Map: Which languages are spoken at different tube stops?

Image: Oliver O'Brien.

We probably don't need to tell you that London is a very diverse city. At the time of the last census,  37 per cent of the population were foreign-born and over 250 langauages were spoken within city limits. For around 1.7 million Londoners, English is a second language. 

To visualise quite how linguistically diverse the city is, Oliver O'Brien, a researcher at UCL, used 2011 census data to map the most common language besides English spoken by those living within 200m of London Underground, Overground, DLR and future Crossrail stations.

Here's central London (you see an interactive version showing the whole network at Tube Tongues):

The size of the circles represents the percentage of people who spoke the second most dominant language. To give you a rough idea, in Shadwell, the largest visible circle, 32.8 per cent of census respondants spoke Bengali.

The dominance of French in Soho, Marlybone and Mayfair is a little surprising – though, as you can see from the size of the circles, the percentages weren't actually that high (around 5 or 6 per cent); the emphasis on French in the UK education system may also have something to do with it. Bengali dominates in east London, and Arabic in west. Unsurprisingly, there's a clutch of Chinese-dominated stops around Chinatown.

In fact, language communities seem to group around certain areas: very few of the stops are dominated by a language that doesn't dominate another stop nearby.

Another trend is that, for the most part (with the notable exception of the Gujarati speakers in Willesden and Wembley) the circles tend to get smaller as you move out towards the ends of tube lines. This implies either that the city's ourskirts are less diverse, or that one language doesn't dominate. On the Central line, it seems to be the former. Here's a breakdown of the languages spoken in Epping, up at the northernmost end, compared with Leytonstone, just a few stops down:

The most linguistically diverse stop of all was Turnpike Lane in northeast London, home to 16 languages. We propose a name change to "Babel". 

 
 
 
 

This fun map allows you to see what a nuclear detonation would do to any city on Earth

A 1971 nuclear test at Mururoa atoll. Image: Getty.

In 1984, the BBC broadcast Threads, a documentary-style drama in which a young Sheffield couple rush to get married because of an unplanned pregnancy, but never quite get round to it because half way through the film the Soviets drop a nuclear bomb on Sheffield. Jimmy, we assume, is killed in the blast (he just disappears, never to be seen again); Ruth survives, but dies of old age 10 years later, while still in her early 30s, leaving her daughter to find for herself in a post-apocalyptic wasteland.

It’s horrifying. It’s so horrifying I’ve never seen the whole thing, even though it’s an incredibly good film which is freely available online, because I once watched the 10 minutes from the middle of the film which show the bomb actually going off and it genuinely gave me nightmares for a month.

In my mind, I suppose, I’d always imagined that being nuked would be a reasonably clean way to go – a bright light, a rushing noise and then whatever happened next wasn’t your problem. Threads taught me that maybe I had a rose-tinted view of nuclear holocaust.

Anyway. In the event you’d like to check what a nuke would do to the real Sheffield, the helpful NukeMap website has the answer.

It shows that dropping a bomb of the same size as the one the US used on Hiroshima in 1945 – a relatively diddly 15kt – would probably kill around 76,500 people:

Those within the central yellow and red circles would be likely to die instantly, due to fireball or air pressure. In the green circle, the radiation would kill at least half the population over a period of hours, days or weeks. In the grey, the thing most likely to kill you would be the collapse of your house, thanks to the air blast, while those in the outer, orange circle would most likely to get away with third degree burns.

Other than that, it’d be quite a nice day.

“Little boy”, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, was tiny, by the standards of the bombs out there in the world today, of course – but don’t worry, because NukeMap lets you try bigger bombs on for size, too.

The largest bomb in the US arsenal at present is the B-83 which, weighing in at 1.2Mt, is about 80 times the size of Little Boy. Detonate that, and the map has to zoom out, quite a lot.

That’s an estimated 303,000 dead, around a quarter of the population of South Yorkshire. Another 400,000 are injured.

The biggest bomb of all in this fictional arsenal is the USSRS’s 100Mt Tsar Bomba, which was designed but never tested. (The smaller 50MT variety was tested in 1951.) Here’s what that would do:

Around 1.5m dead; 4.7m injured. Bloody hell.

We don’t have to stick to Sheffield, of course. Here’s what the same bomb would do to London:

(Near universal fatalities in zones 1 & 2. Widespread death as far as St Albans and Sevenoaks. Third degree burns in Brighton and Milton Keynes. Over 5.9m dead; another 6m injured.)

Everyone in this orange circle is definitely dead.

Or New York:

(More than 8m dead; another 6.7m injured. Fatalities effectively universal in Lower Manhattan, Downtown Brooklyn, Williamsburg, and Hoboken.)

Or, since it’s the biggest city in the world, Tokyo:

(Nearly 14m dead. Another 14.5m injured. By way of comparison, the estimated death toll of the Hiroshima bombing was somewhere between 90,000 and 146,000.)

I’m going to stop there. But if you’re feeling morbid, you can drop a bomb of any size on any area of earth, just to see what happens.


And whatever you do though: do not watch Threads. Just trust me on this.

Jonn Elledge is the editor of CityMetric. He is on Twitter as @jonnelledge and also has a Facebook page now for some reason. 

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.