It indicates that a single fission bomb puts out more radiation than Chernobyl, at least for the first 1000 days and we are talking about **200 **bombs. The difference appears to be short lived isotopes, most of which have already disappeared in a reactor, so only the most recent formed isotopes are dangerous.
You should also consider that the Soviet Union was setting off bombs as large as 50 Megatons before the partial test ban treaty.
What you probably meant was that one was a uranium-based bomb and the other a plutonium-based bomb. But both were fission, AKA atomic, bombs. Not fusion, AKA hydrogen, bombs.
The redoubtable and honorable Tsutomu would probably have survived that just fine. Having done so, he would’ve eventually joined the crew of Ehime Maru and finally met his match: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehime_Maru
Sometimes you’re just out there minding your own business trying catch a few fish and the strangest stuff happens.
And despite having also crashed thousands of cars themselves in testing. They do that to refine their data and engineer better solutions or test new ideas or systems. Same with the folks who were working on nuclear weapons. They wanted to build them smaller (to put them on missiles or fire them from submarines), more durable, able to be used or stored in more varied conditions, with higher (or lower) yields or with variable and settable yields, etc etc. To do that took a lot of testing. Also, like any weapon, you have to test it periodically to make sure what you have will actually work if you ever need to use it. Right now the Russians have a lot of nuclear weapons but I’m unsure how confident they (or anyone else) are that the things will work if they need them…which rather takes away from the credibility of the threat they might pose.
Of course some of these were so-called peaceful nuclear explosions that tried to find civilian uses for nuclear explosives. The US did a few dozen of these that experimented with using nuclear explosives for excavation and 3 tests (in New Mexico and Colorado) that tried using them for stimulating natural gas reservoirs. The Soviet program was a lot more extensive, to the point that some of the explosions were no longer considered “tests” but were actually applied uses. 239 of the 715 explosions the USSR set off were part of this program.
Now, granted, there’s some question as to how serious these programs really were or if they were just ways of continuing research on nuclear weapons in the face of potential weapons-test bans. I think in reading the history of nuclear testing that this is sort of a common theme-- every single test had some stated goal or other, but the actual timing and numbers of tests undertaken often had more to do with sabre rattling than actual scientific or technical necessity.
Another obscure nuclear test location was Mississippi.
Well, except for the fact that virtually none of the people directly affected by either the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the cities that were virtually incinerated by the firebombing campaign by the 20th Air Force, had any direct responsibility or choice about the bombing of Pearl Harbor. The damage at Pearl, while a terrible and underhanded blow, was almost entirely limited to legitimate military targets, while Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while both being of industrial importance, suffered massive civilian casualties. Whether the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary to bring about the surrender of the Japanese government can be debated–there is at the persuasive argument that the United States was so eager to have the Japanese surrender prior to a Soviet invasion of the Home Islands, which would have resulted in the same kind of uneasy division seen in Central Europe, that they felt pressed to use atomic weapons to bring a quick resolution–but that many tens of thousands of people who committed no wrongful act other than to be living in those cities lost their lives and others horribly maimed and psychologically scarred by the experience is unquestioned. This sort of gloating response is beyond thoughtless and insensitive.
Although Canada has never experienced a nuclear explosion of any sort, it has tested nuclear-capable missiles. In 1983, the United States asked Canada’s permission to test cruise missiles over northern Canada. As I recall, the Americans were interested in testing over northern Canada, because it approximated the terrain of the northern USSR. At any rate, tests occurred, as the Wikipedia entry on Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Cold Lake, Alberta, notes:
It should be noted though, that none of the missiles tested in Canada carried a payload or warhead–tests were merely to determine how well the missiles could hug the terrain.
Actually, zero tests were necessary. Trinity was a test of the plutonium design dropped on Nagasaki. No test was performed or required for the uranium design dropped on Hiroshima.
No, I meant what I said. Fallout from the Castle Bravo test contaminated a Japanese fishing boat (also linked to by someone above) and killed at least one of the crew, albeit not until six months later.
They chose the government that plotted this attack. That is where their responsibility comes. If you don’t want to suffer in wars, don’t choose a government that starts wars.
As an American, I despise George Bush, and fought hard to prevent him from becoming President. But once he was President, I (and all the other Americans) must bear blame for all the evil things he did in our name while President.
I’ll be charitable and assume that you are unaware that the government of Japan was essentially under martial law from 1936 through the end of the war. Even when the government was elected, only a small fraction of the population was eligible to vote, and military and industrial influence served to tightly control the activities of the resulting government. The vast majority of the people killed in the atomic attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had absolutely no influence on the government which elected to attach the US Navy base at Pearl Harbor.
Well, kind of. Kuboyama died of viral hepatitis contradicted via blood transfusion. Radiation from the Bravo test was indirectly responsible but really, he was a victim of poor medical care.
(that wiki article is really a poster child example of the flaws of wikipedia)
It looks like that’s disputed…do you have a more reliable cite?
Was the blood transfusion part of his treatment for being contaminated? If so, it seems like saying he was not a victim of the bomb but only of “poor medical care” is the equivalent of saying every US Civil War soldier who died after amputation was not a war casualty.
My statement was a bit less GQ than it should have been.
I agree that it was disputed at the time. But I don’t think that’s currently the case. Simply put, I don’t know of any doctors who still subscribe to the theory of “radiation-induced hepatitis” as the cause of death. Kuboyama’s own attending physician walked back from his initial cause of death claims in later years. This journal (in Japanese, sorry) also includes statements by Dr. Akashi Makoto, director of the Japanese National Institute of Radiological Sciences, attributing the death to viral hepatitis an explicitly .
English internet resources for this aren’t great; it’s not a topic of great interest and even newer publications tend to rely on the same older sources rather than introduce new scholarship (note that your link only has one reference, from 1958. 50 years later, Lapp’s is still the only full-length account of the incident in English). Elements of Controversy: the Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation Safety gives what I feel is a fairly neutral (if brief) take on the cause of death (disclaimer: the book is by a respected academic, but was written under Energy Department sponsorship).
My doctoral dissertation is on the Lucky Dragon incident, so I’ve read a lot of primary documents from the archives. Virtually none of these are on-line, unfortunately.
Now this is something that I would agree is actually in dispute. If I had to summarize the mainstream academic position on this issue it would be: “Kuboyama either died of viral hepatitis contracted during the course of necessary medical treatment or he died of radiation. Either way the US is responsible so the actual cause of death is immaterial.” Generally speaking, that Kuboyama died is more important than how he died to most studies of the incident, so most authors side-step the question.
But while I agree that the US government is ultimately responsible for his death, I don’t accept the mainstream position because I dispute that all of the treatment he received was necessary. Kuboyama, a man with a history of liver problems and a severely compromised immune system, was given daily blood transfusions over a period of nearly six months without being placed in isolation. That’s a recipe for infection. And I can’t accept it as the best that contemporary medicine could do because I’ve read statements by US doctors from both before and after his death saying, essentially, “WTF were they thinking!?”
But my earlier statement was a bit too strident. I should have said that his death was “probably” the result of poor medical care. There is, of course, the possibility that he would have died even if better precautions against infection had been taken.
