• Images
• Videos
• Documents
• Books
• Articles

Types

Nuclear weapons tests have historically been divided into four categories reflecting the medium or location of the test.

• Atmospheric testing involves explosions that take place in the atmosphere. Generally, these have occurred as devices detonated on towers, balloons, barges, or islands, or dropped from airplanes, and also those only buried far enough to intentionally create a surface-breaking crater. The United States, the Soviet Union, and China have all conducted tests involving explosions of missile-launched bombs (See List of nuclear weapons tests#Tests of live warheads on rockets). Nuclear explosions close enough to the ground to draw dirt and debris into their mushroom cloud can generate large amounts of nuclear fallout due to irradiation of the debris (particularly with neutron radiation) as well as radioactive contamination of otherwise non-radioactive material. This definition of atmospheric is used in the Limited Test Ban Treaty, which banned this class of testing along with exoatmospheric and underwater.
• Underground testing is conducted under the surface of the earth, at varying depths. Underground nuclear testing made up the majority of nuclear tests by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War; other forms of nuclear testing were banned by the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963. True underground tests are intended to be fully contained and emit a negligible amount of fallout. Unfortunately these nuclear tests do occasionally "vent" to the surface, producing from nearly none to considerable amounts of radioactive debris as a consequence. Underground testing, almost by definition, causes seismic activity of a magnitude that depends on the yield of the nuclear device and the composition of the medium in which it is detonated, and generally creates a subsidence crater.² In 1976, the United States and the USSR agreed to limit the maximum yield of underground tests to 150 kt with the Threshold Test Ban Treaty.Underground testing also falls into two physical categories: tunnel tests in generally horizontal tunnel drifts, and shaft tests in vertically drilled holes.
• Exoatmospheric testing is conducted above the atmosphere. The test devices are lifted on rockets. These high-altitude nuclear explosions can generate a nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP) when they occur in the ionosphere, and charged particles resulting from the blast can cross hemispheres following geomagnetic lines of force to create an auroral display.
• Underwater testing involves nuclear devices being detonated underwater, usually moored to a ship or a barge (which is subsequently destroyed by the explosion). Tests of this nature have usually been conducted to evaluate the effects of nuclear weapons against naval vessels (such as in Operation Crossroads), or to evaluate potential sea-based nuclear weapons (such as nuclear torpedoes or depth charges). Underwater tests close to the surface can disperse large amounts of radioactive particles in water and steam, contaminating nearby ships or structures, though they generally do not create fallout other than very locally to the explosion.

Salvo tests

Another way to classify nuclear tests is by the number of explosions that constitute the test. The treaty definition of a salvo test is:

In conformity with treaties between the United States and the Soviet Union, a salvo is defined, for multiple explosions for peaceful purposes, as two or more separate explosions where a period of time between successive individual explosions does not exceed 5 seconds and where the burial points of all explosive devices can be connected by segments of straight lines, each of them connecting two burial points, and the total length does not exceed 40 kilometers. For nuclear weapon tests, a salvo is defined as two or more underground nuclear explosions conducted at a test site within an area delineated by a circle having a diameter of two kilometers and conducted within a total period of time of 0.1 seconds.³

The USSR has exploded up to eight devices in a single salvo test; Pakistan's second and last official test exploded four different devices. Almost all lists in the literature are lists of tests; in the lists in Wikipedia (for example, Operation Cresset has separate items for Cremino and Caerphilly, which together constitute a single test), the lists are of explosions.

Purpose

Separately from these designations, nuclear tests are also often categorized by the purpose of the test itself.

• Weapons-related tests are designed to garner information about how (and if) the weapons themselves work. Some serve to develop and validate a specific weapon type. Others test experimental concepts or are physics experiments meant to gain fundamental knowledge of the processes and materials involved in nuclear detonations.
• Weapons effects tests are designed to gain information about the effects of the weapons on structures, equipment, organisms, and the environment. They are mainly used to assess and improve survivability to nuclear explosions in civilian and military contexts, tailor weapons to their targets, and develop the tactics of nuclear warfare.
• Safety experiments are designed to study the behavior of weapons in simulated accident scenarios. In particular, they are used to verify that a (significant) nuclear detonation cannot happen by accident. They include one-point safety tests and simulations of storage and transportation accidents.
• Nuclear test detection experiments are designed to improve the capabilities to detect, locate, and identify nuclear detonations, in particular, to monitor compliance with test-ban treaties. In the United States these tests are associated with Operation Vela Uniform before the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty stopped all nuclear testing among signatories.
• Peaceful nuclear explosions were conducted to investigate non-military applications of nuclear explosives. In the United States, these were performed under the umbrella name of Operation Plowshare.

Aside from these technical considerations, tests have been conducted for political and training purposes, and can often serve multiple purposes.

Alternatives to full-scale testing

See also: Stockpile stewardship

Since the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, "nuclear explosions" of all kinds are banned. Nuclear nations have invested in many alternatives to maintain confidence in weapon capability:

• Computer simulation is used extensively to provide as much information as possible without physical testing. Mathematical models for such simulation model scenarios not only of performance but also of shelf life and maintenance.⁴⁵ A theme has generally been that even though simulations cannot fully replace physical testing, they can reduce the amount of it that is necessary.⁶

• Physical testing
  • Materials testing
    • Subcritical (or cold) tests involving fissile materials and high explosives that purposely result in no yield. The name refers to the lack of creation of a critical mass of fissile material. Subcritical tests continue to be performed by the United States, Russia, and the People's Republic of China, at least.⁷⁸
    • Proxy isotope testing: high temperature/density/pressure compression testing of non-fissile isotopes such as plutonium-242 or uranium-238, to determine a bomb core's relevant equation of state.
  • Fission testing
    • Critical mass experiments studying fissile material compositions, densities, geometries, and reflectors. They can be subcritical or supercritical, in which case significant radiation fluxes can be produced. This type of test has resulted in several criticality accidents.
    • Hydronuclear tests (hydrodynamical + nuclear) study nuclear materials under the conditions of explosive shock compression. They can create subcritical conditions, or supercritical conditions with yields ranging from negligible all the way up to a substantial fraction of full weapon yield.⁹ Any fission yield is considered banned by the CTBT.
  • Fusion testing: inertial confinement fusion experiments using lasers, like the National Ignition Facility, or magnetized liners, like the Z Pulsed Power Facility, or projectile compression. They study the plasma physics and ignition of deuterium-tritium mixtures.

Subcritical tests executed by the United States include:¹⁰¹¹¹²

History

Main article: Timeline of nuclear weapons development

The first atomic weapons test was conducted near Alamogordo, New Mexico, on July 16, 1945, during the Manhattan Project, and given the codename "Trinity". The test was originally to confirm that the implosion-type nuclear weapon design was feasible, and to give an idea of what the actual size and effects of a nuclear explosion would be before they were used in combat against Japan. The test gave a good approximation of many of the explosion's effects, but did not give an appreciable understanding of nuclear fallout, which was not well understood by the project scientists until well after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The United States conducted six atomic tests before the Soviet Union developed their first atomic bomb (RDS-1) and tested it on August 29, 1949. Neither country had very many atomic weapons to spare at first, and so testing was relatively infrequent (when the US used two weapons for Operation Crossroads in 1946, they were detonating over 20% of their current arsenal). By the 1950s the United States had established a dedicated test site on its own territory (Nevada Test Site) and was also using a site in the Marshall Islands (Pacific Proving Grounds) for extensive atomic and nuclear testing.

The early tests were used primarily to discern the military effects of atomic weapons (Crossroads had involved the effect of atomic weapons on a navy, and how they functioned underwater) and to test new weapon designs. During the 1950s, these included new hydrogen bomb designs, which were tested in the Pacific, and also new and improved fission weapon designs. The Soviet Union also began testing on a limited scale, primarily in Kazakhstan. During the later phases of the Cold War, both countries developed accelerated testing programs, testing many hundreds of bombs over the last half of the 20th century.

Atomic and nuclear tests can involve many hazards. Some of these were illustrated in the US Castle Bravo test in 1954. The weapon design tested was a new form of hydrogen bomb, and the scientists underestimated how vigorously some of the weapon materials would react. As a result, the explosion—with a yield of 15 Mt—was over twice what was predicted. Aside from this problem, the weapon also generated a large amount of radioactive nuclear fallout, more than had been anticipated, and a change in the weather pattern caused the fallout to spread in a direction not cleared in advance. The fallout plume spread high levels of radiation for over 100 miles (160 km), contaminating populated islands in nearby atoll formations. Though they were soon evacuated, many of the islands' inhabitants suffered from radiation burns and later from other effects such as increased cancer rate and birth defects, as did the crew of the Japanese fishing boat Daigo Fukuryū Maru. One crewman died from radiation sickness after returning to port, and it was feared that the radioactive fish they had been carrying had made it into the Japanese food supply.

Castle Bravo was the worst US nuclear accident, but many of its component problems—unpredictably large yields, changing weather patterns, unexpected fallout contamination of populations and the food supply—occurred during other atmospheric nuclear weapons tests by other countries as well. Concerns over worldwide fallout rates eventually led to the Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963, which limited signatories to underground testing. Not all countries stopped atmospheric testing, but because the United States and the Soviet Union were responsible for roughly 86% of all nuclear tests, their compliance cut the overall level substantially. France continued atmospheric testing until 1974, and China until 1980.

A tacit moratorium on testing was in effect from 1958 to 1961 and ended with a series of Soviet tests in late 1961, including the Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever tested. The United States responded in 1962 with Operation Dominic, involving dozens of tests, including the explosion of a missile launched from a submarine.

Almost all new nuclear powers have announced their possession of nuclear weapons with a nuclear test. The only acknowledged nuclear power that claims never to have conducted a test was South Africa (although see Vela incident), which has since dismantled all of its weapons. Israel is widely thought to possess a sizable nuclear arsenal, though it has never tested, unless they were involved in Vela. Experts disagree on whether states can have reliable nuclear arsenals—especially ones using advanced warhead designs, such as hydrogen bombs and miniaturized weapons—without testing, though all agree that it is very unlikely to develop significant nuclear innovations without testing. One other approach is to use supercomputers to conduct "virtual" testing, but codes need to be validated against test data.

There have been many attempts to limit the number and size of nuclear tests; the most far-reaching is the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty of 1996, which has not, as of 2013[update], been ratified by eight of the "Annex 2 countries" required for it to take effect, including the United States. Nuclear testing has since become a controversial issue in the United States, with a number of politicians saying that future testing might be necessary to maintain the aging warheads from the Cold War. Because nuclear testing is seen as furthering nuclear arms development, many are opposed to future testing as an acceleration of the arms race.

In total nuclear test megatonnage, from 1945 to 1992, 520 atmospheric nuclear explosions (including eight underwater) were conducted with a total yield of 545 megatons,²² with a peak occurring in 1961–1962, when 340 megatons were detonated in the atmosphere by the United States and Soviet Union,²³ while the estimated number of underground nuclear tests conducted in the period from 1957 to 1992 was 1,352 explosions with a total yield of 90 Mt.²⁴

Yield

The yields of atomic bombs and thermonuclear are typically measured in different amounts. Thermonuclear bombs can be hundreds or thousands of times stronger than their atomic counterparts. Due to this, thermonuclear bombs' yields are usually expressed in megatons which is about the equivalent of 1,000,000 tons of TNT. In contrast, atomic bombs' yields are typically measured in kilotons, or about 1,000 tons of TNT.

In US context, it was decided during the Manhattan Project that yield measured in tons of TNT equivalent could be imprecise. This comes from the range of experimental values of the energy content of TNT, ranging from 900 to 1,100 calories per gram (3,800 to 4,600 kJ/g). There is also the issue of which ton to use, as short tons, long tons, and metric tonnes all have different values. It was therefore decided that one kiloton would be equivalent to 1.0×1012 calories (4.2×1012 kJ).²⁵

Nuclear testing by country

Main article: List of nuclear weapons tests

The nuclear powers have conducted more than 2,000 nuclear test explosions (numbers are approximate, as some test results have been disputed):

• United States: 1,054 tests by official count (involving at least 1,149 devices). 219 were atmospheric tests as defined by the CTBT. These tests include 904 at the Nevada Test Site, 106 at the Pacific Proving Grounds and other locations in the Pacific, 3 in the South Atlantic Ocean, and 17 other tests taking place in Amchitka Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, New Mexico and Nevada outside the NNSS (see Nuclear weapons and the United States for details). 24 tests are classified as British tests held at the NTS. There were 35 Plowshare detonations and 7 Vela Uniform tests; 88 tests were safety experiments and 4 were transportation/storage tests.²⁶ Motion pictures were made of the explosions, later used to validate computer simulation predictions of explosions.²⁷ United States' table data.
• Soviet Union: 715 tests (involving 969 devices) by official count, plus 13 unnumbered test failures.²⁸²⁹ Most were at their Southern Test Area at Semipalatinsk Test Site and the Northern Test Area at Novaya Zemlya. Others include rocket tests and peaceful-use explosions at various sites in Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. Soviet Union's table data.
• United Kingdom: 45 tests, of which 12 were in Australian territory, including three at the Montebello Islands and nine in mainland South Australia at Maralinga and Emu Field,³⁰ 9 at Christmas Island (Kiritimati) in the Pacific Ocean, plus 24 in the United States at the Nevada Test Site as part of joint test series).³¹ 43 safety tests (the Vixen series) are not included in that number, though safety experiments by other countries are. The United Kingdom's summary table.
• France: 210 tests by official count (50 atmospheric, 160 underground³²), four atomic atmospheric tests at C.S.E.M. near Reggane, 13 atomic underground tests at C.E.M.O. near In Ekker in the French Algerian Sahara, and nuclear atmospheric and underground tests at and around Fangataufa and Moruroa Atolls in French Polynesia. Four of the In Ekker tests are counted as peaceful use, as they were reported as part of the CET's APEX (Application pacifique des expérimentations nucléaires, “Peaceful Application of Nuclear Experiments”), and given alternate names. France's summary table.
• China: 45 tests (23 atmospheric and 22 underground), at Lop Nur Nuclear Weapons Test Base, in Malan, Xinjiang³³ There are two additional unnumbered failed tests. China's summary table.
• India: Six underground explosions (including the first one in 1974), at Pokhran. India's summary table.
• Pakistan: Six underground explosions at Ras Koh Hills and the Chagai District.³⁴ Pakistan's summary table.
• North Korea: North Korea is the only country in the world that still tests nuclear weapons, and their tests have caused escalating tensions between them and the United States. Their most recent nuclear test was on September 3, 2017. North Korea's summary table

There may also have been at least three alleged but unacknowledged nuclear explosions (see list of alleged nuclear tests) including the Vela incident.

From the first nuclear test in 1945 until tests by Pakistan in 1998, there was never a period of more than 22 months with no nuclear testing. June 1998 to October 2006 was the longest period since 1945 with no acknowledged nuclear tests.

A summary table of all the nuclear testing that has happened since 1945 is here: Worldwide nuclear testing counts and summary.

Global fallout

Main article: Nuclear fallout § Global fallout

Nuclear weapons testing did not produce scenarios like nuclear winter as a result of a scenario of a concentrated number of nuclear explosions in a nuclear holocaust, but the thousands of tests, hundreds being atmospheric, did nevertheless produce a global fallout that peaked in 1963 (the bomb pulse), reaching levels of about 0.15 mSv per year worldwide, or about 7% of average background radiation dose from all sources, and has slowly decreased since,³⁵ with natural environmental radiation levels being around 1 mSv. This global fallout was one of the main drivers for the ban of nuclear weapons testing, particularly atmospheric testing. It has been estimated that by 2020 up to 2.4 million people have died as a result of nuclear weapons testing.³⁶

Criticism

Nuclear arms tests have been criticized for its arms race³⁷ and its fallout,³⁸³⁹⁴⁰ with a potentially global fallout.

Nuclear weapons tests have been criticized by anti-nuclear activists as nuclear imperialism, colonialism,⁴¹ ecocide, environmental racism and nuclear genocide.⁴²⁴³⁴⁴

The movement gained particularly in the 1960s and in the 1980s again.

The international day "End Nuclear Tests Day" raises critical awareness annually.⁴⁵

Treaties against testing

There are many existing anti-nuclear explosion treaties, notably the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. These treaties were proposed in response to growing international concerns about environmental damage among other risks. Nuclear testing involving humans also contributed to the formation of these treaties. Examples can be seen in the following articles:

• Desert Rock exercises
• Totskoye range nuclear tests

The Partial Nuclear Test Ban treaty makes it illegal to detonate any nuclear explosion anywhere except underground, in order to reduce atmospheric fallout. Most countries have signed and ratified the Partial Nuclear Test Ban, which went into effect in October 1963. Of the nuclear states, France, China, and North Korea have never signed the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.⁴⁶

The 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans all nuclear explosions everywhere, including underground. For that purpose, the Preparatory Commission of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization is building an international monitoring system with 337 facilities located all over the globe. 85% of these facilities are already operational.⁴⁷ As of May 2012[update], the CTBT has been signed by 183 States, of which 157 have also ratified. For the Treaty to enter into force it needs to be ratified by 44 specific nuclear technology-holder countries. These "Annex 2 States" participated in the negotiations on the CTBT between 1994 and 1996 and possessed nuclear power or research reactors at that time. The ratification of eight Annex 2 states is still missing: China, Egypt, Iran, Israel and the United States have signed but not ratified the Treaty; India, North Korea and Pakistan have not signed it.⁴⁸

The following is a list of the treaties applicable to nuclear testing:

Compensation for victims

See also: Environmental impact of war

Over 500 atmospheric nuclear weapons tests were conducted at various sites around the world from 1945 to 1980. As public awareness and concern mounted over the possible health hazards associated with exposure to the nuclear fallout, various studies were done to assess the extent of the hazard. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ National Cancer Institute study claims that nuclear fallout might have led to approximately 11,000 excess deaths, most caused by thyroid cancer linked to exposure to iodine-131.⁵⁰

• United States: Prior to March 2009, the US was the only nation to compensate nuclear test victims. Since the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990, more than $1.38 billion in compensation has been approved. The money is going to people who took part in the tests, notably at the Nevada Test Site, and to others exposed to the radiation.⁵¹ As of 2017, the US government refused to pay for the medical care of troops who associate their health problems with the construction of Runit Dome in the Marshall Islands.⁵²
• France: In March 2009, the French Government offered to compensate victims for the first time and legislation is being drafted which would allow payments to people who suffered health problems related to the tests.⁵³ The payouts would be available to victims' descendants and would include Algerians, who were exposed to nuclear testing in the Sahara in 1960. Victims say the eligibility requirements for compensation are too narrow.
• United Kingdom: There is no formal British government compensation program. Nearly 1,000 veterans of Christmas Island nuclear tests in the 1950s are engaged in legal action against the Ministry of Defense for negligence. They say they suffered health problems and were not warned of potential dangers before the experiments.
• Russia: Decades later, Russia offered compensation to veterans who were part of the 1954 Totsk test. There was no compensation to civilians sickened by the Totsk test. Anti-nuclear groups say there has been no government compensation for other nuclear tests.
• China: China has undertaken highly secretive atomic tests in remote deserts in a Central Asian border province. Anti-nuclear activists say there is no known government program for compensating victims.

Milestone nuclear explosions

The following list is of milestone nuclear explosions. In addition to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the first nuclear test of a given weapon type for a country is included, as well as tests that were otherwise notable (such as the largest test ever). All yields (explosive power) are given in their estimated energy equivalents in kilotons of TNT (see TNT equivalent). Putative tests (like Vela incident) have not been included.

• "Staged" refers to whether it was a "true" thermonuclear weapon of the so-called Teller–Ulam configuration or simply a form of a boosted fission weapon. For a more complete list of nuclear test series, see List of nuclear tests. Some exact yield estimates, such as that of the Tsar Bomba and the tests by India and Pakistan in 1998, are somewhat contested among specialists.

See also

• Nuclear technology portal

• Atmospheric focusing – Type of wave interaction causing shock waves
• Atomic Testing Museum – history museum in Nevada, United StatesPages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback (in Nevada in the US)
• High-altitude nuclear explosion – Nuclear detonations in the upper layers of Earth's atmosphere
• Historical nuclear weapons stockpiles and nuclear tests by country
• History of nuclear weapons
• International Day against Nuclear Tests – It is observed on August 29 every YearPages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
• How to Photograph an Atomic Bomb – 2006 book by Peter Kuran
• List of military nuclear accidents (including nuclear weapons accidents)
• List of nuclear weapons tests of the United States
• List of states with nuclear weapons
• Live fire exercise – Military exercise using live munitions
• National Technical Means
• Nuclear test sites
• Nuclear ethics – Academic and policy-relevant field on problems in the nuclear weapons and energy complex
• Nuclear weapons design – Process by which nuclear WMDs are designed and producedPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
• Project Gnome – 1961 nuclear test explosion in New Mexico, United StatesPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
• Rope trick effect – "Spikes" emanating from suspended nuclear explosions
• Subsidence crater – Hole or depression left on the surface over the site of an underground explosion
• Test Readiness Program
• Trinity and Beyond – 1995 film directed by Peter KuranPages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback (documentary about nuclear weapon testing)

Explanatory notes

Citations

General and cited references

• Gusterson, Hugh. Nuclear Rites: A Weapons Laboratory at the End of the Cold War. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1996.
• Hacker, Barton C. Elements of Controversy: The Atomic Energy Commission and Radiation Safety in Nuclear Weapons Testing, 1947–1974. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1994.
• Rice, James. Downwind of the Atomic State: Atmospheric Testing and the Rise of the Risk Society. (New York University Press, 2023). https://nyupress.org/9781479815340/downwind-of-the-atomic-state/
• Schwartz, Stephen I. Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998.
• Weart, Spencer R. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.

External links

• Federation of American Scientists Archived 2016-09-04 at the Wayback Machine
• Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban-Treaty Organization
• Nuclear Weapon Archive
• NuclearFiles.org
• What About Radiation on Bikini Atoll?
• "Time-lapse map of all nuclear weapon tests from 1945 to 1998." on YouTube
• Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
• Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues
• Atomic Bomb website and nuclear weapon testing articles
• The Woodrow Wilson Center's Nuclear Proliferation International History Project

References

1. "The Treaty has not been signed by France or by the People's Republic of China." US Department of State, Limited Test Ban Treaty. https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/isn/4797.htm ↩

2. For a longer and more technical discussion, see US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (October 1989). The Containment of Underground Nuclear Explosions (PDF). Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-02-27. Retrieved 2018-12-24. https://web.archive.org/web/20130227180158/http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/OTA-ISC-414.pdf ↩

3. Yang, Xiaoping; North, Robert; Romney, Carl; Richards, Paul R. "Worldwide Nuclear Explosions" (PDF). http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~richards/my_papers/WW_nuclear_tests_IASPEI_HB.pdf ↩

4. Scoles, Sarah (2023-04-20). "Trust but verify: U.S. labs are overhauling the nuclear stockpile. Can they validate the weapons without bomb tests?". Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/trust-verify-can-u-s-certify-new-nuclear-weapons-without-detonating-them ↩

5. Hoffman, David E. (2011-11-01). "Supercomputers offer tools for nuclear testing — and solving nuclear mysteries". Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/supercomputers-offer-tools-for-nuclear-testing--and-solving-nuclear-mysteries/2011/10/03/gIQAjnngdM_story.html ↩

6. Associated Press (2006-10-18). "Supercomputers can't perfectly simulate nuclear blasts: Experts". CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/supercomputers-can-t-perfectly-simulate-nuclear-blasts-experts-1.597887 ↩

7. "US conducts 'subcritical' nuclear test". zeenews.india.com. 2012-12-07. Retrieved 2013-05-28. http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/us-conducts-subcritical-nuclear-test_815260.html ↩

8. Thomas Nilsen (2 October 2012). "Subcritical nuke tests may be resumed at Novaya Zemlya". barentsobserver.com. Retrieved 2017-07-13. http://barentsobserver.com/en/security/subcritical-nuke-tests-may-be-resumed-novaya-zemlya-02-10 ↩

9. Carey Sublette (9 August 2001), Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions, section 4.1.9, retrieved 10 April 2011 http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-1.html#Nfaq4.1.9 ↩

10. Papazian, Ghazar R.; Reinovsky, Robert E.; Beatty, Jerry N. (2003). "The New World of the Nevada Test Site" (PDF). Los Alamos Science (28). Retrieved 2013-12-12. https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/pubs/las28/papazian.pdf ↩

11. Thorn, Robert N.; Westervelt, Donald R. (February 1, 1987). "Hydronuclear Experiments" (PDF). LANL Report LA-10902-MS. Retrieved December 9, 2013. https://fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/docs1/00090266.pdf ↩

12. Conrad, David C. (July 1, 2000). "Underground explosions are music to their ears". Science and Technology Review. Retrieved 9 December 2013. http://www.llnl.gov/str/Conrad.html ↩

13. Universal Time at the Nevada National Security Site is 8 hours after local time; UT dates are one day after local date for UT times after 16:00. /wiki/Nevada_National_Security_Site ↩

14. Nevada Test Site: U1a Complex subcritical experiments (PDF) (Report). DOE Nevada. February 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 May 2003. https://web.archive.org/web/20030517214406/http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/dirpdfs/DOENV708_REV1_U1a.pdf ↩

15. A video of the Armando test on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFUUE5shMLc ↩

16. A video of the Pollux test on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGf4-ZOjyVY ↩

17. A video of the Leda test on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmsfgRtxbHg ↩

18. Kishner, Andrew (18 September 2018). "U.S. Sneaks in 'Vega,' Its 28th Subcritical Nuclear Test". Retrieved 30 October 2019. http://andrewkishner.com/vega.htm ↩

19. O'Brien, Nolan (24 May 2019). "Subcritical experiment captures scientific measurements to advance stockpile safety". LLNL. Retrieved 16 January 2021. https://www.llnl.gov/news/subcritical-experiment-captures-scientific-measurements-advance-stockpile-safety ↩

20. "US conducted subcritical nuclear test in November". NHK World-Japan. 16 January 2021. Retrieved 16 January 2021. https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20210116_12/ ↩

21. Danielson, Jeremy; Bauer, Amy L. (September 2016). Nightshade Prototype Experiments (Silverleaf). Los Alamos National Laboratory (Report). OSTI. doi:10.2172/1338708. OSTI 1338708. /wiki/Los_Alamos_National_Laboratory ↩

22. Pavlovski, O. A. (1 January 1998). "Radiological Consequences of Nuclear Testing for the Population of the Former USSR (Input Information, Models, Dose, and Risk Estimates)". Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 219–260. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-03610-5_17. ISBN 978-3-642-08359-4. 978-3-642-08359-4 ↩

23. "Radioactive Fallout - Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War - Historical Documents". Atomciarchive.com. http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/Effects/wenw_chp2.shtml ↩

24. Pavlovski, O. A. (1 January 1998). "Radiological Consequences of Nuclear Testing for the Population of the Former USSR (Input Information, Models, Dose, and Risk Estimates)". Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 219–260. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-03610-5_17. ISBN 978-3-642-08359-4. 978-3-642-08359-4 ↩

25. The Containment of Underground Explosions (Report). Office of Technology Assessment. 31 October 1989. p. 11. OTA-ISC-414. https://www.osti.gov/opennet/detail?osti-id=16383760 ↩

26. "United States Nuclear Tests: July 1945 through September 1992" (PDF). Las Vegas, NV: Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office. 2000-12-01. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-10-12. Retrieved 2013-12-18. This is usually cited as the "official" US list. https://web.archive.org/web/20061012160826/http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf ↩

27. Long, Kat. "Blasts from the Past: Old Nuke Test Films Offer New Insights [Video]". Scientific American. Retrieved 2017-04-24. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/blasts-from-the-past-old-nuke-test-films-offer-new-insights-video ↩

28. "USSR Nuclear Weapons Tests and Peaceful Nuclear Explosions 1949 through 1990" (Document). Sarov, Russia: RFNC-VNIIEF. 1996. The official Russian list of Soviet tests. ↩

29. Mikhailov, Editor in Chief, V.N.; Andryushin, L.A.; Voloshin, N.P.; Ilkaev, R.I.; Matushchenko, A.M.; Ryabev, L.D.; Strukov, V.G.; Chernyshev, A.K.; Yudin, Yu.A. "Catalog of Worldwide Nuclear Testing". Archived from the original on 2013-12-19. Retrieved 2013-12-28. {{cite web}}: |last1= has generic name (help)An equivalent list available on the internet. https://web.archive.org/web/20131219131618/http://www.iss-atom.ru/ksenia/catal_nt/ ↩

30. "British nuclear weapons testing in Australia | ARPANSA". Retrieved 2022-11-02. https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/sources-radiation/more-radiation-sources/british-nuclear-weapons-testing ↩

31. "UK/US Agreement". Archived from the original on 2007-06-07. Retrieved 2010-10-21. https://web.archive.org/web/20070607112924/http://www.awe.co.uk/main_site/about_awe/history/timeline/1958/index.html ↩

32. "N° 3571.- Rapport de MM. Christian Bataille et Henri Revol sur les incidences environnementales et sanitaires des essais nucléaires effectués par la France entre 1960 et 1996 (Office d'évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques)". Assemblee-nationale.fr. Retrieved 2010-10-21. http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/rap-oecst/essais_nucleaires/i3571.asp ↩

33. "Nuclear Weapons Test List". Fas.org. Retrieved 22 September 2018. https://fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/index.html ↩

34. "Pakistan Special Weapons - A Chronology". Archived from the original on 2012-04-27. Retrieved 2018-12-24. https://web.archive.org/web/20120427000543/http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/chron.htm ↩

35. Bouville, André; Simon, Steven L.; Miller, Charles W.; Beck, Harold L.; Anspaugh, Lynn R.; Bennett, Burton G. (2002). "Estimates of Doses from Global Fallout". Health Physics. 82 (5): 690–705. Bibcode:2002HeaPh..82..690B. doi:10.1097/00004032-200205000-00015. ISSN 0017-9078. PMID 12003019. /wiki/Bibcode_(identifier) ↩

36. Adams, Lilly (May 26, 2020). "Resuming Nuclear Testing a Slap in the Face to Survivors". The Equation. Retrieved July 16, 2024. https://blog.ucsusa.org/lilly-adams/resuming-nuclear-testing-a-slap-in-the-face-to-survivors/ ↩

37. Kinsella, William (2023-08-04). "The nuclear arms race's legacy: Contamination, staggering cleanup costs and a culture of secrecy • Missouri Independent". Missouri Independent. Retrieved 2025-01-07. https://missouriindependent.com/2023/08/04/the-nuclear-arms-races-legacy-contamination-staggering-cleanup-costs-and-a-culture-of-secrecy/ ↩

38. Prăvălie, Remus (2014-02-22). "Nuclear Weapons Tests and Environmental Consequences: A Global Perspective". Ambio. 43 (6). Springer Science and Business Media LLC: 729–744. Bibcode:2014Ambio..43..729P. doi:10.1007/s13280-014-0491-1. ISSN 0044-7447. PMC 4165831. PMID 24563393. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4165831 ↩

39. Seale, Jack (2024-11-20). "Britain's Nuclear Bomb Scandal: Our Story review – how the UK's atomic testing programme devastated lives". the Guardian. Retrieved 2025-01-07. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/20/britain-nuclear-bomb-scandal-our-story-review ↩

40. "Banning nuclear explosions protects the environment". CTBTO. Retrieved 2025-01-07. https://www.ctbto.org/news-and-events/news/banning-nuclear-explosions-protects-environment ↩

41. Hennaoui, Leila; Nurzhan, Marzhan (2023-10-02). "Dealing with a Nuclear Past: Revisiting the Cases of Algeria and Kazakhstan through a Decolonial Lens". The International Spectator. 58 (4): 91–109. doi:10.1080/03932729.2023.2234817. ISSN 0393-2729. https://doi.org/10.1080%2F03932729.2023.2234817 ↩

42. Skinner, Rob (2021-09-30). "'Against Nuclear Imperialism': peace, race and anti-colonialism in the early 1960s". University of Bristol. Retrieved 2025-01-03. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/history/public-engagement/blackhistory/snapshots2021/nuclear/ ↩

43. Hsu, Hsuan L. (2014-05-21). "Nuclear colonialism". Environment & Society Portal. Retrieved 2025-01-03. https://www.environmentandsociety.org/exhibitions/risk-and-militarization/nuclear-colonialism ↩

44. Maguire, Richard (2007). "From the Guest Editor: The nuclear weapon and genocide: The beginning of a discussion". Journal of Genocide Research. 9 (3): 353–360. doi:10.1080/14623520701528866. ISSN 1462-3528. https://doi.org/10.1080%2F14623520701528866 ↩

45. Nations, United (1945-07-16). "End Nuclear Tests Day". United Nations. Retrieved 2025-01-08. https://www.un.org/en/observances/end-nuclear-tests-day/history ↩

46. U.S. Department of State, Limited Test Ban Treaty. https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/isn/4797.htm ↩

47. "CTBTO Factsheet: Ending Nuclear Explosions" (PDF). Ctbto.org. Retrieved 2012-05-23. http://www.ctbto.org/fileadmin/user_upload/public_information/CTBT_Ending_Nuclear_Explosions_web.pdf ↩

48. "Status of signature and ratification". Ctbto.org. Retrieved 2012-05-23. http://www.ctbto.org/the-treaty/status-of-signature-and-ratification/ ↩

49. "The Status of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Signatories and Ratifiers". Arms Control Association. March 2014. Retrieved June 29, 2014. https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ctbtsig ↩

50. Council, National Research (11 February 2003). Exposure of the American Population to Radioactive Fallout from Nuclear Weapons Tests: A Review of the CDC-NCI Draft Report on a Feasibility Study of the Health Consequences to the American Population from Nuclear Weapons Tests Conducted by the United States and Other Nations. doi:10.17226/10621. ISBN 9780309087131. PMID 25057651. 9780309087131 ↩

51. "Radiation Exposure Compensation System: Claims to Date Summary of Claims Received by 06/11/2009" (PDF). Usdoj.gov. https://www.usdoj.gov/civil/omp/omi/Tre_SysClaimsToDateSum.pdf ↩

52. "Troops Who Cleaned Up Radioactive Islands Can't Get Medical Care". The New York Times. 28 January 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us/troops-radioactive-islands-medical-care.html ↩

53. Hardach, Sophie; Shirbon, Estelle (24 March 2009). "France to compensate victims of nuclear testing". Reuters. Retrieved 28 January 2025. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-nuclear/france-to-compensate-victims-of-nuclear-testing-idUKTRE52N4W720090324/ ↩

54. "Pakistan Nuclear Weapons: A Brief History of Pakistan's Nuclear Program". Federation of American Scientists. 11 December 2002. Retrieved 30 October 2019. http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/ ↩