created was the Soviet RDS-220 Vanya with a yield of 50 Mt which is 4,000 times the energy of the Mk-I Little Boy.

To have an idea of the blast radius and damage caused, I suggest you check out NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein: NUKEMAP

The RDS-220 Vanya used in the test was a scaled down ver
sion of a 100 Mt weapon, the Soviets scaled it down to allow the bomber to escape (Tu-95V); the bomber escape only narrowly. The fireball had a diameter of some 9 km and most structures within a 20 km radius would have been levelled (there weren’t actually that many structures around, the test took place on Novaya Zemblya).

These days most weapon yields have been optimized and are roughly around 500 kt. In the 1960s the warhead all had large yields 2–5 Mt on average, to compensate for lack of accuracy. This was vital when destroying hard targets such as underground bunkers, missile siles, airfields carved out of mountains, naval bases carved out of cliffs, etc. As the accuracy improved, the yields diminished. A 500 kt warhead has a good kill percentage against a hard target and multiple warheads can be used for saturation bombing of urban-industrial targets. A simple example: If you wan to totally destroy New York City you need 40 x 500 kt weapons (total yield 20 Mt) or 7 x 20 Mt weapons (total yield 140 Mt) … the destruction would be the same. So smaller warheads are more economic than larger ones.
The largest yield in the US inventory is the B83Y2 Mod.0 at 2 Mt but this weapon is no longer deployed, it is in storage. The largest yield in the British arsenal as a Trident II warhead at 100 kt (there are also two smaller yield Trident II warheads for tactical use). The largest French warheads are the TN-81 and TNA both at 300 kt for use with the ASMP cruise missile. China fields a 4.5 Mt warhead on the DF-5A. Russia still deploys some R-36M2 (15A18M2) Voyevoda ICBMs with the 15F175 20 Mt warhead. India’s largest warhead has a 250 kt yield for use on the Agni-III/IV. Pakistani warheads have a top yield of 150 kt and those of Israel 100 kt. North Korea’s largest weapon is estimated at 10 kt.

Now it is important to point out miniaturizing a weapon is more difficult than making a big large yield one. What countries want are optimal yields (they vary for the purpose they are intended for) with as low a mass as possible to make delivery easier: that’s the big challenge.

***

Mohammed Rafiq Sethi, Physician
Written Feb 5

[This is in reference to a small nuclear war between only India and Pakistan.]

You had plenty of very useful answers with minute details that I read and learnt from as well.

You asked about the most powerful nuclear explosion, here is what will happen if there was ever a regional nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan on a much smaller scale.  You can extrapolate the following scenario and take it from there. I thought the following would shed some light on the devastation that some think will only be limited to the subcontinent.

Here is the result of studies done at three American Universities. The link follows the main points.

                If the war is fought with 100 Hiroshima-size weapons (currently available in India-Pakistan arsenals), which have half of 1 percent (0.05%) of the total explosive power of all currently operational and deployed U.S.-Russian nuclear weapons
                 
                20 million people will die from the direct effects of the weapons, which is equal to nearly half the number of people killed during World War II
                 
                Weapons detonated in the largest cities of India and Pakistan will create massive firestorms which will produce millions of tons of smoke
                 
                1 to 5 million tons of smoke will quickly rise 50 km above cloud level into the stratosphere
                 
                The smoke will spread around the world, forming a stratospheric smoke layer that will block sunlight from reaching the surface of Earth
                 
                Within 10 days following the explosions, temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere would become colder than those experienced during the pre-industrial Little Ice Age
                 
                These nuclear war-induced effects on temperature would be twice as largeas those which followed the largest volcanic eruption in the last 500 years, in 1816, which caused “The Year Without Summer”
                 
Year Without a Summer

                This cold weather would also cause a 10% decline in average global rain fall and a large reduction in the Asian summer monsoon.
                 
                25-40% of the protective ozone layer would be destroyed at the mid-latitudes, and 50-70% would be destroyed at northern high latitudes.Massive increases of harmful UV light would result, with significantlynegative effects on human, animal and plant life.
                 
                These changes in global climate would cause significantly shortenedgrowing seasons in the Northern Hemisphere for at least years. It would be too cold to grow wheat in most of Canada.
                 
                World grain stocks, which already are at historically low levels, would becompletely depleted. Grain exporting nations would likely cease exports in order to meet their own food needs.
                 
                Some medical experts predict that ensuing food shortages would cause hundreds of millions of already hungry people, who now depend upon food imports, to starve to death during the years following the nuclear conflict.
                 
Here is the link to some global maps in the above study
Five Millions Tons of Smoke in the Stratosphere 
In short, the humanity will soon cease to exist. I can't even imagine what will happen to the planet after the explosion of the most powerful nuclear weapon.

***

Selected and edited from --
https://www.quora dot com/How-much-damage-could-the-worlds-most-powerful-nuclear-weapon-inflict

** **

       1703 hours. This is enough information to show me that if we err today as we almost did during the Cuban Missile Crisis (October 1962) we mostly would been as long gone or never been. That was one of the most frightening weeks of my life – not for me so much as for the planet. I’ll round up some info on biological weaponry and add it tonight. What bothers me the most about the above is the fall out from even a small nuclear war.

       This shows your passion for your species’ humanity. You genuinely feel the worst could happen mostly by accident. Your fears are your own and obviously not everyone would agree with your assessment here. The point is how this all plays out in your mind and why humans need to have a colony on Mars if at all possible. Post. - Amorella

     This section is on another personal worrisome concern for humanity from your perspective. - Amorella

Arms Control Association

Chemical and Biological Weapons Status at a Glance

          FACT SHEETS & BRIEFS
Contact: Daryl Kimball, Executive Director, (202) 463-8270 x107
For more information about the CWC, please see the CWC at a Glance Factsheet and CWC Signatories and States-Parties
For more information about the BWC, please see the BWC at a Glance Factsheet and BWC Signatories and States-Parties

Updated: February 2014

The danger posed by Biological Weapons (BW) and Chemical Weapons (CW) still lingers two decades after the cold war’s end. Despite the reduction of threats as an increasing number of states fulfill their commitments under international conventions, a small number of states still maintain declared and undeclared stockpiles and even active BW and CW programs. A bio-technology revolution is making bio-technology more readily available and presents a potential future proliferation risk. Dual-use chemical processes also present a series of ongoing challenges. Progress has certainly been made by Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) state-parties and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in the destruction of declared CW stockpiles. However, progress on the implementation of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) has been slower due to the  lack of a formal verification mechanism.

The chart below details countries possessing or developing CW or BW. It draws on open source intelligence including unclassified government assessments. Taking into account the clandestine and controversial nature of these programs, state capabilities are considered under four headings: State declarations detail the state’s official position on the weapons in question and whether they have declared stockpiles or programs. Allegations look at allegations made by other states, namely the U.S. as to what the status of programs and stockpiles are. Potential delivery systems consider the means that suspected possessors have of delivering such weapons. Any other information is also included which may be of relevance to a state’s capabilities.

The chart also details whether each state has signed, ratified, or acceded to relevant international treaties: the 1972 BWC, which bans offensive biological weapons development and possession; the 1993 CWC, which outlaws chemical weapons development, possession, and use; and the 1925 Geneva Protocol, which forbids the use of chemical and biological weapons in war.

Selected and edited from -- Arms Control Association - chemical and biological weapons status …

** **

Reaching Critical Will

Biological weapons

What are biological weapons?

Biological warfare is the deliberate spreading of disease amongst humans, animals, and plants. Biological weapons (BW) introduce a bacteria or virus into an environment for hostile purposes, that is not prepared to defend itself from the intruder. As a result, this agent can become very effective at killing plants, livestock, pets, and humans. There are a huge variety of genetically or traditionally modified bacterias and viruses to withstand antibiotics, that could be used as biological weapons, but some of the most common types today are bacteria, rickettsiae, viruses, toxins, and fungi.

Deadly and Cheap

When compared to the cost of a nuclear weapons program, biological weapons are extremely cheap. It is estimated that 1 gram of toxin could kill 10 million people. A purified form of botulinum toxin is approximately 3 million times more potent than Sarin, a chemical nerve agent. As a comparison, a SCUD missile filled with botulinum toxin could affect an area of 3700 sq.km, an area 16 times greater than could be affected with Sarin.

It is important to note that while it is relatively cheap to produce the biological weapons agents in large quantities, sophisticated weapons are slightly more difficult to develop and produce. For example, when a missile is flying it gets very hot, biological agents are killed. Therefore, the missile has to be fitted with a cooling system. In addition, storing biological weapons agents requires much effort, due to the quick decay of many of these sorts of agents. However, as far as weapons of mass destruction are concerned, biological weapons are relatively cheap to develop and produce. In one analysis, the comparative cost of civilian (unprotected) casualties is "$2,000 per square kilometer with conventional weapons, $800 with nuclear weapons, $600 with nerve-gas weapons, and $1 with biological weapons." Not surprisingly, biological weapons have long since become known as the poor man's atom bomb.

Any nation with a reasonably advanced pharmaceutical and medical industry has the capability of mass producing biological weapons. This fact also leads to problems with determining what countries have programs. Anything from a piece of fruit to a ballistic missile could be used to deliver a biological weapon to a target. Along with this is the fact that with certain organisms, only a few particles would be needed to start an infection that could potentially cause an epidemic.

Conventional weapons explode once and are finished. With a few particles of Hanta virus many thousands of people could become carriers that infect thousands more people.

A seed culture of anthrax bacteria could be grown to mass quantities in around 96 hours. The level of technology needed to do this kind of work is also much lower when compared to Nuclear weapons. Most of the techniques used can be found in textbooks and journals available worldwide. The information is not considered "hot" like certain kinds of nuclear information. The techniques are taught in undergraduate courses in Colleges and Universities worldwide.

When have biological weapons been used - a short history

The first recorded use of biological agents is the Romans using dead animals to foul the enemies water supply. This had the dual effects of decreasing enemy numbers and lowering morale.

1346-1347 - Mongols catapult corpses contaminated with plague over the walls into Kaffa (in Crimea), forcing besieged Genoans to flee. Some historians believe that this event was the cause of the epidemic of plague that swept across medieval Europe killing 25 million.

1710 - Russian troops allegedly use plague-infected corpses against Swedes 

1767 - During the French and Indian Wars, the British give blankets used to wrap British smallpox victims to hostile Indian tribes.

1916-1918 - German agents use anthrax and the equine disease glanders to infect livestock and feed for export to Allied forces. Incidents include the infection of Romanian sheep with anthrax and glanders for export to Russia, Argentinian mules with anthrax for export to Allied troops, and American horses and feed with glanders for export to France 1937 - Japan begins its offensive biological weapons program. Unit 731, the BW research and development unit, is located in Harbin, Manchuria. Over the course of the program, at least 10,000 prisoners are killed in Japanese experiments.

1939 - Nomonhan Incident - Japanese poison Soviet water supply with intestinal typhoid bacteria at former Mongolian border. First use of biological weapons by Japanese.

1937 - Japan begins its offensive biological weapons program. Unit 731, the BW research and development unit, is located in Harbin, Manchuria. Over the course of the program, at least 10,000 prisoners are killed in Japanese experiments.

1940 - The Japanese drop rice and wheat mixed with plague-carrying fleas over China and Manchuria

1942 - U.S. begins its offensive biological weapons program and chooses Camp Detrick, Frederick, Maryland as its research and development site.

1945 - Only known tactical use of BW by Germany. A large reservoir in Bohemia is poisoned with sewage.

1951 - In a test of BW dispersal methods, biological simulants are sprayed over San Francisco.

1966 - The United States conducts a test of vulnerability to covert BW attack by releasing a harmless biological simulant into the New York City subway system.

1969 - President Nixon announces unilateral dismantlement of the U.S. offensive BW program.

1970 - President Nixon extends the dismantlement efforts to toxins, closing a loophole which might have allowed for their production.

1978 - In a case of Soviet state-sponsored assassination, Bulgarian exile Georgi Markov, living in London, is stabbed with an umbrella that injects him with a tiny pellet containing ricin (a highly toxic, natural protein).

1979 - Outbreak of pulmonary anthrax in Sverdlovsk, Soviet Union.

1992- Russian president Boris Yeltsin acknowledges that the outbreak was caused by an accidental relase of anthrax spores from a Soviet military microbiological facility.

1985-1991 - Iraq develops an offensive biological weapons capability including anthrax, botulium toxin, and aflatoxin.

How can biological weapons be defended against?

Biological defense may be divided into the following categories: prevention, protection, detection, treatment, and decontamination.

Prevention may take several forms. In the case of biological warfare, international disarmament and inspection regimes may deter production and dissemination of biological warfare agents. Intelligence assets may indicate potential threats and allow for preventative action to be undertaken.

Protection against biological warfare agents is limited. Protective suits, clothing, gas masks and filters may provide limited protection for short periods of time. However, the persistence of biological agents such as anthrax makes such protections mainly useful for military personnel and first responders. Anthrax can remain active and potentially lethal for at least 40 years. (source: Biological Warfare: A Historical Perspective) It should be noted that anthrax is an exception, as most other agents do not live that long. Protection (as detection and treatment) of Biological Warfare is the establishment and maintenance of a good health care system. In addition, vaccination is a form of protection, which may provide substantial protection against naturally occurring agents, although vaccines often provide limited or no protection against genetically engineered variants designed to defeat such vaccines.

Detection. During the Gulf War, US and allied forces suffered from a lack of reliable biological agent detection systems. Subsequently, a number of detection systems have been developed. Often it takes from a few hours to a few days to detect exposure to a biological weapon. However,  advances in biotechnology will help develop improved and quicker detectors. Current detectors include: SMART (Sensitive Membrane Antigen Rapid Test) JBPDS (Joint Biological Point Detection System) BIDS (Biological Integrated Detection System) IBAD (Interim Biological Agent Detector) (source: Biological Warfare and Detection Capabilities) Treatment options after infection depend on whether or not the infectious agent is identified. If not identified, massive doses of antibiotics may be given in hopes that something may work. Again, treatment of victims of biological warfare largely depends on the establishment and maintenance of a good health care system.

Decontamination. Unlike chemical weapons, which disperse over time, biological agents may grow and multiply over time. Anthrax can remain active in the soil for at least 40 years and is highly resistant to eradication. (Source: Biological Warfare: A Historical Perspective) However, the anthrax contaminated Gruinard Island in the UK was decontaminated - decontamination is possible, using chemicals, heat or UV rays.

Efforts to ban biological weapons

Using biological and chemical weapons was condemned by international declarations and treaties, notably by the 1907 Hague Convention (IV) respecting the laws and customs of war on land. Efforts to strengthen this prohibition resulted in the conclusion, in 1925, of the Geneva Protocol, which banned the use of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, usually referred to as chemical weapons, as well as the use of bacteriological methods of warfare. The latter are now understood to include not only bacteria, but also other biological agents, such as viruses or rickettsiae which were unknown at the time the Geneva Protocol was signed. However, the Geneva Protocol did not prohibit the development, production and stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons. Attempts to achieve a complete ban were made in the 1930s in the framework of the League of Nations, but with no success.

The prohibition of chemical and biological weapons appeared on the agenda of the Eighteen-Nation Committee on Disarmament in Geneva (now called the Conference on Disarmament) in 1968. One year later, the United Nations published an influential report on the problems of chemical and biological warfare, and the question received special attention at the UN General Assembly. The UN report concluded that certain chemical and biological weapons cannot be confined in their effects in space and time and might have grave and irreversible consequences for humans and nature. This would apply to both the attacking and the attacked nations. Due to interest in the topic in the end of the 1960s, the Biological Weapons and Toxin Convention was signed in 1972 and entered into force in 1975.

The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention

The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) entered into force in March 1975 after 22 governments had ratified, and was the first multilateral disarmament treaty banning an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. The Convention, about four pages long, bans the development, production stockpiling, or acquisition of biological agents or toxins of any type or quantity that do not have protective, medical, or other peaceful purposes, or any weapons or means of delivery for such agents or toxins. Under the treaty, all such materiel is to be destroyed within nine months of the treaty's entry into force. The BTWC currently has 163 states parties and 110 signatories. Since the entry of the Convention, seven review conferences have taken place. On the Seventh Review Conference in December 2011, 103 states parties to the Convention participated in the conference.

Selected and edited from -- http://www.reachingcriticalwill dot org/resources/fact-sheets/critical-issues/4579-biological-weapons

** **

Biological warfare (BW)—also known as germ warfare—is the use of biological toxins or infectious agents such as bacteria, viruses, and fungi with the intent to kill or incapacitate humans, animals or plants as an act of war. Biological weapons (often termed "bio-weapons", "biological threat agents", or "bio-agents") are living organisms or replicating entities (viruses, which are not universally considered "alive") that reproduce or replicate within their host victims. Entomological (insect) warfare is also considered a type of biological weapon. This type of warfare is distinct from nuclear warfare and chemical warfare, which together with biological warfare make up NBC, the military acronym for nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare using weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). None of these are conventional weapons, which are primarily due to their explosive, kinetic, or incendiary potential.

Biological weapons may be employed in various ways to gain a strategic or tactical advantage over the enemy, either by threats or by actual deployments. Like some of the chemical weapons, biological weapons may also be useful as area denial weapons. These agents may be lethal or non-lethal, and may be targeted against a single individual, a group of people, or even an entire population. They may be developed, acquired, stockpiled or deployed by nation states or by non-national groups. In the latter case, or if a nation-state uses it clandestinely, it may also be considered bioterrorism.

There is an overlap between biological warfare and chemical warfare, as the use of toxins produced by living organisms is considered under the provisions of both the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention. Toxins and psychochemical weapons are often referred to as midspectrum agents. Unlike bioweapons, these midspectrum agents do not reproduce in their host and are typically characterized by shorter incubation periods.

Selected and edited from Wikipedia

** **

         The above you have selected as examples of biological weapons. Your main concern is not that these will be used by the military but that accidents happen. These matters concern you and you can do nothing about them except admit that these concerns and the safety of the world’s children have been most of the lifetime bothersome and they are a part of the reason you write fiction. The truth is already out there. Do you agree with this assessment? – Amorella

         2230 hours. I do. Deep down I have an inner hope that our species will survive partly by luck, perhaps even by miracle. I don’t really know these things. I like to share matters that affect my consciousness because I’m sure they affect others too. What can be done? I have no idea, if I did I wouldn’t be writing fiction. 

         Post. - Amorella


No comments:

Post a Comment