– Thank you, thank you," Yarovitovich stopped him. – As they say, no one is forgotten, nothing is forgotten. I take it you have everything?
– Yes, Your Honor.
– Thank you. Let's move on to the next option.
Chapter 2: Nuclear War and Climate Change
– Another presentation on the topic of impacts, in particular climate change, from our colleague, the Master of the Academy of Sciences. You have the floor.
Yarovitovich did not turn his face, did not point at anyone. It was not quite clear how the next speaker realized that he had been given the floor. Apparently, there was one Master of the Academy of Sciences on the board. The area on the table in front of him lit up.
– I present to your attention a study on the topic "Nuclear War – Possible Climate Change". For many decades the threat of nuclear catastrophe has been hovering over mankind, and scientists of different specialties and all countries have tried to estimate its possible size. Direct destruction and mass deaths during atomic explosions, murderous radiation, diseases and many other things that await mankind in the outcome of a nuclear war have been repeatedly subjected to careful analysis. The conclusions have been horrifying and have disturbed great masses of people. And yet the published results did not provide a clear answer to the question of the possible fate of human civilization after nuclear war. The impression was created that a nuclear war could seemingly end with the victory of one of the warring countries. This created illusions and could be a source of tragic designs. With all the possible variants, no one from military and political strategists considered the option that a nuclear war would have such climatic consequences that mankind would in no way survive! In the late 70s, the Max Planck Institute of Physical Chemistry began to seriously study the phenomena of large-scale fires. The phenomenon of occurrence and development of a large-scale fire with sufficient oxygen, for example, in a forest with a strong wind, was called a fire tornado. Fire tornadoes have the following peculiarity: they eject a huge amount of soot-like material into the upper atmosphere and the stratosphere. The soot that rises into the atmosphere is practically impervious to sunlight. In other words, on the surface of the Earth under the canopy of these clouds, even on the sunniest day it will be darker than on an inclement moonless night. Naturally, not receiving light and heat, the surface of the Earth under the soot clouds will begin to cool down quickly. Hypothetically possible events will occur – "nuclear winter" and "nuclear night". After formation of soot clouds, the Earth's surface will cease to be heated by solar rays and the temperature will drop sharply. Already in the first month the average temperature of the land surface in the northern hemisphere may decrease by 15-20 and even by 25 degrees Celsius, and in some places remote from the oceans – by 30-35 degrees. As a result, the biosphere will receive such a blow that it is unlikely to recover and return to its original state. If life can survive on land after a nuclear catastrophe, it will be in a very damaged form. In any case, the higher animals will not survive the catastrophe. One can think that the same fate will befall the living world of the ocean. Indeed, the initial link of all oceanic trophic chains is phytoplankton. But it will most likely perish, although the ocean temperature will change only slightly. The reason for its death will be different: for more than a year phytoplankton will be deprived of sunlight – the basis of its vital activity. A nuclear strike on the biosphere dramatically changes the path of its evolution. The consequences cannot be predicted in every detail. The biosphere will probably not disappear altogether. However, it will undergo such a qualitative reorganization that will exclude the possibility of further existence of higher animals and plants, which will probably perish during the nuclear winter. It goes without saying that the same fate will befall man, no matter where he is, whether in the United States or Russia, South Africa or Australia. No matter where in the world a nuclear strike occurs (with or without retaliation), its climatic consequence will be a "nuclear winter" that humanity will not be able to survive. In addition to the climatic consequences of a nuclear strike, there would be devastating concentrations of radiation that would exceed the lethal dose over a large area of the Earth's surface, explosions of nuclear power plants, epidemics, and much more. My report is finished," the speaker said and fell silent.
The lighted section of the table in front of him went out.
Chapter 3: Nuclear War – A Pessimistic Scenario
After a short pause, the chairman of the meeting took the floor.
– Now, colleagues, let's hear two more versions of the consequences of atomic war. Optimistic and pessimistic. Pessimistic: "Possible scenarios and a review of the main hypotheses about the consequences of atomic war". You have the floor, Master.
Jarovitovich turned his face to the man sitting to his right. The Magister made a slight nod of his head and the area on the table in front of him lit up. Rutra noticed that the text of the report appeared in that area, but only when the speaker stopped speaking or pressed his finger on the spot.
– Dear colleagues, masters, gentlemen. In mid-December 2018, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War analyzed the consequences of a local nuclear conflict.
A couple of decades after the invention of nuclear weapons, scientists began to wonder about the consequences of their large-scale use. According to most apocalyptic hypotheses, in the event of a local or global nuclear conflict, colossal amounts of smoke and ash would be released into the atmosphere at once. Almost all scientists agree that there will be climate change. It is not clear just exactly what these changes will be. Some are inclined to talk about a sharp and significant increase in temperature, others – about its fall to Arctic values, others – about a slight change in temperature graphs. In any case, none of the proposed scenarios gives mankind a serious chance of survival: and if anyone can survive a global nuclear war, they will still die of hunger and disease. The number of casualties from nuclear conflicts of varying intensity could range from a billion to four billion, with a subsequent active population decline from epidemics, starvation, and poisoning. Within days of a major nuclear conflict, temperatures on Earth would rise. As a result of the nuclear explosions themselves, as well as the numerous fires caused by them, the temperature on Earth will become several degrees higher. The increase in temperature will lead to various natural disasters, including flooding of low-lying areas of land due to melting glaciers. In addition, the explosions will release a huge amount of nitrogen dioxide into the atmosphere, which will cause almost complete destruction of the protective ozone layer over the Earth's surface. Thus, the greenhouse effect will only intensify. According to the most optimistic forecasts, the "nuclear summer" will last one to three years, but many scientists are sure that it will be much longer.
The speaker coughed and continued speaking:
– There is only one difference between the popular "nuclear summer" scenarios. Some researchers say it will begin immediately after a nuclear war. Others believe that the summer will be preceded by a short nuclear winter. The "nuclear winter" theory has many opponents, who, in particular, remind us that since 1945, more than two thousand nuclear tests have been conducted worldwide, which is equivalent to a full-scale protracted conflict. Nevertheless, there has been no serious climate change. The theory of "nuclear winter" also does not take into account the greenhouse effect and heating of soot particles by the sun. In addition, as skeptics note, previous observations of large volcanic eruptions and oil fires have not shown soot and aerosols rising more than six kilometers from the surface of the earth. At this altitude, water vapor condenses rapidly on the soot, and it falls to the ground with rainfall in a short time. Consequences: the Fall variant. In the second half of the 2000s, researchers began talking about a "nuclear fallback." The program was developed by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. In support of their theory, supporters of the "nuclear autumn", as well as "nuclear winter", cited studies of climate change in the Persian Gulf after the war between Iraq and Kuwait in August 1990. In January 1991, the Iraqi forces that captured Kuwait retreated but set fire to some 700 oil wells. The fires were not put out until November. However, only a