Doomsday Clock closest it's ever been to midnight amid climate, nuclear, AI threats
As aquifer dries up, some Will County towns say they aren't worried about running out of water
The challenge with continuing to depend on groundwater is the unpredictability and sensitivity of the deep aquifer, experts say.
January 28, 2025 at 5:00 p.m.
Earth is moving closer to destruction, a science-oriented advocacy group said Tuesday as it advanced its famous Doomsday Clock to 89 seconds till midnight, the closest it has ever been.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
17 hours ago
- Metro
If World War Three erupts this is the UK bunker we're all heading to
With the Doomsday Clock remaining extremely close to midnight and Donald Trump striking Iran after previously suggesting the US was on the verge of World War Three, tensions are extremely high across the globe. Last year, Britain's top general, General Sir Patrick Sanders, warned civilians could be conscripted to fight a war against Russia, saying the UK's military is much 'too small' to handle such a conflict on its own. General Sanders' remarks come nearly two years after he said Britain was facing a '1937 moment' – a reference to the two years preceding the Second World War. But if full-blown world conflict breaks out, AKA World War Three, there are several places across the globe which would probably be safe – one of which is located in the UK. Wood Norton, a tunnel network running deep into the Worcestershire forest, is easy to miss from above ground. Only a small radio mast and security banner is visible from ground level. Originally bought by the BBC at the beginning of World War Two, its initial purpose was to be a hidden base for the broadcaster in the event a crisis in London. Wood Norton is now used as a training base for sound engineers and technical staff at the broadcasting company. Its mast would continue broadcasting messages from the BBC if the UK were ever to go into crisis mode. Also referred to as PAWN, Protected Area Wood Norton, the site boasts several storeys of architecture underground. BBC documents released in 2016 revealed that the base would be utilised in the event of a grave attack on the UK. The facility is reportedly able to house up 90 BBC staff – including 12 news editors and sub-editors – and is even equipped with a ping-pong table. Peters Mountain, situated in the vast Appalachian Mountains, has beenused as an AT&T communications station for some time. You can even see an AT&T logo painted on a helicopter landing pad. It serves as one of several secret centres also known as AT&T project offices, which are essential for the US government's continuity planning. The centre can house a few hundred people, and according to Mr Graff, the bunker has received renovations costing $67 million in recent years. He stated that if an attack on Washington were to occur, it would potentially be used as a relocation site for intelligence agencies. The Raven Rock Mountain Complex, dubbed 'Harry's Hole' after President Truman who gave the project the thumbs-up, has maintained an air of mystery since its construction began in 1948, first opening its doors in 1953. Raven's Rock was constructed with the intention of being a 'centrepiece of a large emergency hub' according to Garret Graff, author of Raven Rock: The Story of the U.S. Government's Secret Plan to Save Itself – While The Rest Of Us Die. Boasting 100,000 feet of office space, the bunker could facilitate up to 1,400 people. The base also has two 1,000 foot-long tunnels as well as 34-ton blast doors to help reduce the impact of a possible bomb attack. The site was placed into standby mode by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 – however, $652 million worth of upgrades were added to the site following 9/11. According to Graff, the underground city was kitted out with 27 new fuel tanks in 2012, both carrying 20,000 gallons. Right now the bunker is thought to have 900,000 square feet of office space, as well as space for 3,000-5,000 government employees. However, family members wouldn't be allowed to live in the base. Mr Graff added: 'Families would have been prohibited from Raven Rock — as they would have been from effectively all of the Doomsday bunkers. 'Although in recent years as the veil of complete secrecy has lifted, family members of Raven Rock personnel are allowed to visit it for specific ceremonies. 'So at the very least, family members today can picture where their relatives will spend Doomsday, even as they're barred outside.' Cheyenne Mountain Complex, located in El Paso County, Colorado, is a defence bunker for the United States Space Force. Better known as the headquarters for the North American Aerospace Defense Command, the site was built in the 1950s over paranoia about the Cold War. Its five chambers have reservoirs for fuel and water – and in one section there's even reportedly an underground lake. More Trending Almost $40 million was invested into the facility in order to kit it out with the best technology, including 15 console displays and three room-sized Philco 212 computers. The Cheyenne Mountain Complex costs $250,000,000 to run every year and can hold up to 1,000 people a month. It was on the brink of closure prior to 9/11 and was briefly put on standby mode in 2006, but the Obama administration revived the base and the Pentagon announced it would re-staff the bunker in 2015. A version of this article was published in February 2024. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: River Island's £32 flip flop wedges could easily be mistaken for £545 Gucci shoes MORE: Putin tells Russians 'the whole of Ukraine is ours' in 'disdainful' speech MORE: Neighbour 'killed couple on nudist ranch after being humiliated with a hot dog'
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
Dangerous bombing
Bombing nuclear power plants is a very risky and dangerous thing to do. Right now, Israel and the United States are doing just that — and they should stop. Almost 80 years ago, in August 1945, two cities in Japan — Hiroshima and Nagasaki — were destroyed by nuclear bombs. Over 2.2 lakh people died, and many more were hurt for years after. The world saw how horrible nuclear weapons could be, and most countries agreed they should never be used again. So in 1970, a big agreement called the Non-Proliferation Treaty (or NPT) was signed. Countries promised not to build more nuclear weapons. Iran signed it. Israel did not. But overall, it helped keep the world safer — only nine countries have nuclear bombs today. And the big accidents at nuclear power plants — like Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011 — all happened by mistake, not in war. Each time, countries worked to make safety better. But now, dangerous things are happening again. In 2022, when Russia attacked Ukraine, it also captured Europe's biggest nuclear power plant. Luckily, there was no disaster. But just last week, Israel bombed several of Iran's nuclear sites. These are not weapons — they are working or nearly working power plants. If bombs damage them, they could leak radiation and hurt thousands of people and the environment — just like Chernobyl. This isn't the first time. In 1981, Israel bombed a nuclear plant in Iraq before it could be used. They knew they couldn't do it after the plant was running, or it would have caused a huge disaster. They were careful again in 2007 when bombing a plant in Syria that was still being built. Back in 1981, even the U.S. was angry at Israel for bombing Iraq's plant. But today, leaders like Putin, Trump, and Israel's Netanyahu don't seem to care about the risks. In 1991, during a war, the U.S. destroyed two nuclear plants in Iraq — it was very dangerous. Why are we repeating those mistakes now? Iran may now leave the nuclear safety treaty. If that happens, other countries might think they also need nuclear weapons to stay safe. That would make the world more dangerous for everyone. There's a clock called the Doomsday Clock that shows how close the world is to a big disaster. Right now, it's just 89 seconds from midnight — the closest ever. Bombing nuclear plants brings us even closer. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Yahoo
Scientists find the best crops to grow during the apocalypse
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Scientists have figured out what crops we'd need to grow in the event of a global catastrophe. . | Credit: Bulgac/Getty Images If a global catastrophe suddenly led to a nuclear winter, millions of people could starve. But now, scientists have figured out what crops we would need to grow to sustain a city if such a calamitous event occurred. According to a new study, farming spinach, sugar beets, wheat and carrots in urban and near-urban areas could feed the population of a midsize city in a post-apocalyptic world. The scientists built on previous research to determine the optimal crops to plant after a global catastrophe — such as nuclear war, extreme pandemics or solar storms. Their goal was to find the most efficient way to feed a person using the least amount of land. "[The research] actually wasn't inspired by the current, you know, geopolitical environment," said study lead author Matt Boyd, founder and research director of Adapt Research, an independent research organization. "But it has turned out to be very relevant, obviously, to the current geopolitical environment," Boyd told Live Science. Current events include unpredictable international politics, ongoing war in the Middle East and Europe, weaponized artificial intelligence and the ever-mounting destruction from climate change. In January, the Doomsday Clock, which indicates how close humanity is to a species-threatening disaster, ticked one second closer to midnight — the closest it has ever been to catastrophe. In the new study, published Wednesday (May 7) in the journal PLOS One , the researchers looked at how the population of a midsize city could survive with agriculture in the event of a global disaster. The study examined two scenarios should disaster strike: what to grow in and around a city under normal climate conditions, and what to grow in the event of a nuclear winter. The optimal crop to grow in a temperate city in normal conditions turned out to be a humble legume: peas. "Peas are a high protein food. They grow well in urban agriculture environments," Boyd said. "If you want to feed someone, growing peas minimizes the amount of land you need to feed that person." However, pea plants are not frost-resistant. In the event of a nuclear winter — which could be caused by nuclear war, a supervolcano eruption or a huge asteroid strike — sunlight would be blocked "due to all the soot and everything that's been thrown up into the stratosphere," Boyd said. This in turn would lead to lower temperatures and make it harder for plants to photosynthesise. In that scenario, a hardier combination of spinach and sugar beets are a better choice, the researchers found. Related: 'Nuclear winter' from a US-Russia conflict would wipe out 63% of the world's population Boyd and study co-author Nick Wilson , a professor of public health at the University of Otago, Wellington came to these conclusions in part by using the data from a meta-analysis of urban agriculture research that analyzed the yield of different crops in dozens of cities around the world. The researchers used Palmerston North in New Zealand as a case study of a midsize city. | Credit:Peas, for example, rose to the top in normal conditions because they require 3,143 square feet (292 square meters) of land to satisfy one person's caloric and protein needs for a year, whereas a combination of cabbage and carrots required 8,364 square feet (777 square meters), said Boyd — almost three times as much land. The researchers chose Palmerston North in New Zealand, but the findings can apply to similar cities worldwide, the researchers said. With a population of roughly 90,000, it's a globally midsize city, Boyd said, plus "it's inland, like many cities around the world, and it has reasonably low density, suburban type housing, not sort of Manhattan-style skyscrapers and so forth." The scientists then used Google imagery of Palmerston North to work out the total amount of available green spaces that could be used to grow crops, such as front lawns, backyards and parks. "Surprise, surprise. The city can't feed all its people," Boyd said. If food is only grown within the city bounds, the available land can feed about 20% of the population with crops that maximize protein and food energy per square foot under normal climate conditions. That number shrinks to about 16% during nuclear winter. To feed the rest of the population, people would need land immediately outside the city — about one-third of the size of the city's built urban area — to sow additional efficient crops. In the case of Palmerston North, that's about 2,817 acres (1,140 hectares), plus another 272 acres (110 hectares) of canola to convert into biodiesel to fuel tractors and other farm machinery. Spinach would help sustain a population during a nuclear winter, researchers found. | Credit: Sally JaneIn the land just outside the city, the study found that potatoes are ideal for a normal climate scenario, and a combination of 97% wheat and 3% carrots is the optimal ratio during a nuclear winter because they have a higher tolerance for colder temperatures. Even in cities, "there is a ton of farmland that can be used to grow food," said Theresa Nogeire-McRae , a landscape ecologist at American Farmland Trust and affiliate faculty at Oregon State University, who was not involved in the study. 'People settled cities where they did for a good reason,' Nogeire-McRae told Live Science. 'It was the rich soil near riverbanks. It's a good commodity. Let's not throw that away." She added that the methods of study were sound and the findings were reasonable. Related stories —14 of the deadliest natural disasters in history —Atlantic ocean currents are weakening — and it could make the climate in some regions unrecognizable —A long-lost ice sheet could predict the future of New York City — one in which Lower Manhattan and Coney Island are 'perpetually submerged' Boyd noted there are a number of unknowns that would impact crop yield in the real world. Soil quality is a big variable, because lower quality soil would yield fewer crops. He also assumed a scenario where water systems were still flowing — "but you can imagine global catastrophe scenarios where there's additional obstacles and problems," he said. He also doesn't expect people will only eat peas for an entire year, but planting the most efficient crops minimizes the amount of land needed to feed a population. Boyd said this study could be used as a first step for cities looking to use resilient urban agriculture in land use policy. "Decisions that might seem optimal in one lens, maybe economically, may look a little bit less optimal if you were also including a lens like resilience, safety and well-being," he said.
