colored smoke
Photos by Pawel Czerwinski

An Introductory Resource Guide for Researchers, Teachers, and Students

From its beginnings in the 1940s, the scientific study of nuclear war effects has been shaped by a small number of countries—most of them nuclear-armed—even as the risks of nuclear war extend across the entire planet. This research has generated a substantial body of knowledge on the environmental, climatic, radiological, and human consequences of nuclear conflict. Yet who produces this knowledge has remained relatively narrow geographically and institutionally. This imbalance matters: the effects of nuclear war would not be confined to the states involved but would reverberate through the global climate system, ecosystems, and human societies. Broadening participation in this field can therefore do more than expand capacity—it can open new lines of inquiry, bring fresh perspectives to longstanding questions, and strengthen the knowledge base needed to inform discussions on nuclear risk, arms control, and disarmament.

The recognition that nuclear weapons pose a catastrophic threat dates back to before these weapons were first produced, tested, and used. In April 1945, U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson warned President Harry Truman that a single atomic bomb could destroy an entire city and that nuclear war could lead to the destruction of modern civilization. Despite such an early and clear assessment of the risks nuclear weapons pose to people and the planet, the number of nuclear weapons and their destructive power increased for the next four decades, as did the number of countries that possess these weapons. Today there are over 12,000 nuclear weapons worldwide and nine countries that possess and maintain and modernize them, and plan for their use.  

In December 2024, the United Nations General Assembly commissioned a new international scientific study on the effects of nuclear war. The study will examine “climatic, environmental and radiological effects, and their impacts on public health, global socio-economic systems, agriculture and ecosystems, in the days, weeks, and decades following nuclear war.” This marks the first UN-led assessment in forty years and creates an important opportunity to expand both the scope of research and the scientific community contributing to it.

Expertise in nuclear war or security is not a prerequisite for contributing to the field of nuclear war effects research. Scientists from a wide range of disciplines can make valuable contributions, bringing fresh perspectives and approaches to this longstanding area of research. The resources below highlight key studies shaping current scientific understanding of the environmental effects of nuclear war, including climatic and radiological impacts, as well as areas of open research. This guide is intended to support researchers, teachers, and students, particularly those new to the field and those seeking to contribute from a wider range of disciplinary and geographic perspectives. 

Getting started:

  • Our companion background paper, The Climatic and Environmental Effects of Nuclear War: A Review of Research, provides a guided, chronological overview of how scientific understanding of global nuclear-war effects has developed since the 1940s. 
  • Readers new to this area may wish to begin with a foundational technical overview of nuclear detonations and their immediate physical effects. A widely used reference is Samuel Glasstone and Philip J. Dolan, eds., The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, 3rd ed. (1977), which provides useful background for engaging with the more specialized studies that follow.
  • Understanding the large-scale consequences of nuclear conflict begins with knowledge of its immediate effects. This report reviews the physical, medical, and societal consequences of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, integrating historical evidence with scientific analysis to assess both immediate and long-term impacts. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Report of the Commission to Study the Damage and Reconstruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, 2010. 
  • PBS Video Series: Nuclear Weapons and Security Policy: Past and Present -- This series covers the fundamentals and complexities of nuclear weapons and security policy. Collection resources, including interactives and videos, support the analysis of key events and trends from the past 75 years and explore the current global nuclear weapons and policy landscape. One video in the series, Global Nuclear War, explains how a global nuclear war would unfold and examines its potential consequences. 

 

blue colored smoke

 

Atmospheric Injection and Plume Dynamics

How material from nuclear detonations enters the upper atmosphere through city firestorms is a foundational question in nuclear-war effects research. Early studies of damage from nuclear weapons focused on blast and radioactivity mostly on urban areas and their populations. By contrast, the effects of mass fires created by nuclear detonations over cities was largely ignored for several decades, even though modeling suggests that for typical modern higher-yield weapons (more than 100 kilotons), fire-related damage would be far more destructive than blast, and would affect much larger areas.These fires in urban and industrial areas would generate smoke plumes, with potential environmental and climate consequences. The nature and mass of the smoke and soot produced, how the plumes rise, and under what conditions soot and other aerosols reach the upper troposphere or stratosphere—where their climatic influence becomes long-lived and global are key questions. Assumptions about what might ignite and burn (urban fuel-loading), fire behavior, and plume lofting are among the most consequential drivers of divergence across models and remain an active area for interdisciplinary research.

Who might contribute here?

Atmospheric physicists, fire and plume-dynamics specialists, combustion scientists, urban systems researchers, high resolution urban climate modelers, and others working on aerosol injection, convective transport, or extreme fire behavior in complex built environments.

Resources:

  • H. L. Brode and R. D. Small, “A Review of the Physics of Large Urban Fires,” in Fredric Solomon and Robert Q. Marston, eds., The Medical Implications of Nuclear War (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1986), pp. 73-95.

This chapter reviews the physical processes underlying large urban fires, including ignition, fire spread, and firestorm dynamics, with attention to how such fires could develop following nuclear detonations.

A foundational paper that first articulated how smoke from large-scale urban fires could be lofted into the upper atmosphere, framing plume rise and atmospheric persistence as central drivers of global nuclear-war effects.

This study examines the physics of plume rise, showing that latent heat release is a necessary condition for firestorm smoke to reach the stratosphere, directly constraining assumptions used in nuclear-war climate models.

Further exploration:

 

orange colored smoke

 

Climate System Response and Modeling Architecture

Once smoke and aerosols enter the upper atmosphere, their interaction with the climate system determines the scale, duration, and geographic distribution of cooling and precipitation changes. This body of research focuses on how radiative forcing from soot alters surface temperatures, atmospheric circulation, and hydrological cycles, and on how different modeling choices—such as dimensionality, coupling, and representation of feedbacks—shape outcomes. Advances in Earth system models have strengthened confidence in the direction of effects while also sharpening debates over magnitude and persistence.

Who might contribute here?

Climate modelers, Earth system scientists, atmospheric dynamicists, radiation and cloud-physics specialists, and researchers working on model intercomparison, uncertainty quantification, or coupled climate–aerosol feedbacks.

Resources:

This paper represents the first end-to-end climate response modeling framework, translating assumed smoke injection into global temperature, circulation, and radiation effects using simplified climate modeling architecture.

This paper advanced the field by using general circulation models (GCMs) to explore how different climate-model structures alter predicted temperature and circulation responses.

Further Exploration:

 

colored smoke

 

Atmospheric Chemistry, Ozone Depletion, and Radiative Effects

Research in this category examines how nuclear detonations and the resulting atmospheric perturbations affect chemical processes in the stratosphere and upper troposphere, particularly ozone depletion and changes in ultraviolet (UV) radiation reaching Earth’s surface. This work played a critical role in broadening early understandings of nuclear-war effects beyond fallout and blast damage, highlighting global-scale biological and ecological consequences even in the absence of severe surface cooling. While later climate-focused studies became more prominent, atmospheric chemistry remains an important yet underexplored pathway of harm and an area where modern chemical-transport modeling could yield further insight.

Who might contribute here?

Atmospheric chemists, photochemists, radiation and UV specialists, chemical-transport modelers, and researchers working on stratospheric processes, ozone recovery dynamics, or biospheric UV sensitivity.

Resources:

This report foregrounds atmospheric chemistry and radiological pathways, especially ozone depletion and long-term radiation effects, before climate cooling became the dominant framing.

This study uses a chemistry–climate model to show that soot from a regional nuclear conflict could drive severe, long-lasting global ozone depletion, linking aerosol injection to increased surface UV exposure.

Further Exploration:

 

purple colored smoke

 

Food Systems, Ecology, and Human Consequences

This body of research examines how climate and atmospheric disruptions caused by nuclear war propagate through ecosystems, agriculture, and global food systems, shaping risks of famine and mass human suffering. Rather than focusing solely on physical or atmospheric effects, these studies integrate crop models, fisheries, trade, and nutritional requirements to assess societal vulnerability under different conflict scenarios. This work has helped translate abstract climatic changes into human-relevant outcomes, while also revealing how inequality, geography, and global interdependence mediate impacts.

Who might contribute here?

Agricultural scientists, food-system modelers, ecologists, fisheries scientists, nutrition experts, economists, and researchers working on global trade, food security, or humanitarian risk modeling.

Resources:

This article translates climate disruption into crop yields, caloric availability, and famine risk, integrating agricultural, trade, and nutritional modeling.

An influential early analysis showing that even regional nuclear conflicts could produce significant climate perturbations, helping motivate later work on ecological and food-system impacts.
 

Further Exploration:

 

multicolored smoke

 

Early Global Effects and Fallout-Centered Assessments (1940s–1960s)

The earliest studies of nuclear war’s global consequences focused primarily on radioactive fallout and long-term biological harm, rather than climate or atmospheric disruption. These efforts established the first systemic thinking about worldwide nuclear damage and shaped decades of subsequent inquiry, even as later research would shift attention toward atmospheric, climatic, and ecological mechanisms.

Who might engage here?

Historians of science, radiobiologists, health physicists, environmental historians, and researchers interested in how early assumptions shaped later scientific trajectories.

Resources:

One of the earliest global assessments of nuclear war effects, this study focused on radioactive fallout, long-term biological harm, and worldwide exposure pathways.

This report quantified the global distribution and biological uptake of radioactive fallout, shaping early understanding of the long-term health consequences of nuclear detonations.

Further Exploration:

 

colored smoke

Regional Nuclear War Climate Effects: Model Assumptions and Scientific Debate

While the planetary-scale destructive effects of a large-scale nuclear war are relatively undisputed, debate emerges over whether a regional-scale nuclear conflict would have far-reaching environmental consequences. This section brings together a set of closely related studies examining the potential climatic consequences of a regional nuclear conflict, most often modeled as a limited nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan. These works are best read together, as they engage in an active and consequential scientific debate over whether such a conflict could plausibly generate enough soot injection into the upper troposphere or stratosphere to produce long-lasting, global climatic disruption.

At the center of this debate are modeling assumptions made early in the causal chain, particularly those related to urban fuel loads, fire behavior, firestorm formation, plume rise, rainout, and pyro-convection. Once soot is assumed to reach and persist in the stratosphere, there is relatively strong agreement on the direction and severity of climate responses. Disagreement instead arises over whether—and under what conditions—those upstream processes would occur in a regional nuclear war scenario.

These papers collectively illustrate how different assumptions about real-world fire dynamics and material properties can lead to sharply divergent conclusions about the magnitude, duration, and global reach of climatic effects. As such, they provide an important case study in how scientific uncertainty, modeling choices, and empirical gaps shape high-stakes risk assessments.

Resources:

This paper presents one of the strongest modeled outcomes of a regional nuclear conflict, concluding that large soot injections from urban fires could drive decades-long global cooling and severe ozone depletion.

This study directly challenges the plausibility of the outcomes claimed by Mills et al. by questioning key upstream assumptions about urban fuel loads, firestorm formation, and the efficiency of soot lofting into the stratosphere.

In response to Reisner et al., the authors defend the realism of firestorm behavior and stratospheric soot injection in regional conflict scenarios, arguing that the challenged assumptions are consistent with historical and observational evidence.

This article synthesizes the competing models and arguments, framing the disagreement as a question of unresolved empirical uncertainty rather than a dispute over basic climate physics.

Who might contribute here?

Researchers who can help constrain, test, or empirically ground the assumptions underlying regional nuclear war climate models are particularly well positioned to contribute in this area. This includes:

  • Fire science and combustion researchers studying large urban fires, firestorms, and mass-conflagration dynamics
  • Atmospheric scientists working on plume rise, pyro-convection, and aerosol transport in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere
  • Remote sensing and satellite imagery analysts capable of characterizing urban fuel loads, building materials, and post-destruction fire behavior
  • Urban systems, civil engineering, and materials researchers with expertise in modern construction practices and combustible contents
  • Experimentalists and field researchers studying soot emission factors, black carbon aging, and rainout under realistic fire conditions
  • Model intercomparison and uncertainty specialists interested in systematically testing sensitivity to assumptions across fire and climate models

Progress in this area depends less on further refinement of global climate models alone and more on improving how real-world fire behavior and material properties are represented within them, making this a particularly fertile area for interdisciplinary collaboration.

 

colored smoke

 

Integrated Assessments and International Scientific Syntheses

At several key moments, international and national scientific bodies have sought to integrate disparate lines of research on nuclear-war effects into authoritative assessments. These efforts synthesize evidence across atmospheric physics, climate modeling, biological impacts, and human consequences, while also explicitly grappling with uncertainty, disagreement, and policy relevance. For new researchers, these assessments provide both a snapshot of where scientific consensus existed at particular historical moments and a reminder of how institutional context shapes the framing and communication of risk.

Who might contribute here?

Interdisciplinary groups of scientists, assessment authors, science-policy experts, systems analysts, and researchers interested in synthesis methods, uncertainty communication, or the interface between scientific knowledge and international governance.

Resources:

These congressional hearings brought together scientific testimony on nuclear-war effects, integrating climate, biological, and strategic perspectives for policymakers.

This assessment synthesized contemporary atmospheric science on nuclear war, evaluating climate and chemical effects while explicitly addressing scientific uncertainty.

An interdisciplinary synthesis integrating physical and atmospheric research on nuclear-war effects, produced through an international scientific collaboration.

This UN report provided a global synthesis of scientific understanding of nuclear-war impacts, situating climate and environmental risks within an international governance context.

 

Provides a synthesis of atmospheric, radiological, and chemical impacts, including stratospheric processes and biological exposure pathways.

Further Exploration:


_________________________________

Development of this resource page is supported by Lex International through the Swiss Philanthropy Foundation.