How risky are nuclear weapons? Amazingly, no one knew!

I'm Martin Hellman, a professor at Stanford University. When I started this project, I searched for studies that estimated the risk of depending on nuclear weapons for our security. I also asked prominent authorities on nuclear weapons, national security, and risk analysis if they knew of any such studies. In spite of the serious consequences, I found nothing.

So I did a preliminary analysis of the risk we face and found that it was equivalent to having your home surrounded by thousands of nuclear power plants.* I published that analysis in a paper (PDF download, 1.8 MB) that appeared in the magazine of Tau Beta Pi, the national engineering honor society.

Informed, subjective estimates support the need for in-depth studies. Former Secretary of Defense William Perry has quoted the odds of a nuclear terrorist attack in the next ten years at roughly 50-50. Republican Senator Richard Lugar's survey of 85 national security experts reached a similarly alarming conclusion.

* I have developed other examples of how a nuclear disaster compares to more familiar risks, as well as an explanation of why those risks are comparable.

 

 

How can we solve such an immense problem?

While solving this problem will require action on the part of world leaders, the first key step must be taken by ordinary citizens like you and me. The 19th century French politician Alexandre Ledru-Rollin (1807-1874) is reported to have said: "There go the people. I must follow them, for I am their leader." He understood that any leader who gets too far in front of the crowd ceases to be a leader.

In 1840 questioning slavery seemed like a fool's errand. In that environment, anti-slavery candidate James Birney received just 0.3% of the vote. Abraham Lincoln could only question slavery and still become president after enough ordinary citizens came together and changed the mistaken societal belief that slavery was an immutable part of human nature.

In the same way, little will change with respect to nuclear weapons until society recognizes the highly unacceptable risk and demands major changes in our nation's nuclear weapons posture. That's why our initial goal cannot be specific legislation or changes, but rather must be to develop public awareness of the problem and support for change. We seek to do that via two, related efforts.

 

What Are the Goals?

While our ultimate goal is to end the unacceptable threat posed by nuclear weapons, to be successful, we must start with more manageable, initial goals.

One immediate goal of the project is to form "pockets of nuclear awareness" – small, interconnected populations that give the issue of nuclear weapons the respect it deserves. By focusing our limited resources on small groups, we have a much greater chance of reach a tipping point, where the issue gains a life of its own and awareness spreads throughout the group. Once that is achieved, the process can be replicated and propagate beyond the initial group. I am applying that approach within Stanford University, and the ideas are explained in that context on the Stanford tab above, or just CLICK HERE.
NOTE: This web site is in the process of being updated to include this part of the effort, and some pages don't yet reflect that.

Another initial goal of the project is to bring risk analysis to bear on nuclear weapons. Until my March 2008 paper introduced the concept, amazingly, no one had applied risk analysis in this area. Because an in-depth analysis would have taken a large team one or more years, I simplified the problem and only lower bounded (underestimated) the risk. Even so, it showed the danger to be thousands of times greater than society will tolerate with nuclear power plants. The next step is for highly regarded scientific bodies, such as the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, to undertake in-depth analyses and, if those results confirm that the risk is unacceptable, use them as a vehicle for alerting society and for starting the process of risk reduction.

While reducing the risk may sound insignificant compared to the goals espoused by some other efforts (e.g., nuclear disarmament or world peace), that is really an advantage. Today, most people dismiss those more ambitious sounding goals as unrealistic dreaming. By stating the goal implicitly in terms of risk reduction, we bypass those objections, while still posing a complete solution. Reducing the risk by at least a factor of 1,000 (as my research indicates is needed) will requite far-reaching changes in human thinking and behavior. If nuclear disarmament or world peace is required, that will be discovered later in the process, after earlier changes have produced a more receptive environment.

 

Who else agrees?

While action by ordinary citizens is the key to this effort, it helps to know that both parts of our effort have received support from notable individuals. Creating a pocket of nuclear awareness on the Stanford campus has the support of seven prominent members of the Stanford community, and the call for in-depth risk analyses has been endorsed by two Nobel Laureates and other individuals of renown.

 

What Can I Do to Help?

Become informed: Malcolm Gladwell's best-seller The Tipping Point identifies a key group in the process that he calls Mavens – Yiddish for "those who know." To become a Maven on defusing the nuclear threat, you don't have to become an expert in nuclear physics. But you have to become comfortable in your conviction that society is neglecting a critical threat and that ordinary citizens can play a key role in changing that.

Our most popular resource "Soaring, Cryptography and Nuclear Weapons" takes only 10 or 15 minutes to read and provides a good introduction.

Be sure to visit our blog and add it to your RSS feed, as well as enter your email address in the JOIN US box to the left so we can keep you informed as new resources become available.

Other useful material is listed on the Resources tab above. One of my favorites takes only a minute or two to read, and graphically communicates that common sense is all that is required to recognize the need for change.

Share your concern: Individuals with courage and foresight are needed to start the process of ensuring that this issue is given the attention it deserves. Begin by taking a minute and emailing friends or letting them know of this effort via FaceBook, Twitter and other social networking sites. This will multiply your influence many times over and has the potential to start a chain reaction. Pay particular attention to friends within groups to which you belong, since a focused effort can form a pocket of nuclear awareness that has more staying power.

Since it's too early in the process for potential solutions to be taken seriously, sharing your concern means just that. It doesn't mean being able to spell out a solution. It doesn't mean that you have to convince anybody of your viewpoint, or argue with them. And it certainly doesn't mean that you are calling for unilateral disarmament – something many people wrongly assume.

All you have to do is state your concern that our current approach to nuclear weapons seems to entail more risk than is prudent and that you are supporting an effort to determine whether or not that is the case. Then see how the other person responds. If they express interest, discuss it a bit further and refer them to this site. Our Suggestions for Increasing Your Effectiveness provide useful hints for avoiding arguments and becoming a more effective advocate for change.