table of contents world information transfer’s 24th … · world ecology report world information...

Education brings choices.Choices bring power.

World Ecology Report is printed on recycled paper.

TABLE of CONTENTS

Opening Remarks 2 Dr. Christine K. Durbak 3 H.E. Ambassador Yuriy A. Sergeyev 5 “Sustainable Disaster Risk Reduction” H.E. Ambassador Edita Hrdá

6 “Sustainable Hazard Management” H.E. Ambassador Andrei Dapkiunas 8 “Health Consequences for the Belorussian Population after the Chernobyl Accident” Dr. Alena Nikalayenka

10 “Energy Security in Ukraine: Need and Opportunity” Mr. Aleks Mehrle 12 “Ukraine’s Economy: Challenges, Reforms and Sustainability” Dr. Ihor Soloviy 15 “Carbon, the Critical Issue” Mr. Richard Whiteford

United Nations Headquarters, May 1st, 2015

Special Conference

Issue

World Information Transfer’s 24th International Conference on Health and Environment: “4-26-86 (Chornobyl*): What has Changed?”

See WIT’s 24th Conference

Co-sponsored by the Government of Ukraine, the U.N. Mission of Belarus, the U.N. Mission

of the Czech Republic, and supported by UNDESA

*Ukrainian spelling

Fall 2015, vol. XXVII No. 3

24 “Chornobyl, Misinformation and Ethics” Dr. Christine K. Durbak

23 Mission Statement

World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer

Fall 20152

Conference Chair and Founder, World Information Transfer, Inc.

Opening Statement: 24th International Conference on Health and the Environment

Your Excellencies, Distinguished Delegates, Colleagues,

Students, Ladies and Gentlemen,

On behalf of World Information Transfer, I would like

to express our sincere appreciation to the Government of

Ukraine; H.E. Yuriy Sergeyev, Permanent Representative

of Ukraine; H.E. Andrei Dapkiunas, Permanent Representa-

tive of the Mission of Belarus to the United Nations and H.E.

Edita Hrda, Permanent Representative of the Mission of the

Czech Republic to the United Nations for their co-sponsor-

ship of this Conference. I would also like to thank all of the

presenters and supporters and all of the Board Members

of World Information Transfer, our administrator, Modou

Cham, and our interns for their the assistance.

WIT began following the catastrophe at Chernobyl and

since 1987 has been following, publishing and presenting

the history, consequences and facts about this disaster. As a

former member of the NIH National Cancer Institute Study

on Chernobyl, I, along with a group of epidemiologists and

other scientists, was given the task of analyzing the after ef-

fects. Many analytical studies in the three countries - Bela-

rus, Russia and Ukraine - that suffered the greatest conse-

quences of Chernobyl were published and the extent of the

damage caused to both people and the environment are

available online.

Today, almost 30 years later, we have a much better un-

derstanding as to the long term effects of the Chernobyl

disaster and the important issues that have to be resolved

for the future development of nuclear power, the further

implementation of which could address our current reli-

ance on carbon fuels and resultant problems with green-

house gases. The issue of nuclear power as one alternative

to the continued extraction of fossil fuels is important due

to the current and impending problems of climate change

and the acceleration of disasters that can be attributed to

the changing climate. It is clear that we need to cut car-

bon pollution and build an energy economy based on clean

fuel. This is based on validated facts: greenhouse gas levels

today are 1/3rd higher than before the Industrial Revolution

and higher than at any level in the last 800,000 years, which

has resulted in global temperature increase of 0.7 degrees

Celsius. This figure is continuing to rise.

Every year since the beginning of this millennium the

global average temperature has risen above the 20th Cen-

tury average. Both the warming of the earth and its pos-

sible consequences have

finally entered the consciousness of not only scien-

tists but most intelligent people. We are witnessing more

droughts, flooding, sea level increases, bleaching of coral

reefs and melting in the North and South poles. Climate

change is real, and it is up to those that do not refute the

data to implement clean energy models for the future.

Many countries, including Britain, Denmark, India, Japan,

Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and South Korea have taken

steps to reduce their carbon emissions, and China is also

closing unsafe and economically inefficient small coal fired

generators and installing wind turbines to reduce carbon

pollution by 40 to 45 percent by 2020.

Questions are being raised by nations utilizing nuclear

power regarding the building of new nuclear power plants,

since greater emphasis has been placed on overseeing and

“We cannot continue to live at the expense of our future generations.”

“It is clear that we need to cut carbon pollution and build an economy built on clean fuel.”

Dr. Christine K. Durbak

3World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer

Fall 2015

regulating nuclear safety by the International Atomic En-

ergy Agency (IAEA). In the United States, the production of

nuclear energy is regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Com-

mission (NRC); in UK by the Nuclear Installations Inspector-

ate (NII) and in Australia by the Australian Radiation Protec-

tion and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). Since nuclear

power plants are extremely complex energy systems, it is

very important that thorough safety precautions are imple-

mented, particularly as the timeframe from the start of con-

struction of a commercial nuclear power station to the safe

disposal of its last radioactive waste is over 100 years.

Nuclear reactors in operation contain large amounts of

radioactive fission products which can pose a direct radia-

tion hazard, contaminate soil and vegetation, and can be

ingested by humans and animals. Human exposure athigh

enough levels can cause both short and long-term illness

and and death. The IAEA works with its member states to

promote safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies.

The IAEA monitors nuclear use and is the sole global or-

ganization overseeing the nuclear energy industry. Follow-

ing Fukushima, it has been reviewing its role with regard to

safety standards and regulations. While the Fukushima ac-

cident was caused by a tsunami and outdated safety guide-

lines, the Chernobyl plant lacked a radiation containment

structure which all western style reactors possess, as it con-

tains radiation in the event of a failure.

Currently, one of the main issues in nuclear technology

and nuclear plant operations is the lack of transparency

that tends to permeate civilian nuclear energy programs

post-Manhattan Project. The consideration as to whether

the risk and uncertainty of nuclear power outweighs its

benefits needs to be addressed openly on behalf of the

potentially affected populations. This is particularly perti-

nent in developing countries that lack the necessary infra-

structure, personnel and regulatory frameworks and have

no significant industrial experience for this highly complex

energy system.

Today we will hear perspectives from the fields of gov-

ernment, science and business. We cannot continue to live

at the expense of our future generations. We need to take

action now so they can have a sustainable future. Thank

you for your attention.

Permanent Representative,Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations.

Opening Remarks: 24th International Conference on Health and the Environment

Excellencies, Dear Colleagues, Distinguished Guests,

I am pleased that Ukraine has a long-lasting tradition of co-

hosting this essential open dialogue at the United Nations, that

gives us an opportunity to discuss a number of the most rel-

evant items of international, national and regional importance.

First of all, let me thank Dr. Christine Durbak of World In-

formation Transfer for being our supporter and partner for so

many fruitful years. I would also like to welcome all of our dis-

tinguished speakers here today, and personally welcome my

colleagues at the United Nations: Her Excellency Mrs. Edita

Hrda of Czech Republic, and His Excellency Mr. Andrei Dapkiu-

nas of Belarus. I encourage everyone to participate in our open

expert discussion, because it will definitely contribute to the

fundamental principles of this international organisation, par-

ticularly when I see so many young professionals in front of me.

Dear colleagues, at the moment, social development pre-

“We need to take action now so that they may have a sustainable future.”

“In your ideals, keep your eyes on the stars and keep your feet on the ground.”

President Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919)

H.E. Mr. Yuriy A. Sergeyev


Fall 20154

sents a serious challenge for my country. Provoked insurgent

activities have breached the territorial integrity of Ukraine and

have lead to a major humanitarian crisis, which poses a threat

to our social stability and our capacity for sustainable devel-

opment. However, despite exceptionally challenging circum-

stances, Ukraine is making every effort to protect and promote

the fundamental rights and freedoms of its people, as well as

striving to keep up with the emerging developmental agenda

of the United Nations, in particular engaging with the post-

2015 Sustainable Development Goal process.

There is no doubt that every country, regardless of

whether they are small or big, rich or poor, faces challeng-

es to their national security. Whilst some states are being

threatened with military insecurity, other countries are fac-

ing the threat of climate change; energy, water and food

insecurity. Unfortunately, Ukraine is not an exception. How-

ever, the challenges we face make us even stronger.

In 1986 one of the world’s major humanitarian challeng-

es struck Ukraine and its neighboring countries, exposing

the unidentified problem of thousands of internally dis-

placed people. Therefore, on the 26th of April we mark the

29th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster. On this occa-

sion, the Office of the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon,

has released a statement on this issue. It was underlined

that the international community remember the hundreds

of emergency workers who responded to the accident, and

the upwards of 330,000 people uprooted from their homes

in its aftermath. We stand in solidarity with the millions who

have been traumatized by lingering fears about their health

and livelihoods.

After nearly three decades, the affected areas are still

suffering from the impact of the accident. However, we can

take heart that communities in the affected regions now

have a chance and, increasingly, the means, to lead a nor-

mal life.

By saying that, I assume that my colleagues, the Ambas-

sadors, will speak and present more about the impact of the

Chernobyl experience and lessons learned into the UN Dis-

aster risk reduction policy, in particular into the cluster on

technological hazards.

Dear colleagues, Ukraine prizes the commitment of the

United Nations system to stand by those affected by Cher-

nobyl and calls to deliberate a forward-looking strategy on

Chernobyl in 2016. It is important that countries are not left

on their own, and that the international community should

support and identify the short and long-term capacity

needs of vulnerable and affected countries.

Being a country with multiple neighbors, Ukraine con-

siders different avenues of cooperation in order to sup-

port, elaborate and realize concrete joint regional projects

in strategic areas. We firmly support the efforts made by

the United Nations system to strengthen its relations with

the relevant international and regional organizations with

the ultimate goal of achieving a concrete positive impact

on the political and socioeconomic development of the re-

gions. Our country closely cooperates at the bilateral, mul-

tilateral and inter-organizational level in order to pursue the

General Assembly proclaimed 2006-2016 “Decade of Recov-

ery and Sustainable Development” for the affected regions

of the Chernobyl disaster. The United Nations Action Plan

on Chernobyl until 2016 reflects our joint commitment to

achieving the aims of the ‘Decade’ by focusing on social and

economic development, the promotion of healthy lifestyles,

and community self-reliance.

My country comprehends on its own how different

and difficult safety and security challenges may affect the

territorial integrity or even pose a threat to their survival.

Therefore, Ukraine advocates for the inclusion of disaster

risk reduction, building resilience and adequate provision

of humanitarian relief into the post-2015 development net-

work. In particular the voice of the least developed coun-

tries, landlocked and small island developing states should

be the concern of every other UN Member State, and the

United Nations system as a whole. (Continued overleaf)

“Provoked insurgent activities have breached the territorial integrity of Ukraine...”

“Ukraine...calls to deliberate a forward-looking strategy on Chernobyl in 2016.”


Fall 2015

Dear colleagues, the approach of the new United Nations-

system must ensure comprehensive consideration of securi-

ty, social and environmental aspects, particularly in priority

areas such as ecological safety, comprehensive environ-

mental conservation and risk reduction management. Only

such an approach will facilitate sustainability and efficiency

of developing world. I am confident that the new General

Assembly Chernobyl resolution in 2016, with the immense

experience of almost thirty years of activity of how to man-

age and revitalize the effects of a nuclear accident, will con-

tribute to the sustainable agenda of the United Nations.

Dear colleagues, I tried to shape the main ideas of the

Ukrainian delegation at the United Nations on the relevant

issues, and now I guess that it is time to listen to the views

and approaches of my colleagues. Thank you.

Closing Remarks:

Dear colleagues,

Once again I would like to thank you for your interest in this

conference, and I prize today’s speakers for being with us

and sharing their views. We realize that Ukraine is facing

serious long-term challenges, but we are prepared. Our as-

piration for building a new country of peace and stability is

supported by our international partners, including today`s

audience, to whom we are extremely grateful. Thank you.

“A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely

rearranging their prejudices.”

-William James, philosopher and psychologist (1842 – 1910)

Permanent Representative,Mission of the Czech Republic to the United Nations

Sustainable Disaster Risk Reduction, Vice-chairmanship of the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, Sendai 2015

Madam Chair, Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen;

It is an honour to be a part of this distinguished panel

and to be able to contribute to a discussion on such a com-

plex and fascinating topic.

Just following the news every day makes it clear that dis-

asters – be they man-made or natural – are part of our daily

lives, and that they often have serious impacts on health

and the environment. From the tragic earthquake in Nepal

to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011 or indeed

the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, now almost 30 years ago,

communities are constantly put at risk. Nuclear energy that

can bring such benefits can turn into a deadly force in a

matter of seconds and a shatter of the earth. The same goes

for other industrial accidents or natural catastrophes.

Providing a new framework to help reduce the risk

of such disasters has thus become a priority for the Third

United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduc-

tion that took place in Sendai, Japan, from March 14th to

March 18th, 2015. The Czech Republic was proud to serve

as one of the Vice-chairs of the Conference, which was the

first in a series of landmark UN conferences of this impor-

tant year and which will be followed by challenging SDG

and climate change negotiations. The outcome is the new

“Providing a new framework to help reduce the risk of such disasters has thus become a priority...”

H.E. Ms. Edita Hrdá


Fall 20156

practical post-2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Re-

duction 2015-2030 and a political document: the Sendai

Declaration. The framework applies to both small-scale and

large-scale risk, frequent and infrequent, sudden and slow-

onset disasters, caused by natural or man-made hazards as

well as related environmental, technological and biological

hazards and risks.

The meeting was attended by 6,500 participants rep-

resenting 187 countries, including 25 heads of state, vice-

presidents, and heads of government. Sendai hosted over

100 ministers from a wide range of ministries, 42 intergov-

ernmental organizations, 236 NGOs, 38 United Nations enti-

ties, over 300 private sector representatives, over 280 local

governments and over 780 journalists from 51 countries.

That in itself is quite a unique indication of how cross-cut-

ting this issue really is.

Round-the-clock negotiations took place to produce the

new Sendai Framework and the political declaration. Issues

at stake included financing for developing countries, tech-

nology transfer, capacity-building, roles and responsibilities

of non-State stakeholders, coherence across disaster risk

reduction, climate change and sustainable development,

governing risk, as well as exacerbating, contextual factors

(e.g. conflict).

The Sendai Framework recognizes that managing dis-

aster risk is an important component of sustainable de-

velopment. Emphasis is on the prevention of new risks in

the course of development. There are calls for coherence

in policies and programmes across sustainable develop-

ment, environment and climate to ensure the reduction of

disaster risk. There are also calls for international coopera-

tion mechanisms and practices to mobilize funding, espe-

cially for developing countries. Last but not least, there is a

strong call to ensure the integration of disaster risk reduc-

tion in the sustainable development strategy of the United

Nations. The links and interfaces between individual UN re-

view processes are key. (Continued overleaf)

The goal of the ‘New Framework’ – and I quote – is: “To

prevent new and reduce existing disaster risk through the

implementation of integrated and inclusive economic,

structural, legal, social, health, cultural, educational, envi-

ronmental, technological, political and institutional meas-

ures that prevent and reduce hazard exposure and vulner-

ability to disaster, increase preparedness for response and

recovery, and thus strengthen resilience”.

Crucial innovations introduced by the Sendai Frame-

work that I would like to highlight include:

- a shift from disaster management to disaster risk

management;

- recognition of the importance of well-functioning

health systems (as we have seen last year during the Ebola

crisis);

- a strong call for strengthening the use of science

and technology in policy-making;

- a separate chapter on the role of stakeholders;

- strengthened global, regional and national plat-

forms;

- focus on the recovery, rehabilitation and recon-

struction phase, which needs to be prepared ahead of dis-

aster (“Build Back Better”).

The Czech Republic has been a member of the Prepara-

tory Committee since March 2014, and one of the Vice-

chairs of the Conference. Together with the Russian Fed-

eration, we represented the Group of East European States.

This means we took part in the procedural management of

the whole conference process.

Approximately 60% of the text of the ‘New Framework’

has been negotiated before the conference in a series of

consultations. The rest has been finalized during intensive

and complex negotiations in Sendai under the leadership of

the Main Committee chaired by Finland and Thailand. The

New Framework also includes provisions for global goals

that have been negotiated under the leadership of Jamaica.

The outcome of the Sendai conference must be en-

“Ukraine...calls to deliberate a forward-looking strategy on Chernobyl in 2016.”

“The outcome of the Sendai conference must be endorsed by the General Assembly...”


Fall 2015

dorsed by the General Assembly, and the inter-governmen-

tal group for the preparation of indicators should be es-

tablished via a General Assembly resolution. It is, however,

understood that countries will specify their own goals and

indicators at a national level.

All in all, the Preparatory Committee and the Conference

succeeded in producing a quality document that provides

the right framework for disaster risk reduction. It has been

a lot of work but the most important job is still ahead of

us – the implementation of the New Framework. I wish us

all good luck.

Ladies and gentleman, allow me a small personal remark

at the end. In disaster risk reduction and elsewhere, we are

constantly looking for innovations and new ideas and they

come from many sources. The Czech Mission to the UN is

currently trying to provide support to a student project

called “City and Disaster“. It is, in essence, an architecture

workshop bringing together students of architecture from

the United States, the Czech Republic, Thailand and poten-

tially Brazil. The aim is to provide ideas for sustainable solu-

tions to various types of hazards affecting cities as diverse

as New York, Prague or Bangkok. The latest workshop took

place in Prague in March and we would like to present its

outcomes here at the UN in the next few weeks. We hope

that some of you will be inspired. Thank you for your atten-

tion.

H.E. Mr. Andrei Dapkiunas Permenant Representative,Mission of Belarus to the United Nations.

Sustainable Hazard Management, Technological Hazard. Chernobyl in Sendai: UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction


Today I would like to make a very brief presentation; a

summary of the presentation on the post-Chernobyl experi-

ence, that the three most effected countries, Belarus, Russia

and Ukraine, made jointly at the recently concluded Sendai

conference on Disaster Risk Reduction. You may watch me

speak, but if you get tired and would like to go easy on your

eyes, you can watch the more colorful slides on the screens,

so choose whatever suits you best. I will also try to elaborate

on the possible way forward for international cooperation

on the Chernobyl issues.

The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant was, as we

know, the worst nuclear accident in history. This severe dis-

aster lead to the loss of human lives and significant health,

environmental, and economic consequences. In 2002 the

governments of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, together with

the UN family, enacted a new strategy on Chernobyl. It rec-

ognized that the biggest challenge to the affected regions

was not radiation, but rather a lack of social and economic

opportunities. In 2006 the UN Secretary-General trans-

ferred the UN system-wide coordination on Chernobyl to

the UNDP. The decade of recovery in sustainable develop-

ment of the affected regions was proclaimed by the United

“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the

dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those

who are in the shadows of life - the sick, the needy and the handicapped.”

-Hubert Horatio Humphrey, US Vice-President (1911-1978)

“...the biggest challenge...was the lack of social and economic opportunities...”


Fall 20158

Nations to be 2006-2016. That decade is about to end next

year. In its framework there were a lot of enormous efforts

and resources allocated by the three countries and inter-

national community to implement numerous national, re-

gional, and international projects aimed at recovery and

allotment of these resources to Chernobyl-affected com-

munities. There were some very important lessons we took

as a result of this experience.

First, the human consequences of nuclear emergency

can be deep-rooted and long- lasting. Recovery activities

should include psychological support, information sharing,

and counseling, in order to ease fears, and promote a for-

ward looking attitude, as in any tragedy or as in any disaster.

Second, following a nuclear disaster, the effected territories

may become stigmatized. This negative effect on the liveli-

hoods of the people may require additional efforts, includ-

ing support to marketing the products, attracting investors,

keeping young people in the region, etc. The third lesson

was that priority should be given to community based, so-

cial, and economic development and to the support of lo-

cal initiatives, aimed at improving welfare and encouraging

self-reliance. The fourth lesson that we’ve drawn was that

assistance should be targeted, and should concentrate on

the most affected and vulnerable people, communities, and

territories. The fifth lesson was that international efforts can

only be effective if they support efforts of local, regional,

and national governments. Last but not least, coordination

efforts by the relevant UN agencies, as well as joint initia-

tives, were always of the utmost importance. The develop-

ment stage of the UN system-wide coordinative function

on the recovery efforts from the nuclear disaster can be

effectively performed by the United Nations Development

Program.

The post-Chernobyl experience proved its efficiency, and

demonstrated that recovery activities can be distinguished

in two ways: actions taken in the immediate aftermath of

the nuclear accident, and actions that take a long term view.

In the short term, it is vital that the affected population gets

access to information on the risks and the scale of the ac-

cident. At this stage, if necessary, the governments can ad-

dress the issues of social benefits, zoning, and resettlement

of the people from affected areas. In the longer term, it is

essential that affected communities are supported in their

economic, social and livelihoods recovery. Application of

the community based approach is most promising. Com-

munities in the affected areas should be encouraged to

implement small scale initiatives that improve their living

conditions, and raise the principle of voluntary actions to

address local challenges.

Together, with the United Nations family, the three

countries of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine gained unique

knowledge and experience in recovering from the hu-

man consequences of Chernobyl’s nuclear disaster. This

unique knowledge and experience can, and should, be

shared amongst the international community, possibly in-

cluding the cases of technological accidents. The need to

preserve and disseminate the experience leads us to the

conviction that further international coordination and ef-

forts are needed beyond the current and nearing comple-

tion of the UN’s Chernobyl decade that will end in 2016. In

fact, the work to elaborate future Chernobyl co-operation

framework already started last year at a meeting in Minsk

that was chaired by the head of UNDP: administrator Helen

Clark. We hope that the dialogue and participation of the

three most affected countries and interested UN agencies

could lead to a new strategy for post-2016 international

Chernobyl cooperation.

In this regard, we are encouraged by the statement of

the UN Secretary-General made last week, in which he

called for a forward looking strategy designed to further

“First, the human consequences of nuclear emer-gency can be deep-rooted and long-lasting.”

“...assistance should be targeted, and should con-centrate on the most affected and vulnerable...”

“Application of the community based approach is most promising.”


Fall 2015

Health Consequences for the Belarusian Population after the Chernobyl Accident

Dear Colleagues and Participants,

I would like to speak about the health consequences of

the Chernobyl accident for the population in Belarus. As

you all know, the 26th of April 1986 saw the devastating

reactor meltdown of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.

It was the nuclear power industry’s darkest hour. The fire

from Reactor #4 spewed out emissions over 10 days that

contained radioactive aerosols and fuel particles. The total

release measured approximately 1.4×1019 becquerels (Bq),

and much of Belarus was contaminated by radionuclides

of caesium, iodine, strontium, plutonium and americium.

Almost all territory of the Republic of Belarus was contami-

nated by Iodine-131 and Caesium-137.

What was done to protect the public? I want to note that

in 1986, in the Soviet Union, there were no clear criteria for

population protection measures, especially for such a large

area and for so many people. The process of formulating

and implementing the protective measures was very diffi-

cult. The procedural decisions could only be taken by the

heads of each of the then Soviet republics - Belarus, Russia,

Ukraine - with the approval of the central committee of the

Source: Alena Nikalayenka; National Commision of Radiation Protection, Republic of Belarus


Scientific Secretary of the National Commission on Radiation Protection, Republic of Belarus

Distribution of Caesium-137 fallout from the stricken Chernobyl nuclear power plant (1986)

help the recovery of the affected areas, and to work togeth-

er for greater nuclear safety worldwide. I’m sure, and I hope,

that we will collectively ensure their liberation and eventual

implementation of such strategy. Thank you very much for

your kind attention.

Contamination of Belarus by Iodine-131

Dr. Alena Nikalayenka

Contamination of Belarus by Caesium-137


Fall 201510

justified in Belarus.

What health effects can stem from radiation? Radiation

exposure may lead to both deterministic and stochastic

effects. Deterministic effects depend on dose thresholds;

those should be higher than 0.1 gray (Gy)* (see note). For

example, acute deterministic effects include acute radiation

syndrome, radiation burns, hair loss, sterility and cataracts.

Stochastic effects do not depend on the dose – only the risk

of the effects is associated with the dose. Stochastic effects

include cancer and subsequent hereditary effects. Stochas-

tic effects do not depend on the dose – only the risk of the

effects is associated with dose. Stochastic effects include

cancer and subsequent hereditary effects. These effects can

be identified by means of epidemiological surveillance.

In radiation protection it is very important to know

what doses people were exposed to. After the Chernobyl

accident, the effective dose for liquidators was on average

100 millisieverts. Evacuees were exposed to, on average,

approximately 17 millisieverts, and effective accumulated

dose for members of the general public from 1986 to 2005

was approximately between 10 to 20 millisieverts. For the

majority of people, the most significant doses of internal ra-

diation from Iodine isotopes were delivered to the thyroid

gland through the consumption of contaminated milk and

green leafy vegetables. Children living in Belarus close to

the Chernobyl nuclear power plant received, on average,

several doses in the range of approximately 1 to 15 millig-

rays and the maximum did not exceed 1 gray.

There were about 1200 emergency workers deployed to

the site of the power plant itself. Health consequences were

only seen in a fraction of them. 2 workers died in the imme-

diate aftermath of the accident. 134 plant staff and emer-

gency personal were exposed to high doses ranging from 1

to 18 grays of radiation. That resulted in to acute radiation

syndrome and radiation burns due to better emitters. 28 of

those exposed to high levels of radiation died in the first

year following the accident from a combination of high ex

Party in Moscow.

Radiation absorption limits for the general public were

only established in the former Soviet republics in 1986.

Those limits set the maximum acceptable annual dose of

radiation for a member of the public at 250 millisieverts,

a figure approximately 10 times larger than the limits set

out for the Chernobyl nuclear power plant workers. Those

dose limits were later revised and reduced, and now the es-

timated average dose for a member of the public shall not

exceed an effective dose of 1 millisievert in a year.

The evacuation of people living in the 30 km exclusion

zone was completed within 4 months, from the 5th of May

to the 5th of September 1986. About 24,000 people were

evacuated from the Belarusian segment of the exclusion

zone. Thyroid blocking procedures were effective only for

the residents of Pripyat town. For other populations they

were not carried out or were not effective for the follow-

ing reasons: delayed start due to inadequate warnings, the

absence of an effective system and criteria, the absence of

clear schemes for distribution of Iodine, and an inadequate

governmental administration.

Early protection measures included a restriction of food

consumption: primarily leaves, vegetables, and milk that

had been contaminated by Iodine-131. The first limits on-

foodstuffs were introduced on the 6th of May 1986. The

early measures also covered the decontamination of build-

ings, roads, and residential areas; the washing of streets and

vehicles in towns (to suppress dust), and the removal of

radioactive soil and demolition of contaminated houses. A

restriction zone of 30 km was established around the inca-

pacitated Chernobyl nuclear power plant. The relocation of

about 200,000 people in the period of 1989-1993 was not

“...the most significant doses...were delivered to the thyroid gland...”

“...10 times larger than the limits set out for the Chernobyl nuclear power plant workers...”

“The first limits on foodstuffs were introduced on the 6th of May 1986.”


Fall 2015

Observed vs. expected thyroid cancer incidence in Belarus for people 0-18 years old at the time of exposure (1986-2002)

ternal doses of gamma exposure and skin burns. 19 died in

the period of 1987 - 2004 from various causes not all linked

to radiation. No cases of acute radiation syndrome have

been recorded amongst general public, and no doses that

could lead to acute radiation syndrome have been received.

The major health consequence for the population of

Belarus is thyroid cancer. This ailment was caused by ex-

posure of the thyroid gland to Iodine isotopes. The de-

layed implementation of protective measures directly led

to greater thyroid cancer prevalence. There have been more

than 7000 cases of thyroid cancer observed in children that

were younger than 18 years old at the time of the accident.

4 years after the accident, the morbidity of thyroid cancer

in Belarus rose from 2 cases of thyroid cancer per 100,000

members of the population in 1990 to 12 cases per 100,000

in 2004. Approximately 95 percent of thyroid cancer were

papillary cancer. In the period from 2008 to 2013, the mor-

bidity stabilized and now there is about 12 cases of thyroid

cancers per 100,000 for the Belorussian population and less

than 0.2 per 100,000 in children 0 – 17 years old. The com-

parative incidences rate for spontaneous thyroid cancer in

Belarus before the accident was 0.5 in children and about

2 in adults. There is only one stochastic effect of radiation

from Chernobyl accident: thyroid cancer in children and

adolescents.

There is no significant increase of leukemia in adults or

children living in contaminated areas. There is no consistent

evidence that the observed increase of solid tumors is ra-

diation related, or that it correlates with a received radiation

dose. The observed increase of general cancer rates may

have been caused by enhanced, intensive medical exami-

nations and improved diagnostic capability coupled with

an improved social and economic situation in Belarus, and

an increased knowledge as to radiological and radiation

factors. It is well known that foetal effects are seen at rela-

tively low doses of radiation. The foetus is a highly prolifera-



Fall 201512

Caesium-137 concentration was more than 15 curies

per square kilometer.

Every five years, according to the law of the Republic of

Belarus, the Ministry of Health assess of annual effective

radiation doses of people living in the contaminated areas

and the data about doses are in the State dosimetric regis-

ter. The register has approximately 3 million records for the

registration period since 1987.

According to the official statistical data from the regis-

ter of Belarus and the official catalog of doses for this year

(2015), a large proportion of people living in contaminated

territory have been exposed to no more than 0.1 millsievi-

erts. Only 23,000 people living in 82 settlements received in

2015 a dose that exceeded 1 millisievert, and approximately

54,000 people from 193 settlements had such dose in 2009

according to the previous catalog. About 80-90 percent of

effective doses are caused by internal exposure from the

consumption of contaminated forest food. The decrease in

dose strength is mainly due to radio-nuclear decay and a

decline in population caused by natural death or migration

of people to clean areas.

In conclusion, only the liquidators had very high doses of

radiation, and as a result were likely to develop acute radia-

tion syndrome and suffer radiation burns. The growth cases

of cataracts and leukemia has been observed in liquidator’s

group. Thyroid cancer was proven to be present in the pub-

lic. Those were children and adult and liquidators that were

exposed at first 2-3 months after the accident. Other solid

cancers and non-cancer mortality incidence have not been

registered after the Chernobyl accident. In Belarus, a lot of

people live on contaminated territory yet they have an ef-

fective dose of no more than 1 millisievert in a year. Thank

you for your attention.

*NOTE: Gray is only for general information about determin-

istic effects. Gray (Gy) is unit of the absorbed dose (equiva-

lent dose) and sievert (Sv) is the specific unit of the effec-

tive dose. These are completely different units and doses.

The effective dose (1 mSv in year, 10-20 mSv in year) is the

dose limit for the population from the normal operation of

all sources.

tive system with many undifferentiated cells. It is therefore

extremely sensitive to radiation effects, but no statistical ab-

normalities were detected in Belarus or other countries. The

state register of Belarus includes information regarding the

4 groups of the population: the liquidators, evacuees and

people and workers from the contaminated areas, where

Official catalogs of annual effective doses of people living on contaminated areas in 2009 and 2015

Dose, mSv/year Region

Catalog-2009 Catalog-2015 settlements Number of

people settlements Number of

people

>1

Brest 5 4841 4 4700 Gomel 142 39844 66 17600 Mogilev 44 3443 8 200 in total 191 48128 78 22500

=1 Gomel 2 6214 4 900 in total 193 54.342 82 23.400

Including

≥3 - <4 Gomel 1 1 - - Mogilev 2 3 - - in total 3 4 - -

≥4 Gomel 4 515 - -

I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning,

confirmed by independent observers. I’ll believe anything, no matter how wild

and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous

something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be.

-Isaac Asimov, scientist and writer (1920-1992)

Annual Effective Doses of Belarusians (mSv/year)

General Population

Dr. Alena Nikalayenka



Fall 2015

Executive Advisor,Ener-Core, Inc.

Energy Security in Ukraine: Need and Opportunity


The Chernobyl accident thirty years ago was a stain on

world history; a stain on Soviet history, Ukrainian history,

and Russian history. We’ve studied our mistakes in the wake

of the disaster, and we’ve learned from them. I’m glad that

the room is young, and I’m here to talk about what you can

do, and how you can make the most of what you have.

Let me deliver a self-serving anecdote to illustrate what

I’m talking about. I am an executive advisor to a company

in the energy sector, but until six months ago I didn’t have

anything to do with the energy industry. I took the assets

that I had at my disposal to try to take action with regard

to the situation in Ukraine, which for me was one of energy

security, and in doing so I asked myself two central ques-

tions: how do you ensure energy security, and how do you

make Ukraine a better place, not just for its peoples and citi-

zens, but also for its political and geographical neighbours

in Western Europe?

This is a survey that was recently conducted on behalf

of EBRD, the European Bank of Reconstruction and De-

velopment, on the subject of technological investment in

Ukraine. Its respondents were a mix of private and public

sector individuals and companies. What were their three

primary motivations to invest in technologies? Energy se-

curity was number one; the reduction of operational costs

was number two; existing legal and regulatory require-

ments was number three. Those results are seen consist-

ently across survey results; a respondent’s motivations align

with the biggest problems that they are facing, and the big-

gest problem facing Ukraine today is one of energy security.

Anything is possible in Ukraine; Ukraine has a lot of in-

teresting things at its disposal. If you were to ask me what’s

changed in the last thirty years in Ukraine, I’d unfortunately

answer you with one thing: Ukraine and the region of West-

ern Europe have less energy security today than they did

thirty years ago. As part of the Soviet Union, Ukraine didn’t

have to worry about its uranium; its uranium came from

Russia. Whilst Ukraine’s uranium is still provided by Russia,

the current political situation between those two nations

is critically strained. A similar situation exists with natural

gas - thirty years ago, Western Europe wasn’t as dependent

on Russian gas as it is today, and they’ve been intention-

ally weaned on it at cheap prices. Today they pay the con-

sequences.

The reliance on another for imported energy sources - an

angry neighbor or even a reliable neighbor – is not a sustain-

able policy; in an interconnected energy network, localized

disruptions in source supply have the potential to result in

national or international ramifications. A nation should aim

to have a reduction in the proportion of energy sources that

it imports, and to diversify and maximize its energy base.

It is pertinent to mention the de-centralization of energy -

the process by which energy sources are diversified, both

geographically and technologically. Why is decentralization

a good idea? Whilst the practice of centralized sourcing is

unfortunately common in the energy industry, centraliza-

tion has the potential to be not only risky, but also highly

inefficient. A mixed energy grid, where the inadequacies of

one energy source can be offset by another, is considered

to be ideal.

In this sense Ukraine has two kinds of energy resources

– base-load resources and intermittent resources. Intermit-

tent resources are those that rely on variable, and poten-

tially uncontrollable, factors: for a wind farm to generate en-

ergy, it needs wind. It is rare, but possible, for intermittent

“...the biggest problem facing Ukraine today is one of energy security.”

Mr. Aleks Mehrle


Fall 201514

sources to rise above their inherent caveats. Last summer,

Germany experienced one day of particularly sunny, par-

ticularly windy, weather. From that, through solar and wind

powered production facilities, they were able to generate

70% of their daily national energy requirements. Such ex-

amples are few and far between.

Even in cases where the production is possible, energy

storage capacity is often limited. Battery technology is ad-

vancing, however there are substantial limitations in stor-

age ability, pending further technological breakthroughs.

An energy grid is a very sensitive entity; it requires constant

adjustment to balance. If the balance is not attained and

maintained, brownouts and blackouts are likely to occur. To

ensure such a balance, an accessible, reliable energy source

is necessary. Nuclear energy sources, for example, would

fulfill such criteria, as would hydroelectric sources. Such

sources constitute a country’s base-load power.

What does Ukraine have in regard to base-load power,

and of that what is environmentally friendly and renew-

able? Many renewable energy sources of base-load power

are limited in their applicability, particularly by geographic

factors. Thermal energy, whilst a reliable form of base-load

provision, is not accessible everywhere. One source that

is available in Ukraine is waste gas, utilized in conjunction

with oxidation technology; the others are biomass and

biogas.

Ukraine is known, or at least has been known, as the

‘bread-basket of Europe’, and its extensive agricultural in-

dustry could be adapted to provide biogas and biomass,

the latter of which has the capacity to be pelletized. A pel-

letized energy source can be easily exported, and in doing

so a nation not only satisfies their own energy needs but

also creates jobs across both its energy industries its and

relevant auxiliary infrastructure. The other element for

base-load power is waste gases; Ener-Core’s solution takes

waste gases and converts them to energy.

If you’ve driven by Newark airport, you might have seen

flames coming out of the top of some of the factory stacks.

That is flaring activity; there’s not enough methane content

for the waste gasses to burn on their own, so companies

add additional methane to their emissions to ensure that

their emissions combust.

This is an example of the type of technology that com-

panies usually buy. Vent technology merely allows the

emission to escape into the atmosphere - a solution that

is very environmentally unfriendly. Scrubbing technology

attempts to remove the damaging components form the

emission gasses. Thermal oxidation technology burns off

the flammable contents. Ener-Core’s solution gives an ad-

ditional positive result.

The project economics are very clear. Providing that pro-

ject financing is available, and project financing is available,

the adoption of technology like Ener-Core’s is a very good

business decision. There are companies that will do lend-

lease programs, where they’ll buy the equipment, lease

them back to the companies that would install it, and then

they just get a percentage; it’s like being a landlord on the

equipment, because it’s paying for itself like monthly rent,

and then eventually it pays for itself, and then you’re mak-

ing a profit. A cost-comparison between alternative energy

“Ukraine and the region of Western Europe have less energy security today than they did thirty years

ago.”

“Even in cases where the production is possible, energy storage capacity is often limited.”

Source: Ukraine Agro Valley Association; Aleks Mehrle


Fall 2015

sources (wind/solar), once one factors in that it has a quick-

er return on investment, shows that Ener-Core’s solution

is cheaper. This doesn’t mean that one should not pursue

wind and solar sources; wind and solar are also important,

particularly as their relevant technologies become more

and more efficient.

I’ve identified energy security as an easy entry point to

solving Ukraine’s problems as a whole. A successful, imple-

mentable, energy solution is likely to attract considerable

attention, and if a solution not only secures energy sources

but also reduces the cost of doing business, companies are

very likely to technologically adapt and adopt. For this rea-

son the Ener-Core solution and the biomass solution are

good ones: by investing in biomass as an energy solution,

you not only solve your energy challenges, but you build

agricultural investment as well.

What are the primary obstacles to implementation? Eco-

nomic and financial obstacles are obvious: if something’s

too expensive, you don’t do it. Policy, legal, and regula-

tory measures can have a dampening effect. If you have

too many people asking for too many stamps on too many

pieces of paper, nothing actually gets done. This is a debate

that you often hear in the U.S. Whilst I am aware of their po-

tential limitations, I am not calling to ‘eliminate regulatory

issues’. One needs to, however, ensure that policy and regu-

latory limitations are predictable and aligned with business

interests where appropriate.

On the matter of existing legal and regulatory require-

ments... Western Europe has very stringent regulations on

pollutant levels, but they also have feed-in tariffs to give

you a multiplying effect if you use alternative energy. Those

can be motivating factors, but they can also be dangerous:

if you rely too much on tariffs, the energy falls under some-

one else’s control. Ukraine had very high feed-in tariffs for

energy generated by wind and solar, the two sources be-

ing effectively controlled by two individuals. As a result, the

regulation of energy flow became a moneymaking scheme:

the individuals benefitted as a result of both monopoly and

high tariffs. This sort of profiteering diverts innovation and

investment from where it should go, into the individual

pocket.

And here’s the opportunity. If you have energy crops, fuel

production, technologies, biomass production and service

facilities, then you would meet your energy demands, and

energize both the public and the private sector. Whilst in

some places investors need to be sought and facilities need

to be constructed and operated in line with the relevant

national and international standards, with the process in

place there is a significant impact. The biomass solution and

the oxidization process are only part of the energy matrix:

Ukraine is likely to continue utilizing nuclear energy sourc-

es, and in that respect sourcing their fuel from somewhere

other than Russia might be a wise idea.

This is the result of harnessing something that you al-

ready have as a country, which in the case of Ukraine is a

significant amount of excess and unused agricultural capac-

ity that could be used as transferred into fuel or translated

into fuel, and as a direct result the nation has a decreased

reliance on Russian gas. Thank you.

Source: EBRD; Aleks Mehrle

Results of the EBRD survey on inhibitors with regard to investment in climate technology in Ukraine

“Policy, legal, and regulatory measures can have a dampening effect.”

“...sourcing their fuel from somewhere other than Russia might be a wise idea.”


Fall 201516

Fulbright Scholar, Gund Institute for Ecological Economics/RSENR Visiting Scholar, University of Vermont

Ukrainian Economy: Challenges, Reforms and Sustainability

Your Excellencies, Madam Chairwoman, Distinguished

Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen;

I think we can reach out to all of the possibilities avail-

able to us in, what some scientists are calling, this age of

‘anthropocene’. We were once very dependent on nature,

but now nature depends on us. We wish to move to the

age of sustainable development, but it is not easy, and

each country has its problems and solutions. In this re-

gard, I will try to speak about current Ukrainian challenges

in a variety of fields - in particular economic, social and

environmental factors - and also suggest some solutions,

as previous speakers have done.

Ukraine took a long time to develop a sustainable de-

velopment policy, and such a policy was only officially

adopted a few months ago. This is because we lack a clear

vision of what it will really mean to our country. Current

challenges for the Ukrainian economy include problems

in the energy sector; looking to adjust its structure, budg-

et and spending to make it economically profitable; the

lack of good governance, as there is a lot of governmental

failure and widespread corruption; and the domination of

an oligarchy, as social benefits and public goods are not,

and have not been, distributed according to the contribu-

tion of the people, but rather by way of somewhat skewed

privileges. In addition to this, Ukraine did not yield good

economic results last year: the economic crisis, which led

to stagnation, coupled with a huge growth in debt - a to-

tal increase of 60% from the last government – took its toll.

Last month, the greatest challenge to so far face Ukraine

emerged in the form of the conflict with Russia backed

separatists in eastern Ukraine. As a result of the conflict

the total Ukrainian GDP shrank by 5%, and in the eastern

regions of the country, in areas like the Donbass, the GDP

dropped by between 40-50%! Bear in mind, however, that

I was just referring to a loss in production, and that a total

destruction of the economy did not occur. A few months

ago the economic situation was very critical: there was the

very real risk of defaulting on national loans. Thankfully the

nation mobilized itself, reforms were carried out, and we re-

ceived assistance from our partners and the EU. The situa-

tion is improving.

Environmentally speaking, the nuclear problem that

stemmed from the Chernobyl disaster is one of the seg-

ments of environmental problems in Ukraine. It has created

air pollution, environmental destruction and forest destruc-

tion, but I would not like to convey the impression that it

was a total disaster: other parts of Ukraine have been suc-

cessfully conserved. Having said this, I believe we should

work on, and discuss, such environmental problems prag-

matically and openly.

The conflict in the east of the country has also caused

some environmental problems. In territories such as Crimea

and Luhansk, more than 100,000 hectares of steppe land-

scape and 40,000 hectares of forest are under threat, with

the areas threatened by forest fire alone possessing a fi-

nancial value of approximately 40 billion Ukrainian hryvnia

(UAH). These are very modest calculations. This just goes

to show how interrelated environmental, political, and eco-

nomic problems are.

Let us consider further impacts brought by the conflict. In

the suburban east, for example, there are families who have

lost their homes and suffer from diseases. One can compare

Donetsk Airport today with how it looked a year ago; the

destruction of the airport resulted in huge economic losses,

not just with regard to connectivity, but also in losses to the

people. One can also compare images of forests from 2003-

“...there is alot of governmental failure and wide-spread corruption...(yet) the situation is improving.”

Dr. Ihor Soloviy


Fall 2015

Damage to Svyati Hori Nation-al Park as a result of military operations and satellite imagery of scorched forest in Ukraine

Source: Photograph by Victor Storozhenko

Source: Google Earth

2004 and from couple of months ago, as they were being

burnt. No one was taking care of the forest resources - in-

fact it was impossible to do so since, in stepping in to pro-

tect the vulnerable areas, there was the possibility that one

would be risking their life. In Crimea, the loss of which we

tend to overlook nowadays, what was protected by Ukrain-

ian law is no longer protected under Russian governance

- that includes endangered species. Building a house on a

protected area may have been explicitly prohibited under

Ukrainian law; today it may be very much allowed.

I always mention environmental and economic aspects

together because I believe both are equally important. In

this regard, I believe that Ukraine should go green, in ac-

cordance with UN mandates. A green economy was one of

the UN’s priorities, and I think that Ukraine should devise

an adequate strategic responses to this call, in both the

long-term and short-term, and push further to transform a

larger part of its economy away from a brown economy to

a greener one. Here, energy is still a critical issue. If energy

efficiency is low in both industrial and residential sectors,

there is no way that the business sector would invest. There

is a potential for biomass energy, wind energy, and hydrau-

lic energy, but those energy sources have huge financing

needs. We must be careful to avoid squandering our funds;

there have been cases of corruption in unsuccessful pro-

jects, and this cannot continue - it is all about money when

it comes to environmental benefits. There is also potential

for solar energy, but in that regard there exist two problems:

first there is the occupation of the Crimean Peninsula - it is

no longer part of Ukraine and Russia has not declared any

interest with regard to solar energy in Crimea. Once this ter-

ritory is returned to Ukraine then we can consider this pros-

pect further. Secondly, there is a decrease in solar activity in

the area, but I think that is just a temporary problem. It is,

however, undeniably, a problem.

Perhaps one of the ways out is through reforms. Some

believed that reforms would only create problems, however

“In Crimea...what was protected by Ukrainian law is no longer protected under Russian governance...”


Fall 201518

the idea of reforms also attracted strong support. For in-

stance, Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko has stated that “…

we don’t have any excuses. If we don’t reform now, we can

never do so in the future”. Can we simply implement re-

forms in areas not affected by the conflict in the East? Only

7% is involved in conflict! The European Association Agen-

da has suggested a list of reform priorities, and Ukraine has

adopted a realistic document called ‘Strategy: 2020’. ‘Strate-

gy: 2020 consists of 4 key pillars for reform, namely sustain-

able development, security, responsibility and a selection

of ‘ethical’, ‘moral’, pillars for Ukraine. Out of 62 reforms in

total there are 13 in the field of development, such as Capi-

tal, Labor, Trans-European Cooperation, Taxation, Energy

and topics such as Housing and Statistical Institutions, all of

which are very important. Responsibilities for the govern-

ment include decentralization, change in taxation; security

(military expenses, police and anti-corruption measures

which would make the country secure) and ‘Pride’, inclu-

sive of some priorities that would reform Ukraine’s brand.

You cannot do anything in the way of reform without social

integration, and that includes a social agreement between

interests of the state, business and civil society. The central

aim of these reforms would be supporting a green econo-

my and the right path to sustainable development. As UN

conferences have declared a green economy as a priority,

we should think about this in a national context.

“You cannot do anything in the way of reform without social integration...”

Sustainability in Ukraine has come a long way since

1997. The Sustainable Development Strategy was formally

adopted under the Cabinet of Ministers’ National Commis-

sion on Sustainable Development. This is a serious step

towards sustainable development. As I have already men-

tioned, it was only in January this year that the strategy for

sustainable development in Ukraine was officially adopted.

Also, Ukraine is making serious contribution to many inter-

national agreements in the field of environmental protec-

tion, in the field of human rights, and other fields that are

important to human civilization. For instance, I was honored

to present at the Rio+20 conference a Ukrainian idea, along

with Prof. Yurij Tunytsya, the author of this idea - the World

Environmental Constitution. Many countries supported the

initiative of such a Constitution, and there is room to further

work on it in the future. The Constitution includes two parts:

a definitive section and an institutional section. The defini-

tive section contains legal arrangements in which are incor-

porated nearly 500 environmental laws. Of course, some of

them are disputed. We believe that we have to work more

on the institutional aspect because the documents would

not work without any institutional support. Currently, the

a definitive section and an institutional section. The defini-

tive section contains legal arrangements in which are incor-

porated nearly 500 environmental laws. Of course, some of

them are disputed. We believe that we have to work more

on the institutional aspect because the documents would

not work without any institutional support. Currently, the

main idea is to develop new economic models for Ukraine

- models that lie with the notion of a green economy - how-

ever we must work hard to translate such a political term

into a scientific, ecological term.

Today we live in different times. We once lived in an

empty world, a world without frontiers, and now we live

Source: H. E. Daly and J. Farley, 2004


Fall 2015

in a different situation: our population is increasing and

ourresources are scarce. In this regard we should devise a

new and reasonable paradigm. We should be aware that

our economic system is inside society and that society is

inside the environment. There are, however, some bounda-

ries that we cannot cross - the environmental and planetary

bound-aries. Today our main objectives are to change the

paradigms and to devise ways to attain them – what should

be changed in our behavior to realize such a noble goal?

To conclude, this change, this change that is so urgently

needed, should be covered in all aspects of our lives,

including policies, strategies, programs, and the everyday

behavior of every citizen – Ukrainian citizens and citizens of

the planet. Thank you for your attention.

Leader, Climate Reality Project

Carbon, the Critical Issue

Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen and Students;

I would like to thank Dr. Durbak for inviting me once again

to an audience with so many young people - we need you.

This is a picture of the Earth taken from Apollo 17, and

when you look at it, you can’t see any political boundaries,

you can’t see any religious boundaries, you can’t see any

ideological boundaries; we are a single species on this little

blue ball that is flying through space and we have to learn

to coexist because we have no place else to go.

The public and business spheres formulate and pursue long-

term economic and personal goals as if planetary conditions

will be much the same in the future as they are today. In the

meantime, each successive report coming from the inter-

governmental panel on climate change gets grimmer than the last.

Our climate situation is becoming very grave indeed, and

considering how capitalism is totally dependent upon un-

ceasing growth for survival, it is inconceivable that climate

warming is denied and ignored given that the ramifications

from extreme weather events will destroy the foundations of

world economies. Recent history reveals that the warming

planet is making weather events more volatile. According

to the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disas-

ters in Belgium, the world averaged 147 climate, water, and

weather disasters each year between 1983 and 1992. In the

last ten years (2005-2015) that number jumped to 306 dis-

asters a year. Since 1992 there have been over 6,600 major

climate-related disasters worldwide, at a cost of $1.6 trillion

in damages and the deaths of over a million people, directly

and indirectly.

Other obvious evidence that the planet is heating up

can be seen in glacial and polar ice cap loss. This picture is

of Glacier National Park, on the left in 1932, and on the right

in 1988. I actually did a climate presentation there, 3 years

ago, and in 1850 there were a 150 glaciers in the park, hence

the name ‘Glacier National Park’. Today they have 25 glaciers

that are melting very fast. The Grinnell Glacier was the park’s

crown jewel, and today it looks like a napkin sitting on top of

a rock. (Continued overleaf)

Source: NASA/Apollo 17 crew

Mr. Richard Whiteford

“...at a cost of $1.6 trillion in damages and the deaths of over a million people...”


Fall 201520

This image is of the polar ice cap in 1980. The next slide

shows the ice cap in 2010. You can see how much ice has

been lost in this picture. When the ice recedes you get deep

blue ocean, the open water, which absorbs more heat, makes

the water warmer, and melts more ice. We keep losing more

and more of the polar ice cap every year.

Last year the Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica broke off

and has been slowly sliding into the ocean. The inevitable

decomposition of the Thwaites Glacier will cause a 4-foot

sea level rise in the near future, and an 11-foot sea level rise

when it melts entirely. A 4-foot rise in sea level is equivalent

to that of the storm surge witnessed in downtown Manhat-

tan as a result of Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Sandy’s deluge

came and went; the Thwaites Glacier’s meltdown will not re-

cede. According to climatologists, if all the ice in Greenland

melts it will raise sea levels by another 28 feet, amounting to

a combined sea level rise of 39 feet. The resulting catastro-

phe will be overwhelming.

According to the UN, more than 300 million people will

become environmental refugees as a result of heightened

sea levels, and will be forced to leave their communities and

move inland. Currently, 44% of the world’s population re-

sides within 150km of the ocean. We are witnessing

climate change worldwide with devastating floods i.e. Hur-

ricane Sandy and serious droughts i.e. California. Stronger,

more spatially concentrated tornadoes and severe wildfires

are disrupting transportation, industry, agriculture; causing

food and commodities shortages, sending prices skyrocket-

ing. The world as we know it is becoming a very different

place. Right now most governments are not addressing the

problem aggressively enough to avert the impacts that we

face. We are pumping 110 million tons of CO2 into the at-

mosphere every 24 hours, and that is a global figure. 110

million every 24 hours.

This chart is from an ice core sample in Antarctica. The

far left of the chart is marked as 800 thousand years ago,

and if you go to the far right, you can see, highlighted in red

(200,000 years ago), the point at which humans showed up

on the planet. At that time Homo sapiens had no involve-

ment with changing the carbon levels.

The blue line on the chart is carbon, the bottom line is

temperature, and you can see that every time the carbon

goes up, the average global temperature also increases. If

the carbon goes down, the temperature goes down and

those two lines can fit together like a puzzle. If you look

across the chart from 800 thousand years ago to today, the

Source: www.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Co2-temperature-plot.svg

‘Atmospheric Carbon Levels’ against ‘Temperature anomaly’ - 800,000 years

Source: NASA


Fall 2015

temperature went up and down a lot, which are the cycles

that a lot of climate deniers like to call attention to and

claim that climate patterns in general are “…just cyclical”.

And it is cyclical, as you can see it right there, but the big

difference is on the far right of this chart. Over an 800 thou-

sand year time period, the natural mean atmospheric car-

bon content was about 280 PPM (parts per million) - 280

parts per million of carbon to oxygen. In the last 165 years

we have driven our carbon level up to 400 million PPM, and

our temperature spikes have not even caught up yet. We are

in for a really rocky ride.

The critical issue is the atmospheric carbon levels that

we have directly contributed to since the beginning of the

industrial revolution. The figure on the far left of the dia-

gram represents how much carbon we have burnt since

1850: 565 billion tons over 165 years. That consumption has

directly increased planetary temperature by 0.8 degrees

Celsius or 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit over the same time frame.

Climate scientists assert that we dare not tempt a cumula-

tive global temperature increase to above 2 degrees Celsius

or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. We cannot exceed that level, and

since we have already burned 565 billion tons of fossil fu-

els, we can only afford to burn that amount again until we

get to our 2-degree critical limit. The big problem, our criti-

cal issue, is that right now, worldwide, the fossil fuels that

are stored in inventories, those that are available to burn,

amount to 5 times more than the mass that we can afford

to utilize. Oil companies want to drill in the Arctic Ocean

and they want to drill along the Atlantic coast: it’s a policy

of ‘drill, baby, drill’. This is a disastrous energy policy, and no

one is paying attention to the potential consequences. We

cannot afford to burn what we already have in our invento-

ries: we are cooked if we continue to do so.

There are a lot of things happening right now to address

the issue of carbon consumption. We are currently push-

ing to get a bill out of Congress that will tax fossil fuels at

their source, and issue the dividends of such taxation to

tax-paying citizens. The authors of this legislation are keen

to avoid the boons of taxation filling government coffers,

and instead would have it returned to the public pocket.

We want to abolish the 90 billion (USD) tax benefit that the

government grants to the fossil fuel industry, and to take

that money and redirect it into renewable energy projects.

We’re currently calling it ‘tax and dividend legislation’. Whilst

Senator Whitehouse of Massachusetts is very supportive of

our proposals, we are struggling to progress the legislation

Source: www.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Co2-temperature-plot.svgSource: www.carbontracker.org/report/carbon-bubble

Global carbon budget contrasted with potential stored fossil fuel emission levels


Fall 201522

youtube.com/user/WITConferences

WATCH WIT’S 24thCONFERENCE ON YOUTUBE:

“We are finally seeing people that understand the consequences of climate change.”

from the committee phase, and it is unlikely that our sug-

gestions will be considered in the remaining tenure of our

current Administration.

There is an organization called Our Children’s Trust, the

website of which, and I encourage you all to give it a visit, is

ourchildrenstrust.org. Doctor James Henson, formerly from

NASA, is very involved in supporting this organization. These

kids are basing their premise on an old doctrine called the

‘Public Trust Doctrine’. That doctrine states that the people

deserve to have clean water, clean air and a healthy natu-

ral environment in which to live. Apparently, the Supreme

Court recognized back in the 1892 that Pennsylvania has a

very similar clause in their state constitution. Our Children’s

Trust is suing Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Oregon, Massa-

chusetts, Colorado, Washington and North Carolina, and is

getting political attention as well as much-needed financial

support to cover the exorbitant costs associated with the

legal process.

We are finally seeing people that understand the conse-

quences of climate change. We had a protest at the White

House in 2012 at which 40,000 people braved bitter cold

and wind to participate. This past September in New York

City 400,000 people participated in a climate protest: this

movement is getting bigger and bigger.

In conclusion, my message to you is simple: there is cur-

rently five times more carbon in our inventories than we can

afford to burn. Leave carbon in the ground or humans won’t

be around. Thank you for your attention.

Source: nps.gov/ olym/learn/nature/images/Blue-Glacier-1899-2008-pair_1.jpg

Source: Glacier National Park; Blase Reardon/USGS

Shepard Glacier - Glacier National Park, 1913 (Left) and 2005 (Right)

“We cannot afford to burn what we already have in our (energy) inventories; we are cooked if we con-


Fall 2015

World Information Transfer, Inc., (WIT) is a not-for-profit, non-govern-mental organization in General Consultative Status with the United Na-tions, promoting environmental health and literacy. In 1987, inspired by the Chornobyl (Ukrainian spelling) nuclear tragedy, in Ukraine, WIT was formed in recognition of the pressing need to provide accurate ac-tionable information about our deteriorating global environment and its effect on human health. WIT exercises its mandate through:• World Ecology Report (WER). Published since 1989, the World Ecol-

ogy Report is a quarterly digest of critical issues in health and envi-ronment, produced in four languages and distributed to thousands of citizens throughout the developing and developed world.

• Health and environment conferences: Since 1992, WIT has convened annual conferences, held at United Nations headquarters on the growing clinical evidence supporting the link between environmen-tal degradation and its effect on human health. The Conferences have been co-sponsored by UN member states and its organizations and has been convened as a parallel event to the annual meetings of the Commission on Sustainable Development. The scientific papers from the Conferences are available on our website.

• Internship. World Information Transfer (WIT) offers internships in New York City. Our goal is to encourage future leaders of health and en-vironment issues. Our interns spend the majority of their time at the United Nations Headquarters. There are 3 sessions, fall, spring and summer - all require applications.

• Health and Development CD ROM Library. This project consists of a library of CDs each of which focuses on a subject within the over-all topic of Development and Health information. CD ROM Library consist of CD’s developed by our partners HumanInfoNGO which ad-dress the digital divide. The project is continuous with future topics being developed.

• Health and Development CD ROM Library for Ukraine. WIT devel-oped a country specific library disk for distribution in schools and centers in Ukraine.

• Humanitarian Aid. In conjunction with the K.Kovshevych Foundation, WIT provides humanitarian aid to schools, and orphanages in areas devastated by environmental degradation.

• Scholarship Program. WIT assists the K.Kovshevych Foundation, in finding intellectually gifted university students in need of financial assistance to continue their studies in areas related to health and en-vironment.

• www.worldinfo.org WIT provides through its web site science based information on the relationship between human health and the nat-ural environment, including the papers from the WIT’s annual con-ferences, the archived World Ecology Reports, and our new Ecology Enquirer, an e-newsletter written by our Interns targeted to young people.

World Information Transfer is a Non-Profit, Non-Governmental Organization in General Consultative Status with the United Nations, Promoting Health and Environmental Literacy.

Board of DirectorsDr. Christine K. Durbak, CHAIR & CEORoland DeSilvaEXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRDr. Claudia Strauss VICE CHAIRCarolyn T. ComittaSECRETARYMargarita PappasTREASURER

Dr. Bernard D.GoldsteinCary GranatAmb. Valeriy Kuchinsky Dr. Patricia MyskowskiDr. Maria PavlovaDr. Scott RatzanProf. Mark RobsonDr. William N. RomDr. Emily ShumanRichard Whiteford

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it’s the only thing that

ever has”

MARGARET MEAD

Source: nps.gov/ olym/learn/nature/images/Blue-Glacier-1899-2008-pair_1.jpg

“Every student needs someone who says, ‘You mean something. You count.’”

-Tony Kushner, playwright (b. 16 Jul 1956)

World Information Transfer

World Ecology ReportWorld Information Transfer, Inc.(ISSN #1080-3092)

475 Park Avenue South, 22nd FloorNew York, NY 10016TELEPHONE: (212) 686-1996FAX (212)686-2172E-MAIL: [email protected] EDITION AVAILABLE ON:http://www.worldinfo. org

FOUNDER & EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:Dr. Christine K. DurbakMANAGING EDITOR: Calum AndersonASSISTANT EDITOR: Modou Cham

TRANSLATIONS:Chinese: Josephine Au, Kyle Yin Chan, Rachel Leung, Katy Ho Chor KiuSpanish: Patricia Munoz TaviraUkrainian/Russian: Oleh Harasevych

REGIONAL DIRECTORS:

CANADA:Taras Boychuk440 Rathbutn Rd. Apt. 501Toronto, ON M9C 3S7 Tel: (647)781-3807E-mail: [email protected]

CHINA:Josephine Au, William Cho3 Hop Yat Road 4th Floor,Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

EASTERN EUROPE:Prof. Mykola Prytula,Prof. Stefan Heryliv,Prof. Hanna KapustianK. Levychkoho11a, #15, Lviv, UkraineTel/Fax: (380) 322 76-40-39 & 76-68-18E-Mails: [email protected],[email protected]

EUROPEAN UNION:Dr. Michel LootsOosterveldlaan 196B-2610 Antwerp, BelgiumTel: 32-3-448-05-54; Fax: 32-3-449-75-74E-Mail: [email protected] Kuzykvia Caio Lelio, 15, Roma, 00175 [email protected]

LATIN AMERICA:Prof. Patricia Munoz TaviraWillemsstraat 14/03061210 Brussels, BelgiumTel: 32 (0) 48 66 79006 E-mail: [email protected]

USA:Dr. Claudia Strauss475 Park Ave. S. 22nd fl..New York, NY 10016Tel: 212-686-1996Fax: [email protected]


Fall 201524

Following Chornobyl, a great deal of misinformation fostered by the Soviet Union, which included, as its obedient provincial branch, the administration of Ukraine, left not only a confused and desperate public, but began a history of continuous falsification that has as yet to be fully clarified. In an attempt to add specificity to growing concerns regarding various pressures and conflicts that influence the publication of news that do not serve the public interest, I would like to start with Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration which includes the public’s right to know the truth regarding environmental and health issues. It states that “Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information….including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities ……… States shall facilitate and encourage public aware-ness [and participation] by making information widely available…”. Since the adoption of the Rio Declaration 13 years ago, governments have had not only ethical but also legal obligations to their citizens to distinguish credible information from faulty, or even de-liberate propaganda.

In Ukraine, under the Communist rule, the “right to know” was unfathomable, which was the reason why the first Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, Volodymur Shcherbytsky, was able to send thousands of Kyiv children to a compulsory street demonstration, the May Day parage, five days after the Chornobyl explosion. This barbaric decision to misinform the public about radioactive iodine con-taminating the air unnecessarily increased the risk of these parading children to thyroid disease, cancer and death.

Thyroid cancer has increased over the past 20 years in proportion to the age of radia-tian exposure, such that young adults exposed in 1986 are showing up in clinics and hos-pitals as adults with thyroid cancer or thyroid disease. Since the latency period for adults exposed to high degree or iodine isotopes is between 15-20 years, we can continue to expect an increase in thyroid cancer come to bear in the very near future.

In the new democratic Ukraine the “right to know” needs to begin with acknowledg-ing the disastrous action of former leaders and creating an opportunity for the country’s citizens to receive scientifically valid, empirically verifiable information about the catas-trophe. This is an extremely important task since a lack of integrity and various conflicts of interest have been the hallmarks of reporting the Chornobyl disaster and therefore it is not surprising that there is a lack of trust in the information and research that surrounds this tragedy.

It is particularly important that national leaders review scientifically based research and are aware of the true facts, since even the appearance of a conflict of interest under-mines readers’ trust. It is also encouraging the continued dependence of the “Chornobyl victims” on economic support that may not be warranted and precludes people from resolving their fear of self-reliance and independence.

As an example, I would like to focus attention on a recent report by the Chornobyl Forum titled “Chernobyl’s legacy.” By emphasizing only the death toll from the accident, the number of people affected by this tragedy in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia are much diminished, from several million to approximately 4000 thousand. However, when dis-ease and disability are addressed, including psychological illnesses (i.e. PTSD), the num-ber of affected people continues to increase. The tragedy of Chornobyl diminishes in the public perception when incidences of death are separated from incidences of cancer or psychological distress.

In a recent article in the New York Times, recommendations call for focusing assis-tance efforts on highly contaminated areas and redesigning government programs to help those that are genuinely need assistance. Suggested changes would replace pro-grams that foster dependency and a ‘victim mentality’ and replace them with initiatives that encourage opportunity, support local development and give people confidence in their futures. The Forum Report also calls for continued close monitoring of workers who recovered from Acute radiation syndrome (ARS) and other highly exposed emergency personnel.

Fear is the strongest component behind decisions NOT to accurately inform a citizenry. We can prescribe fear of consequences by the Ukrainian Communist Party that

denied the existence of the Chornobyl catastrophe for several days. Fear almost imme-diately trumps ethics as a component in the decision making unless leaders have the courage to control their fear. If national and international policies are grounded in a per-spective of fear, then the real danger goes unnoticed or is kept secret due to fear of the consequence. The Chornobyl nuclear disaster and its ongoing effects on human health exemplifies the long-lasting consequences of fear based decisions.

Anyone who lived in Ukraine in 1986 would confirm that on April 26, the day of the nuclear accident, apparatchiks from Kyiv started privately calling their friends and rela-tives in the affected areas to warn them of the necessity to take precautions. In exchange for the vital information, the callers demanded promises of “omerta” - silence to avoid panic. No one was supposed to pass the news outside of the immediate family circle.

Unfortunately, there are many examples of governments intentionally withholding health-related information out of fear of the consequences of exposing themselves to public scrutiny. The 2003 SARS outbreak in Asia is a current illustration of a government’s conflict between fear reaction and global health security. The Chinese authorities viewed the release of all negative news as damaging to its international image and a threat to social stability just as the Soviet government did.

The paranoid response of withholding information by governments is often the beginning of the catastrophe. Paranoia has three main elements: denial, projection and reaction-formation. The official responses to the Chornobyl explosion and to the SARS outbreak demonstrate denial. Projection, accusing others of one’s own fears and actions, continues to characterize the paranoid response of unethical people in governments. Reaction-formation can be seen in the responses to a perceived loss of control and pow-er. Paranoia also increases suspicion of one’s neighbors in individuals and nations alike. In such a climate no one can be trusted, and valuable information is kept secret and unavailable for scientific inquiry and research.

Paranoia encourages both individuals and groups to create communities of like-minded people with shared perceptions of “their” reality. The film “Chernobyl Heart” is an example of promoting misinformation for the sake of publicity and economic gain. The uninformed could easily be misled to believe that radiation causes severe retardation, defective hearts and the alcohol sundrome.

The challenges of making decisions grounded in reality are daunting in a climate of fear, yet the integration of a realistic assessment of a given situation based on scientific findings and perspective, can balance fear and increase transparency, communication and political cooperation. An additional component of a realistic situation assessment is the reduction of corruption, a feature fostered in a climate of fear.

With the intent of providing accurate information on the short and long term effects of radiation, many scientifically based empirical studies have been and are conducted by the IAEA, the Nagasaki Radiation Institute, the US National Cancer Institute Tri-National Chornobyl Thyroid Research Projects and other research centers interested in reliable and rigorously validated results that add to the armamentarium of knowledge as to the effects of exposure to various doses of radiation. It is those studies that need to promot-ed and brought into the attention of not only the scientific community and politicians but the general public, who will benefit from the resulting awareness and knowledge and thus will be able to make better, informed decisions regarding the safeguarding of their health

The importance of perception cannot be overstated. Perceptions are governed by the level of accuracy in information that is available. Actions flow from perceptions and verifiable information comes from asking key questions. If the questions are based on misinformation, the results of studies will not broaden the knowledge base. Further-more, if rigorous studies focus on only one element of a catastrophe, the public percep-tion will be that other elements of the tragedy are insignificant, i.e. death versus long term disability.

Those in governments, industries and organization have a particular ethical obliga-tion to inform, to be informed and to lead from a base of accurate knowledge. For with-out this, the opportunity to mitigate the most severe, enduring effects of disasters, such as Chornobyl, can cause untold – and unnecessary – long term devastation.

“Chornobyl, Misinformation and Ethics”

Chornobyl Conference in Slavutych, Ukraine, September 19-21, 2005

Presented by Dr. Christine K. Durbak, Chair, World Information Transfer, Inc.

table of contents world information transfer’s 24th … · world ecology report world information...

Documents