It’s still likely to die in a nuclear apocalypse

Tiberiu Stanescu

Today, 23 years after the official end of the Cold War, organized tours in families nuclear missile silos abolished in ten states in America. Maybe more. A guide explains to visitors that here, in this room, Air Force missile monitored each containing a 1.3 megaton warhead able to incinerate everything within a radius of 10 kilometers. The Delta-01 facility in South Dakota, children can become junior border rocket with a badge and everything.

An analysis made in 200 8 Engineering Professor Martin E. Hellman Stanford estimated that these junior guards currently living with a 10% risk of dying from a nuclear weapon. It’s a game of Russian roulette with ten rooms, he said. Of course, many of the silos are empty now, which is great, but the world there are still 16,000 active nuclear weapons.

In a recent analysis, Seth Baum, CEO of Global Catastrophic Risk Institute has researched what are the chances accidentally start a nuclear war between Russia and the United States. Depending on the assumptions made, the chances took 1 to 100. But the risk of start of such a war is much higher if we take into account other countries besides Russia and the United States.

So young guards will not die of heart disease or cancer, but vaporization or incineration or radiation poisoning, bleeding and cognitive imbalance. Were more likely to die from it than death in a car accident (1 in 112) or cancer (not normally induced by radiation), the rate is about 1 in 7.


Baum’s analysis based on mathematical modeling frameworks constructed by schemes or Poisson processes, used as input information about nuclear accidents or near-misses “warning systems available information about the incidents that took place and other factors to estimate the probability of a crisis between Russia and US rates and false alarm probabilities leaders to launch missiles in response to a false alarm. “the study is based on data collected for the period between 1977 and 1983. In each year there are between 43 and 255 false alarms, most secret.

“The fact that so far there has been no evidence that nuclear war tactics of intimidation works, but I was lucky,” says Baum Bulletin Researchers atom. “If the third officer of the B-59 would be had a different opinion about the launch of the submarine nuclear weapons? If Norwegian rocket incident could have happened during a crisis between the US and Russia? If India and Pakistan would be resolved quickly so the Kargil conflict? It happens often crashes . ”

“In 2013, during a brief period in the United States threatened to intervene militarily in Syria, Israel launched missile to its coastal Mediterranean to test missile defense system,” Baum continues. “Russian radars have launch detected. Israel has cleared the confusion before something bad happens and nuclear weapons have not played any role in the incident. But that kind of danger demonstrates that we are every day. ”

Hellman’s 2008 analysis stems from anti-nuclear site called defusing Threat Nucl eare, which launched a petition to Congress encouraging visitors to fund a study to examine in detail the nuclear threat. Man has a mission.

The buttons are now launching worldwide, including both sides of the conflict in India / Pakistan. And then there are North Korea, China, Israel, France and Britain. All armed to the teeth for the apocalypse. Then there are the terrorist organizations. The chances of a terrorist nuclear attack launched over the next ten years 50-50.

Hellman’s analysis using probabilistic risk analysis to arrive at this conclusion disturbing and analysis that inform partly Baum’s latest study. In particular, Hellman analyzes the failure rate of nuclear deterrence. Basically, the whole structure stability of nuclear weapons is based on the fear of potential aggressors themselves not to fly in the air and fear of the reaction of other countries. But give misfire systems for many reasons – accidents, instability, sabotage, provocation – and tactical nuclear deterrent which saved us before annihilation is no exception.

Hellman allows a failure rate of 0.1 percent per year, or one percent per decade. Hence the risk of 10 percent. As noted in the study, prefer a failure rate of one percent per year, although it is claimed less. That would be a risk of 10 percent a decade and 50 percent in five decades. By comparison, the failure rate associated with an asteroid hitting the Earth is approximately .000001 percent per year.

Perversely nuclear weapons is a facilitator of peace, but that does not mean it’s stable. Eric Schlosser cataloged admirable history events approximation water turned into nuclear accidents in the Guardian last week.

The situation now is much worse than that from the moment Hellman’s report. There is also Iran, but US relations Russia is the limit. Send US anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe and Russia tests new generation nuclear weapons. And if America will continue its clockwise direction until 2016, will have a president can really fool who will guide the world into a new era nuclear super dangerous.