Well yes and then again no. Thing is that most of the WW3 apocalypse type stuff was based on a large exchange; Hiroshima and Nagasaki were swept by clean air coming from else where etc, while a serious nuclear apocalypse would not permit much of this effect, and so the consequences would be more intense.

There are several types of radiation but the key is that intensity is inversely proportional to longevity. Because it arises from instability, an object that is highly radioative and emitting stuff very intenesely will decay away quite quickly; conversely, something that's only just borderline unstable and emitting at a low intensity will last a long time. An object with a half-life of 10,000 years could probably be held in the hand quite harmlessly.

Every element beyond iron-56 is technically unstable and therefore radioactive, but they have half-lives that for most part are substantiually longer than the lifetime of the universe IIRC.

Being exposed to radiation can be understood as being subjected to a barrage from a large number of very very tiny machineguns. Individual particles travel through the body smashing what they hit; in serious direct doses this has en effect like a burn, and also kicks the shit out of your internal systems by killing random cells all over the place. Long term slow exposure isn't much different to being under the sun.

The main difference between civilian and military radiation is the intensity; civilian plants use material that is only suficiently radioactive to trigger a runaway effect at a very slow rate. This is bad, and you still wouldn't want to be close to it, but its not comparable with the highly enriched stuff that has its cascade effect occur suddenly and cataclysmically. The main fallout effect from weapons detonation is dust particles that themselves get irradiated and become radioactive, and this is at its worst when these particles get inside your body and emit their radiation there.

Hence, in Chernobyl, animals can live relatively normal lives; they are getting a dose that is not healthy, and probably causes them various sorts of illnesses and birth defects, but also probably doesn't shorten their lifespan that much. Humans would experience it rather differently because we would react to those illnesses and defects, and we have an artificially extended lifespan, so we would accumulate more damage over time and the reduction in life expectancy would be observable.

Fallout effects have always been somewhat overstated in the popular imagination, but on the other hand the damage is irreversible and accumulates steadily. Walking into and out of radiation exposure is not particularly significant, but living with it every day, with it in your food and your clothes and your own tissues, could get quite serious relatively quickly (on the order of years). This is the main concern about civil nuclear pollution.

Frankly I don't think 25 20-kiloton bombs would be that significant. Nuclear war exhanges of a few thousand multi-megaton warheads would be a different story.

A very good comment. Thanks, Contra.

Quote:

Frankly I don't think 25 20-kiloton bombs would be that significant. Nuclear war exhanges of a few thousand multi-megaton warheads would be a different story.

Agree. People seem to go hysterical and foam at the mouth over the threat of a nuclear bomb. But nuclear bombs of the kind that North Korea, Iran (and formerly Pakistan) had in mind are likely less disruptive than Hurrican Katrina, and pale into insignificance beside the next major earthquake to hit California.

There are different categories of nuclear waste.

Air bursts produce little radioactive fallout. I'm not sure bout humidity. Given the kind of temperatures you have to ask how much water vapour will be around? Ground bursts tend not to disperse evenly but in a given direction, a little like the shape of a footprint. I did a fair bit of reading about Chernobyl quite recently and it's suprising how many of the 'bio-robots' responsible for clearing the roof of the reactor are still alive and well. That said, they had a very limited exposure ( 40 seconds) while wearing lead plates and respirators and so on.

Vaguely related, and I never miss a chance to plug this thing.

Tokyo Damage Report ura hello work – NUCLEAR WASTE CLEANER-UPPER

Quote:

... “We don’t advertise the jobs in ‘hello work’ magazines or sites. In my case, I went out and got some nuclear industry trade magazines. “Nuclear Times” or “Reactor Core Monthly” or whatever. I read ‘em all! There’s some want-ads in there. The other way to get hired – if you’re not connected – is to skip the main nuclear companies altogether and aim for the subsidiary ‘grand-child companies.’ Like, Big Company A owns the reactor, but Child-company B handles the cleaning. Or Grand-child company C handles the inspections. Or if you find out when a reactor is scheduled for clean-up, just go outside on that day and wait. It’s not rare for there to be a bunch of day-laborers waiting!” On the streets, there’s no shortage of interesting rumors that I’d like to get to the bottom of. For instance, homeless from Ueno park being offered $100 for a days’ work at a reactor. “There’s also that side of the business!” replies Mr. Joinbeauty. “In this industry, you hear a lot of rumors about Yakuza involvement in the subsidiary companies. I can’t say those rumors are all false. There’s a lot of day-laborers at our plant, and some of them have gang tattoos, too! Who knows what they’re up to? It’s a mystery, right?”... (continues)

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by bateman

Air bursts produce little radioactive fallout. I'm not sure bout humidity. Given the kind of temperatures you have to ask how much water vapour will be around?

The relative humidity will shrink immediately to almost zero due to the high temperature, but the absolute humidity will still be the same. After all, the water vapor molecules in the air have no place to go. They will still be around.

In order to spread radioactivity beyond the radius of immediate (i.e., direct) radiation, you need a medium to carry the radiation to some other place. This can be either water (through radiated rivers) or air. Water transport is efficient but limited to wherever the river flows. Air transport is therefore potentially much more effective.

In order for air to transport the radiation elsewhere, the radiation must be attached to particles that are light enough to be carried by wind to distances far away, and yet, they must be heavy enough so that they will eventually fall back down to the ground.

Dust particles are a very effective carrier of radioactivity. As we know from volcanic ashes, wind can carry dust particles over hundreds of kilometers, where they will eventually land.

Water vapor is another effective carrier, because sooner or later, the water will condensate out, and you get radioactive rain. Radioactive rain is even more effective than dust, because the plants will actively suck in the water, thereby ensuring that the radioactivity ends up in the food chain of animals and humans.

It would be a waste of a human life to die of nothing at all.

Precipitation will also wash radioactive dust out of the air and deposit it on the ground. Thus, depending on prevailing weather patterns, it might indeed be the case that you end up with a pocket that isn't much affected. Being behind the rain shadow of a mountain range, for example.