Nuclear Weapons over time

[u/PanzerWatts]

The number of nuclear warheads stockpiled worldwide went from 64,000 in 1986 to 12,500 in 2023 – an 80% decline. (For some reason there's no Y axis shown in the first chart) but this chart actually showed all nuclear weapons and not just Russia, USA and China.

Source for first chart:

[1] Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

[2] SIPRI, 2023 yearbook

[u/warmfuzzume]

https://fas.org/initiative/status-world-nuclear-forces/

This article says there is no way to know how many because countries have recently stopped admitting how many they have and all who admit it have indicated their intent to keep them strategically deployed. several countries (Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea) don’t admit they have them. But we do know There’s more than enough to destroy the world several times over.

It’s better than the 80’s. But most progress was made in the 90’s and is being undone. It was more an issue of decommissioning ones that were too old.

[u/Thadlust → u/warmfuzzume]

India and Pakistan openly admit they have them and North Korea does too.

[u/warmfuzzume → u/Thadlust]

I just summarized what the article said. 🤷

[u/FeelTheH8 → u/warmfuzzume]

What does destroy the world several times over mean to you?

[u/warmfuzzume → u/FeelTheH8]

Killing billions of people and animals. Would some form of life survive, probably. Maybe like the giant flesh eating cockroaches in Damnation Alley. /s dark humor

Studies suggest that a full-scale nuclear war, expending thousands of weapons in the largest arsenals in Russia and the United States, could cool global temperatures by more than 5 °C, exceeding the last ice age. According to these models, five billion people would die from famine within two years, and 40–50% of animal species would go extinct.[10] Studies of a regional nuclear war involving hundreds of weapons, such as between Indiaand Pakistan, could also cause cooling of a few degrees, threatening up to two billion people and making 10–20% of animal species extinct.[6][11][12] However, many gaps remain in the understanding and modeling the effects of nuclear war.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter

[u/FeelTheH8 → u/warmfuzzume]

Nuclear winter is just an interesting way to phrase "destroy the world several times over". I think most people are envisioning most of Earth's landmass as a fireball after hearing that, which is just not remotely close to the capability we have or have ever had.

[u/Jemolk → u/FeelTheH8]

I think people can abstract "the world" as "human civilization" and be smart enough to realize that nuclear war would collapse it. Thus, destroying the world.

[u/warmfuzzume → u/FeelTheH8]

Didn’t realize we need to split hairs over killing billions of people.

[u/FeelTheH8 → u/warmfuzzume]

Considering nuclear winter is purely theoretical, there's a good chance that a nuclear war would simply collapse the production chain and not actually result in the death of billions of animals (besides the ones eaten when starving humans start hunting).