homehome Home chatchat Notifications


How to survive a nuclear attack: mathematical model gives you some options

The first moments following a nuclear attack are crucial. If you’re right in line of the blast, well … you’re pretty much toast. For people out of the initial blast’s way, but still subjected to lethal fallout, making the right steps can mean the difference between life and death. Not satisfied with the official government […]

Tibi Puiu
January 15, 2014 @ 10:57 am

share Share

The first moments following a nuclear attack are crucial. If you’re right in line of the blast, well … you’re pretty much toast. For people out of the initial blast’s way, but still subjected to lethal fallout, making the right steps can mean the difference between life and death. Not satisfied with the official government recommendations in case of nuclear fallout, Michael Dillon, an atmospheric scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, proposes a mathematical model that looks at a few important scenarios and tells you when and how you should leave your house in search for better shelter.

Dilon started exploring the topic some 5 years ago after the U.S. government called out for more research into nuclear sheltering. After being asked by family members what they should do in case of a nuclear emergency, the scientist was struck by the fact he didn’t have a definite and satisfying answer. There’s clearly no ONE way to handle this sort of stuff. The dread alone in face of such an incident is enough to petrify most people. In some standard cases, and if the person in question manages to keep his reason, lives can be saved.

The official government notice is seek shelter and stay put! In California, where Dilon is from, there aren’t really that many basements, though. So, he decided to make a mathematical model in which he looks at a couple of situations in which people need to move while nuclear fallout is still infesting the atmosphere. A nuclear event similar to the one that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki was chosen for his calculations. Although nuclear power states today have thousands time more power in a single warhead, the assumption is that a nuclear attack would be more likely coming from a terrorist threat, which would typically use a low-yield warhead.

The key variables are:

  • exposure time to radiation outside
  • precise timing with initial blast, since radiation intensity decreases over time
  • distance from detonation
  • environmental shielding from radiation

Now, there are a lot of things that can happen after you find your dear home ripped to shreds and, crumbling out of the rubble, you leap out through your ragged doorway. For the sake of simplification, Dilon made some assumptions:

  • you are totally exposed while running to safer shelter
  • there’s enough room for everybody in the shelter. Put otherwise, he ignores how the beast in men comes out in life and death situations.

He’s conclusions are summed up in the image below. It all boils down to this, though: the ratio of the time you spend hunkering down in your first shelter to the time you spend moving to the high-quality shelter.

Photo: Michael Dillon/LLNL

Photo: Michael Dillon/LLNL

Surprisingly enough, the best course of action would be not to stay in your initial, poor shelter but to run to your nearest safe shelter – preferably somewhere with very thick concrete armor. This goes against the official recommendation that says you should stay sheltered no matter what for the initial 12 hours following the nuclear blast. n. If you have poor shelter but higher quality shelter is available farther away, you should get to that high-quality shelter no later than 30 minutes after detonation.

His paper published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society A, claims that between 10,000 and 100,000 could be saved. The figure themselves are arguable, considering a number of assumptions have been made and far more have been ignored totally. Lawrence Wein, an operations research scientist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California says “He fails to account for several important issues that are vitally important for policy recommendations.”

Nevertheless, the model serves as a good starting point for what’s useful and what’s useless to do in case of a nuclear attack, although it has yet to be cleared by a government body.

share Share

A New Vaccine Could Stop One of the Deadliest Forms of Breast Cancer Before It Starts

A phase 1 trial hints at a new era in cancer prevention

Ozempic Is Changing More Than Waistlines as Scientists Wise Up to Concerning Side Effects

But GLP-1 drugs also offer many benefits beyond weight loss.

New Blood Test Reveals How Fast Your Organs Are Aging. Your Brain’s Biological Age May Hold the Key to How Long You Live

People with "older" brains had a much higher risk of dying compared to "younger" brains.

Deadly Heatwave Killed 2,300 in Europe, and 1,500 of those were due to climate change

How hot is too hot to survive in a city?

A Common Cough Syrup Might Protect the Brain in Parkinson’s Dementia

An old drug reveals new potential — but only in some patients.

Doctors Restored Hearing in Children and Adults With a Single Shot

A one-time injection helped some patients hear for the first time in their lives

People Across Cultures Agree This Body Fat Percentage Is the Most Attractive in Men

Across cultures and genders the male body fat level we consider ideal is less extreme than you think.

Tennis May Add Nearly 10 Years to Your Life and Most People Are Ignoring It

Could a weekly match on the court be the secret to a longer, healthier life?

Your gut has a secret weapon against 'forever chemicals': microbes

Our bodies have some surprising allies sometimes.

Newborns Feel Pain Long Before They Can Understand It

Tiny brains register pain early, but lack the networks to interpret or respond to it