[extropy-chat] nuclear winter's back
emlynoregan at gmail.com
Wed Dec 13 12:43:27 UTC 2006
I really love that idea. Anyone got an idea on numbers?
Related... instead of global nuclear winter, could we pollute with
something a lot more opaque than current fossil fuels, and reduce the
amount of energy getting through to the planet surface? Modify the
greenhouse gas emmisions so they act like dark sunglasses?
On 13/12/06, Gary Miller <aiguy at comcast.net> wrote:
> Hey now here's an thought.
> What about using nuclear weapons nuclear winter effect to offset global
> We could probably set them off far enough out under the middle of the ocean
> that that significant
> fallout wouldn't even reach land.
> Radical perhaps but using one environmental disaster to counter another
> sounds crazy enough to work.
> Who says two wrongs can't make a right?
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
> Of Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 3:13 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] nuclear winter's back
> Damien Broderick wrote:
SYDNEY: Even a
> small-scale, regional nuclear war could produce as
many fatalities as all
> of World War II and disrupt the global climate
for a decade or more, U.S.
> researchers have found.
"With the exchange of 100 [hiroshima-sized] weapons
> as posed in this
scenario, the estimated quantities of smoke generated
> could lead to
global climate anomalies exceeding any changes experienced in
recorded history," said co-author Alan Robock, of Rutgers Univeristy
> New Jersey. "And that's just 0.03 per cent of the total explosive
> the current world nuclear arsenal."
> Kucinich's knuckles hit the podium like a drumroll as he says he will "cause
> the U.S. to work toward total nuclear disarmament...."
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
More information about the extropy-chat