Cited by 55Atmospheric Ozone and ClimateNuclear Issues and DefenseAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

Extreme Ozone Loss Following Nuclear War Results in Enhanced Surface Ultraviolet Radiation

Open access
Bardeen, Charles G., Kinnison, Douglas E., Toon, Owen B., Mills, Michael J., Vitt, Francis, Xia, Lili, Jägermeyr, Jonas, Lovenduski, Nicole S. +3 more·2021·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

For the first time, we use a modern climate model with interactive chemistry including the effects of aerosols on photolysis rates to simulate the consequences of regional and global scale nuclear wars (injecting 5 and 150 Tg of soot respectively) for the ozone layer and surface ultraviolet (UV) light. For a global nuclear war, heating in the stratosphere, reduced photolysis, and an increase in catalytic loss from the HO x cycle cause a 15 year‐long reduction in the ozone column, with a peak loss of 75% globally and 65% in the tropics. This is larger than predictions from the 1980s, which assumed large injections of nitrogen oxides (NO x), but did not include the effects of smoke. NO x from the fireball and the fires provide a small (5%) increase to the global average ozone loss for the first few years. Initially, soot would shield the surface from UV‐B, but UV Index values would become extreme: greater than 35 in the tropics for 4 years, and greater than 45 during the summer in the southern polar regions for 3 years. For a regional war, global column ozone would be reduced by 25% with recovery taking 12 years. This is similar to previous simulations, but with a faster recovery time due to a shorter lifetime for soot in our simulations. In‐line photolysis provides process specific action spectra enabling future integration with biogeochemistry models and allows output that quantifies the potential health impacts from changes in surface UV for this and other larger aerosol injections.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2021jd035079

Cites

89 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This finding is broadly consistent with previous studies that examined UV responses to SAI, including recent work highlighting that while stratospheric aerosol perturbations can modify photolysis rates, the net surface UV changes tend to be modest.

    “This finding is broadly consistent with previous studies that examined UV responses to SAI, including recent work highlighting that while stratospheric aerosol perturbations can modify photolysis rates, the net surface UV changes tend to be modest (Bardeen et al., 2021).”

    From Air quality impacts of stratospheric aerosol injections are likely small and mainly driven by changes in climate, not aerosol settling (2026) · cites this paper as Bardeen et al., 2021

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 2 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Exclusion of aerosol optical depth from the TUV calculations in WACCM4 only resulted in a small difference in overall ozone column changes due to minimal differences in ozone loss rates, so this shortcoming in the simulations is not likely to significantly impact the conclusions.

    “A study by Bardeen et al. (2021) using a previous version of WACCM (WACCM4), but modified to include online Tropospheric Ultraviolet and Visible (TUV) model calculations, showed that the exclusion of aerosol optical depth from the TUV calculations only resulted in a small difference in the overall ozone column changes due to minimal differences in the overall ozone loss rates, leading us to conclu”

    From Air quality impacts of stratospheric aerosol injections are likely small and mainly driven by changes in climate, not aerosol settling (2026) · cites this paper as Bardeen et al., 2021

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Surface ozone and downward ultraviolet radiation would also be impacted by nuclear war.

    “Surface ozone and downward ultraviolet radiation would also be impacted by nuclear war 36”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. AMBIO, Barnaby, F, Kristoferson, L, Peterson, J, Prawitz, J, Rodhe, H, & Rotblat, J. (1982). Reference Scenario: How A Nuclear War Might Be Fought. Ambio (Vol. 11, pp. 94-99).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bardeen, C. G., Kinnison, D. E., Toon, O. B., Mills, M. J., Vitt, F., Xia, L., Jägermeyr, J., Lovenduski, N. S., Scherrer, K. J. N., Clyne, M., & Robock, A.
Affiliations
  • NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • Goddard Institute for Space Studies (US)
  • Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research (US)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
Corresponding author
Bardeen, Charles G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
2021-09-24
Volume
126
Issue
18
ISSN
  • 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-897X
  • 2169-8996
OpenAlex
W3196661613
Cited by
55
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8
FWCI
1.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
  • NOAA Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Publication Database PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Open Philanthropy Project
  • National Science Foundation (ACI‐1532235; ACI‐1532236)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric Ozone and Climate
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Nuclear Issues and Defense
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
nuclear war, ozone depletion, surface ultraviolet radiation, UV-B radiation, soot aerosols, photolysis, stratospheric heating, ozone recovery, UV index

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review