[Jack Hammer]

Just as a matter of academic interest, how many nukes would it take to cover every, single, square inch of the planet in nuclear fire?

[Alter Kaker]

Just as a matter of academic interest, how many nukes would it take to cover every, single, square inch of the planet in nuclear fire?

Approximately 300 nuclear weapons would destroy every city and town with a population of greater than 50k in Russia.

[ecomcon]

Just as a matter of academic interest, how many nukes would it take to cover every, single, square inch of the planet in nuclear fire?

A 20 kiloton device has a Moderate damage diameter of 2 miles. This gives us 3.14 square miles per device.

The earth has a gross surface area of 198 million square miles, of which approximately 52 million square miles are not under water or oceans.

So if indeed you want every square inch to have nuclear fire, we divide 198,000,000 by 3.14 and we get 63,027,354 20 kiloton devices.

For exposed land, 52,000,000 / 3.14 gives us 16,560,509 20 kiloton devices.

If my math is right.

[TheZMan]

Well...

Let’s say your average (modern) bomb has a 15 mile kill radius. That’s ~700 sq. miles (not counting fallout).

Land surface area of the Earth is (I believe) ~57,506,055 sq. miles.

82,151?

A lot more than 1,300.

[a fool in paradise]

Just as a matter of academic interest, how many nukes would it take to cover every, single, square inch of the planet in nuclear fire?

They are deployed in different areas.

But Obama is part of the "Zero" dream to reduce nuclear arsenals to ZERO. His on board but the Russians, North Koreans, Iranians, Pakistanis, et al are not.