Cover Image: July 2002 Scientific American Magazine See Inside

Ground below Zero [Preview]

Are bunker-busting nuclear warheads a viable option?















Share on Tumblr

NUCLEAR BLAST for underground bunkers would be much smaller than this 1962 detonation of 104 kilotons at 195 meters deep, but critics say a similar

NUCLEAR BLAST for underground bunkers would be much smaller than this 1962 detonation of 104 kilotons at 195 meters deep, but critics say a similar "Roman candle" effect would occur. Image: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

A joint report of the U.S. Departments of Defense and Energy estimates that more than 10,000 potential hardened and deeply buried targets worldwide contain crucial infrastructure and possibly chemical or biological weapons. Although many of these targets are vulnerable to conventional weapons, hundreds are fortified below 25 to 100 meters of concrete. Nuclear weapons are the only sure means to defeat these strongholds, some defense analysts say, calling for a new generation of weapon: a low-yield, earth-penetrating warhead that would deliver a knockout blast without releasing plumes of deadly radioactivity. But such weapons, various physicists argue, are not technically feasible.

"Earth-penetrating weapons cannot penetrate deeply enough to contain the nuclear explosion and will necessarily produce an especially intense and deadly radioactive fallout," concludes Robert W. Nelson of the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University. In a paper to appear this summer in the journal Science and Global Security, Nelson calculates that a one-kiloton, earth-penetrating "mini nuke" used in an urban environment such as Baghdad would spread a lethal dose of radioactive fallout over several square kilometers and result in tens of thousands of civilian fatalities. Regardless of its impact velocity or its construction material, no missile can penetrate reinforced concrete more than about four times its length, Nelson calculates, a number supported by data he received from Sandia National Laboratories via the Freedom of Information Act.


Subscribe     Buy This Issue

Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.

Comments

Add Comment
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital

Latest from SA Blog Network

  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Ground below Zero: Scientific American Magazine

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X