Can you 'scrub' fallout in real life, like in CiV?

[kamex]

In a recent name, I upset a nuclear neighbor and Venice got blasted, several times. But it wasn't as bad as you'd think! With a small team of late game workers you can easily scrub all the tiles clean in just a couple of turns, then its just a case of quickly repairing the pillaged improvements, so it becomes no more inconvenient than a freak barb invasion.

I think fallout should damage units which end there movement inside the tile. i know there's a couple of mods for this, but my real question here is, should you be able to remove the fallout at all, or should the tile be a permanent wasteland? Can this be done in real life? I'm by know means a physics expert, but I understood the land around Chernobyl was uninhabitable... Although people now live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki right?

Would make nukes useless for conquering, but would a great way of shutting down an annoying tall enemy.

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[tjs282]

*snip* should you be able to remove the fallout at all, or should the tile be a permanent wasteland? Can this be done in real life?

On a small scale, certainly, radioactive cleanup can be done. Look at Fukushima, for example.

And not all radioactivity is instantly lethal, at least over the short term: alpha and beta radiation can actually be blocked by ordinary clothing (although that's not recommended as protective gear!). Admittedly, you really don't want to ingest alpha-emitters (that's what killed that Russian guy who was poisoned by polonium in London a couple of years back), but so long as you can avoid inhaling radioisotope-laden air, drinking radioisotope-laden water or eating food grown in radioisotope-contaminated soil, you should be OK in that regard.

Gamma radiation is a problem though: you need at least a couple of feet of concrete and lead to block it. Since fallout usually contains emitters of all 3 types of radiation, and the type of radiation changes as the radioisotopes decay into lower-mass and more 'stable' elements (i.e. ones with longer half-lives), cleanup basically involves washing down and/or collecting up radioisotope-contaminated material (including building-materials and topsoil if necessary) and disposing of it in such a way that the remaining radioactivity is contained (e.g. by burial in old mineworkings) until emissions drop to safe (i.e. 'background') levels.

On a large-scale, I think you answered your own question, as to the practicality of cleanup-ops...

I understood the land around Chernobyl was uninhabitable...

Well, it's 'only' been 30 years since that accident, and successive Russian governments since then had other priorities, what with the USSR collapsing, insurrections in the former Soviet states, and all.

Although people now live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki right?

Yes they do -- both cities have been completely rebuilt. Hiroshima's population had actually returned to pre-1945 levels by 1955, and 70 years later, residual radioactivity has returned to 'near-background' levels.

In 1945, cleanup was possibly not a high priority there, either (remember, this is an era when doctors were paid to advertise smoking as a healthy habit!) -- and what was done may not have been as effective as the techniques used today. But the casualty count from radiation sickness at the time might also have been (much) lower, had the US Govt of the time not made the decision to treat the bombsites as field-research sites for a classified military medical experiment, and withold the (classified) data collected from people to whom it might have been useful, such as Japanese doctors.

(Acute radiation sickness was already known about, due to accidents during the Manhattan Project, amongst others, but not so much was known about the long-term effects of lower-level exposure).

That said, the bombs dropped on Japan were relatively low-tech, inefficient devices that spread a lot of isotopes around. Modern nukes use much less radioactive material per warhead than FatMan and LittleBoy, and generate much greater explosive yields, primarily as a result of increased efficiency of fissioning, and hence produce far less radioactive fallout per megaton (because more of the isotopes have been 'burned' during the detonation).

Of course, the idea that a nuked civ would actually be able to muster the organization and manpower required for fallout-cleanup immediately after a global nuclear war is fairly moot...

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Another point, which the previous poster inferred, is that the environment returns to 'normal' after even a ground-zero blast in a relatively short time. Thus, the Trinity Site in New Mexico, where the first test nuclear device was detonated in 1945, has been a 'normal' desert for some time now. While people do not officially live there, the land around Chernobyl teems with wildlife- the flora and fauna have returned to nearly what was normal before people altered the landscape.
In other words, even if the civilization makes no attempt at cleanup, the majority of the radiation effects of a nuclear blast are scrubbed by the environment within 30 - 50 years. Rebuilding the human infrastructure, of course, is a product of human/government intervention, which also becomes much easier the longer the radiation is allowed to decay.

In Civ terms, the effects of a 'Nuke' should be a bit more complicated than they are now. Initially, in the area of a combat strike or nuclear accident, very little is possible, and even covering up or removing contaminated topsoil is very, very expensive, involving special protection for any workers and machines. Let's say, initially, that all Worker Actions in a contaminated tile take 3 times longer, and construction in a City Queue is 3 times slower. As the area naturally 'cools', the rebuilding work gets easier, until, in game terms, it is a normal rebuilding effort by Workers or a City Queue within, say, 30 years. In the meantime, farms, roads, mines, and other 'infrastructure' Improvements will also gradually deteriorate to ordinary tiles with disuse. Farms go fastest, returning to second growth timber and scrub within 5 - 10 years, but a mine can flood out or road coverts, bridges, etc. can deteriorate pretty fast, also - requiring Worker Action to rebuild them once the radiation is gone.

 

[Redaxe]

Gamma radiation is a problem though: you need at least a couple of feet of concrete and lead to block it. Since fallout usually contains emitters of all 3 types of radiation, and the type of radiation changes as the radioisotopes decay into lower-mass and more 'stable' elements (i.e. ones with longer half-lives), cleanup basically involves washing down and/or collecting up radioisotope-contaminated material (including building-materials and topsoil if necessary) and disposing of it in such a way that the remaining radioactivity is contained (e.g. by burial in old mineworkings) until emissions drop to safe (i.e. 'background') levels.

Yah Gamma rays are probably the biggest danger. Alpha and Beta is fairly easy to block but Gamma takes heavy shielding (thick concrete, lead or spent uranium - I think that is the best).
Water is also a good absorber of radiation and I think spent fuel is kept in water until it is safer to move - but it can only be used in controlled environments.

As Tjs said. Localised radiation spills aren't too hard to clean up (relatively) but over a larger area it is much more difficult. So yeah there isn't really much you can do except to get people the hell out of there and given everybody exposed quick access to iodine pills.
Luckily there hasn't been anything more serious than what happened in Chernobyl or Japan - The firefighters sent to Chernobyl weren't told the reactor had exploded - they assumed an electrical fire so those poor bastards didn't last long.

The nuclear weapons of today are much deadlier too - so God forbid anything like Hiroshima happen again be cause it would be much much worse.
The disgusting thing is that 2000 nuclear tests have occurred since 1945. I don't know if anyone has ever proven if that has had any permanent effects on the human health but I'm sure we all have more radioactive metal deposited in our bones from all those tests.

For low doses of ionizing radiation N-Acetyl Cysteine seems to have protective effects as it helps the body scavenge dangerous free-radicals when radiation smashes into DNA which can go on to cause further cell damage. Interestingly it appears that NAC might also works as a sunburn protection pill too so perhaps there is something to be said for certain cyto-protective anti-oxidants. They don't block the radiation but they help the cell limit the damage it can cause.

But that said the long term effects of low radiation exposure aren't always as fatal as you might think. If you are middle-aged and over and have had children the risks are a lot lower as the older your body is the less cell divisions you have left before you die so any mutations aren't going to be as harmful compared to a unborn/newborn child.
I believe some older people have actually repopulated the Chernobyl area.