Forward to the past: Fallout preps are a thing again

[Bolster]

The doomsday clock has been moved forward by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists to 90 seconds before midnight, "the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been." (https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/) For my part I am dusting off some ancient 1960s-vintage thoughts about surviving fallout, and thinking about what to do if I'm still alive when a big mushroom cloud appears off to the west over Los Angeles, and the public warnings start sounding on my iPhone.

Haven't gotten very far. I have no basement. (However, I have spied a nearby building that has one, and I have a master key--by which I mean a Milwaukee M18 grinder with metal cutting blade. Am meeting the proprietor this week to discuss sheltering). My calculations indicate I'd have well over 2 hours before the fallout started to rain down from LA, even if the wind was blowing 3x as hard as it usually does. Of course, a nuke might hit closer than LA, so, who knows. I've got a geiger counter on order, and have been surprised to learn that nuclear fallout is not as difficult to survive as I'd thought. There is apparently a LOT of misinformation on the deadliness of fallout, and most authorities think the radiation would reduce to 1/100th of its original intensity in just 48 hours. But it's important to plan ahead and have somewhere you can put 2-3 feet of earth (or something else dense) between you and the fallout.

I'd be interested to hear what fallout-specific preps you folks have in place, or have planned, with a view to taking some inspiration from them and getting better prepared myself.

PS: If interested: https://www.oism.org/nwss/, authored by the inventor of the Kearny Fallout Meter.

[cabfrank]

I suppose hope and denial are not good preps. Maybe prayer is. They're all I have.

[cabfrank]

By the way, when I think about this stuff, I'm always stunned by how little we've evolved as a species.

[Bolster]

I am a presenter for the local CERT (the FEMA-sponsored emergency response training group). CERT teaches how to prepare for: fires, earthquakes, active shooters, floods, storms, and so on. When I asked "Where's the nuclear fallout prep?" I got crickets. I brought it up again to the administrator, and got ignored. I pressed one more time and was finally told, "We don't want to think about that." (What??) I said: "Can we at least tell people where the nearest fallout shelter is?" Response: "We don't know where it is, and we don't do nuclear preparedness."

This, from a government organization whose job it is to prepare people for disasters. Amazing.

The sad part is, many (most?) people believe a nuclear bomb detonation, close enough to be visible, is unsurvivable. That's a magnificent false fabrication; if you are not in the fireball, nukes are definitely survivable--if you have prepared and act quickly. Blast sizes have actually gotten smaller not larger with many (most?) modern multiple warhead bombs that go for precise targeting on military assets rather than a mass explosion size. The earth is not poisoned forever, like the movies tell us; the radiation in bombs is of high energy, so decays rapidly. The worst of it is gone in 48 hours. The Russian people are well prepared to survive nuclear warfare. They are not pre-defeated. They will be back out of their bunkers in a couple of days, rebuilding their society, because they have prepared, using scientific information rather than "fantasy movie depictions."

IMHO, Americans (and other nationalities) need to throw out everything they "learned" about nuclear bombs from American movies, and start over. As more radical and belligerent nations go nuclear, now is the time to take a fact-based approach to nuke preps.

[wocket]

Is ignoring nuclear a CERT or FEMA policy? You might get somewhere by going over the local admin, but the locals will probably know it's you.

[Bolster]

I was talking to local admin of CERT. I don't know anybody in the upper reaches of FEMA. As far as a CERT policy, AFAIK, there are no preps for nuke in it. So that's sort of a de-facto policy.

I take a Darwinist approach. I think that people with the foresight to do a little preparation have earned the right to survive a nuclear blast. Prep isn't "on" FEMA, it's "on" me. But I think it's remarkable that a disaster preparedness organization won't discuss even fallout survival, which is not rocket science.

[The Mastiff]

I agree that a nuclear attack is more survivable than most people think. It all depends on your location and luck as well as what actions you take. Most targets will be hit with air bursts which produce much less fallout. If it's an old soviet union style attack on IBM fields where each silo is targeted with ground bursts then fallout within hundreds of miles down wind will be pretty bad and take a long time to be safe again. A Nork temper tantrum where one or two cities are targeted mainly on the west coast means very little to the rest of the country in reality but the effects on the uninformed Americans confidence would be an issue for the government. Call it damaged American psyche maybe. I'd personally rather see Los Angeles go than the main bridges over the Mississippi. :) Harsh but true. One would be a tragedy to get over the other a disaster to interstate transportation for years. Both would alter this country but the first would be easier to get over for the rest of us.

Also, one Nuke would not really destroy all LA. That place is huge. Doing that would take 5 to 7 warheads . Not really likely for any adversary. Nukes taking out several large ports and military airfields and bases would be more likely. If you are close to those you should worry more. The huge massed attacks of 7 to 8,000 warheads flooding the continent went away with the fall of the Soviet Union.

[ChrisinHove]

The risk these days must be more a single missile from a rogue state or terrorist dirty bomb, in which case a full tank of fuel will probably suffice.

[rangefinder]

... and the public warnings start sounding on my iPhone.

If there are high-altitude blasts, the resulting EMP will likely destroy your iPhone. Are you doing anything to mitigate the effect of an EMP?

[TkoK83Spy]

I know someone who's going to get all riled up when they see this one...

[Bolster]

If there are high-altitude blasts, the resulting EMP will likely destroy your iPhone. Are you doing anything to mitigate the effect of an EMP?

I believe NORAD is tasked with tracking missiles and transmitting warnings before a nuke strike. FWIW, I do have a ham radio and an AM/FM radio stored in a Faraday cage. Will an iPhone, even if protected, be able to connect to any cell tower after? Maybe satellites if you have an iPhone 15?

The risk these days must be more a single missile from a rogue state or terrorist dirty bomb, in which case a full tank of fuel will probably suffice.

Have you seen SF or LA during rush hour...


But back to the original question: What can I learn from the preparations of other folks on the forum? What have y'all done to prepare? I was hoping for some guidance or inspiration.

[TomAiello]

The risk these days must be more a single missile from a rogue state or terrorist dirty bomb, in which case a full tank of fuel will probably suffice.

I'm not sure I'm as confident in that as you are. China and North Korea both have a lot more than one bomb.

[rangefinder]

If there are high-altitude blasts, the resulting EMP will likely destroy your iPhone. Are you doing anything to mitigate the effect of an EMP?

I believe NORAD is tasked with tracking missiles and transmitting warnings before a nuke strike. FWIW, I do have a ham radio and an AM/FM radio stored in a Faraday cage. Will an iPhone, even if protected, be able to connect to any cell tower after? Maybe satellites if you have an iPhone 15?


But back to the original question: What can I learn from the preparations of other folks on the forum? What have y'all done to prepare? I was hoping for some guidance or inspiration.

Thanks, you answered my question: You have some comm gear protected. I do too, although who knows if my homemade Faraday cage will actually work.

I can't provide any other guidance, because fallout isn't something I have (or even can) prepare for. I live in a wood frame house without a basement, so it's not going to provide much protection. Basements are almost non-existent in the area where I live; none of my neighbors have a basement either. The only thing that's several feet below grade is my septic tank, and I'd rather not crawl into it!

Many years ago I worked in downtown Seattle, and I used to see lots of old buildings that had the old black and yellow civil defense fallout shelter sign by the door. But I've never seen any of those signs on public buildings where I live. Most of the .gov buildings (schools, fire stations, etc.) in my area were built fairly recently, so I doubt fallout protection was part of the design criteria.

[Ankerson]

The doomsday clock has been moved forward by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists to 90 seconds before midnight, "the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been." (https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/) For my part I am dusting off some ancient 1960s-vintage thoughts about surviving fallout, and thinking about what to do if I'm still alive when a big mushroom cloud appears off to the west over Los Angeles, and the public warnings start sounding on my iPhone.

Haven't gotten very far. I have no basement. (However, I have spied a nearby building that has one, and I have a master key--by which I mean a Milwaukee M18 grinder with metal cutting blade. Am meeting the proprietor this week to discuss sheltering). My calculations indicate I'd have well over 2 hours before the fallout started to rain down from LA, even if the wind was blowing 3x as hard as it usually does. Of course, a nuke might hit closer than LA, so, who knows. I've got a geiger counter on order, and have been surprised to learn that nuclear fallout is not as difficult to survive as I'd thought. There is apparently a LOT of misinformation on the deadliness of fallout, and most authorities think the radiation would reduce to 1/100th of its original intensity in just 48 hours. But it's important to plan ahead and have somewhere you can put 2-3 feet of earth (or something else dense) between you and the fallout.

I'd be interested to hear what fallout-specific preps you folks have in place, or have planned, with a view to taking some inspiration from them and getting better prepared myself.

PS: If interested: https://www.oism.org/nwss/, authored by the scientist who invented the Kearny Fallout Meter.

Well there are a few things that those prepper websites (The ones who are trying to sell you stuff) fail to even bring up.

If there is a major nuclear war, IE WW III and we really get hit. Yes it may be possible to survive it temporally until the clean uncontaminated water runs out. That's right, they never even bring that up. That radiation will get into the ground water tables. And then there is the ground that will be contaminated so you can't grow anything for a very long time.

We don't know exactly how many warheads Russia and China has to hit us with and what they would really be aiming at.

I wouldn't be cleaning out the air raid shelters just yet however.

[Bolster]

I live in a wood frame house without a basement, so it's not going to provide much protection. Basements are almost non-existent in the area where I live; none of my neighbors have a basement either.

Same here. My house is of virtually no protection, just drywall and plywood and stucco. Contemplating a 6 ft deep by 8 ft long trench in the back yard, put back a "roof" of earth of 2 ft, leaving 4 ft beneath. If the local basement idea doesn't work out. Maybe.

[Bolster]

Yes it may be possible to survive it temporally until the clean uncontaminated water runs out. That's right, they never even bring that up. That radiation will get into the ground water tables. And then there is the ground that will be contaminated so you can't grow anything for a very long time.

That sounds like the Hollywood version: the "poisoned earth" narrative. Slow Chernobyl type radiation? Yes, that's a years long problem. High energy nuclear bomb type radiation? Scientists calculate it's down to 1/100th strength in 48 hours. At some point the radiation (some say 2 weeks) would be "dead." Covered water could be drunk. Simple filtering of fallout contaminated water through 7" of earth would be sufficient to remove virtually all radiation.

Actually the Kearney book I attached devotes Chapter 8 to water. From Kearney:

Myth: So much food and water will be poisoned by fallout that people will starve and die even in fallout areas where there isn't enough food and water.

Fact: If the fallout particles do not become mixed with the parts of food that are eaten, no harm is done. Food and water in dust-tight containers are not contaminated by fallout radiation. Peeling fruits and vegetables removes essentially all fallout, as does removing the uppermost several inches of stored grain onto which fallout particles have fallen. Water from many sources -such as deep wells and covered reservoirs, tanks, and containers - would not be contaminated. Even water containing dissolved radioactive elements and compounds can be made safe for drinking by simply filtering it through earth, as described later in this book.

[ChrisinHove]

After the Chernobyl disaster, it was *26 years* before radiation monitoring & controls of livestock in parts of the U.K. were stopped, 1400 miles away.

Survivability from fall-out is likely not be a binary thing, but measured in terms of time / % health.

[ChrisinHove]

The risk these days must be more a single missile from a rogue state or terrorist dirty bomb, in which case a full tank of fuel will probably suffice.

I'm not sure I'm as confident in that as you are. China and North Korea both have a lot more than one bomb.

I’m confident M.A.D still applies with China. I strongly suspect mad NK are a long way off being able to deliver at all, and certainly in any number capable of overwhelming defence systems.

Maybe I’m an optimist!

[Ankerson]

Yes it may be possible to survive it temporally until the clean uncontaminated water runs out. That's right, they never even bring that up. That radiation will get into the ground water tables. And then there is the ground that will be contaminated so you can't grow anything for a very long time.

That sounds like the Hollywood version: the "poisoned earth" narrative. Slow Chernobyl type radiation? Yes, that's a years long problem. High energy nuclear bomb type radiation? Scientists calculate it's down to 1/100th strength in 48 hours. At some point the radiation (some say 2 weeks) would be "dead." Covered water could be drunk. Simple filtering of fallout contaminated water through 7" of earth would be sufficient to remove virtually all radiation.

Actually the Kearney book I attached devotes Chapter 8 to water. From Kearney:

Myth: So much food and water will be poisoned by fallout that people will starve and die even in fallout areas where there isn't enough food and water.

Fact: If the fallout particles do not become mixed with the parts of food that are eaten, no harm is done. Food and water in dust-tight containers are not contaminated by fallout radiation. Peeling fruits and vegetables removes essentially all fallout, as does removing the uppermost several inches of stored grain onto which fallout particles have fallen. Water from many sources -such as deep wells and covered reservoirs, tanks, and containers - would not be contaminated. Even water containing dissolved radioactive elements and compounds can be made safe for drinking by simply filtering it through earth, as described later in this book.

Yeah right.

Sounds more like a preppers pipe dream.

[Ankerson]

After the Chernobyl disaster, it was *26 years* before radiation monitoring & controls of livestock in parts of the U.K. were stopped, 1400 miles away.

Survivability from fall-out is likely not be a binary thing, but measured in terms of time / % health.

A lot of it will depend on what type of warheads they are and or how powerful they are.

There really isn't just one answer to it all, but all in all it really isn't good when talking about radiation.