Environmental activists and experts warn of the ripple effect of Russia’s invasion in Ukraine. This could lead to long-lasting damage to the country’s industrial, agricultural, and urban areas.
Nearly two years after its invasion, Russia has launched its long-feared offensive to eastern Ukraine along the 300 mile front near Donbas. This region has a 200 year history of coal mining, heavy industry, and other activities.
Experts told ABC News that the past seven weeks have been marred by death, displacement, and the destruction of a country’s landscape, which will take years to fix. The war will have a direct impact on Ukrainians as well as its economic, social, and environmental consequences.
“Russia’s invasion into Ukraine raises a host if unique and potentially deep environmental concerns for not just the people of Ukraine but for the wider region including much of Europe,” Carroll Muffett president and CEO, Center for International Environmental Law told ABC News. “Those human consequences of war take on many forms and dimensions, and many of them persist long after the hostilities end.”
Although there were severe environmental consequences during World War I, II, recent conflicts provide a better blueprint for the sheer volume of greenhouse gases emitted by modern wars.
According to a 2019 report by the U.S. Department of Energy, 1.2 Million Metres of greenhouse gases were released in 2001 as a result. This is equivalent to 257 million passenger cars’ annual emissions. Brown University’s Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs.
The report also reveals that hundreds of thousands of tons each of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides were emitted by military vehicles and heavy machinery. It also shows that heavy deforestation was caused in Afghanistan by illegal logging, especially by warlords. This then led to the destruction of wildlife habitat.
Muffett stated, “We now understand environmental dimensions of war and in ways that were not possible ten years ago.” “This is a particularly grave situation, as the entire world is calling on Russia to end its invasion of Afghanistan right now.”
After the conflict is resolved, the environment in Ukraine will be “No.1 priority” for the local government. Doug Weir (research and policy director at The Conflict and Environment Observatory), stated that the environment in Ukraine is going to be the local government’s “No.1 priority.”
These are the areas that experts consider to be most important for the environment.
Regions industrial
Ukraine is highly industrialized, especially in its eastern region. Muffett stated that Ukraine has a large number mines and chemical plant refineries that produce substances like ammonia or urea.
Weir said that the Ukrainian government will prioritize assessing the damage caused by attacks against industrial sites and new nuclear plants.
Weir stated that there are also “serious concerns about the forced closing of many coal mines. These mines are now flooding with acid mine drainage and are not using the right methods to pump out the water. These toxins then seep into groundwater aquifers.
“We’ve already seen hints about how those could play out,” she stated, adding that multiple Ukrainian refineries have been struck. “One thing that the lessons from the invasion of Kuwait, and the Iraq war has taught us is that strikes on facilities of this type pose serious risks for massive releases and really lasting damage.”
Agricultural fields
Researchers believe that millions of people could become malnourished in the years following an invasion of arable land.
Weir stated that initial assessments showed large areas of agriculture affected by heavy shelling and unexploded ordinances.
Olha Boiko is a Ukrainian climate activist and coordinator for Climate Action Network for Eastern Europe & East Asia. She stated that she and her fellow activists in Ukraine are concerned about the condition of the agricultural fields after the war and whether they can grow wheat. It is one of the country’s most important exports.
Wildlife and natural ecosystems
Experts said that the unforgiving landscape created by the plethora military vehicles crossing over the Ukrainian border is unforgiving.
According to the Ukrainian military, they laid landmines on at least one beach near Odesa in an effort to defend their country. Conflict and Environment Observatory.
Boiko also claimed that Russian forces had destroyed oil exporting equipment, polluted Black Sea, and filled fields with landmines. These were discovered as Russian forces began to withdraw from the areas around Kyiv.
The observatory said that the fighting near Kherson, on the southern coast of Ukraine, caused fires in the Black Sea Biosphere Reserve that were so large that they could be seen from space. These fires likely destroyed unique habitats for birds and trees.
Muffett stated, “There have been risks for wildlife and biodiversity that we’ve seen play out in Ukraine with active battles within insignificant wetlands.”
Urban areas
Weir said that one of Russia’s military strategies was to besiege cities by firing weapons in unison into them.
After failing to seize the capital, the Russian troops evacuated the areas around Kyiv. The devastation in cities like Bucha, Borodyanka, and Irpin was immediately evident.
Some buildings were completely destroyed or burned. The roads were littered by burned-out vehicles. Whole neighborhoods were reduced entirely to rubble.
Weir stated that the rebuilding phase will be a “huge job.”
Weir stated, “From an environmentally-oriented point of view, there’s going a lot of work required to properly evaluate these sites, locate potentially dangerous sites,” adding that the environmental remediation process can be costly and complex.
Nuclear facilities
Soon after the conflict began Russian troops seized the Chernobyl exclusion zone. This raised concerns that an errant explosive might cause another radioactive event at Chernobyl’s site of 1986’s worst nuclear accident.
The $2 billion stadium-sized steel structure was constructed to seal the reactor that was destroyed. However, the remaining three reactors remain intact. There is a 5 million pound pool of spent nuclear fuel and other dangerous isotopes within them, including uranium, plutonium, and uranium. Muffett stated that the storage facility could cause a much greater disaster than the one in 1986, and could lead to widespread evacuations across Europe.
“The conduct or active military operations within a country with four nuclear facilities and 15 active reactors poses extraordinary dangers,” Muffett said. He criticized Russia for attacking Chernobyl immediately despite “no legitimate militaristic objectives associated with that location.”
Russian troops have cut power to Chernobyl by cutting off power in ways that were not sustainable. Untrained Russian servicemen moved through the area and disturbed radioactive soil, raising dust and causing radioactive soil to be released, Muffett stated.
“We’ve seen missile attacks actually set a nuclear facility on blaze,” she said. “And, firefighters were unable reach the blaze within the first hour after the fire started, because they were in a situation of live fire. These are extraordinary risks.
The role of Russian oil in the conflict
Muffett stated that the conflict raging in Ukraine is an example of the “deep connections between fossil fuels & conflict”. Boiko, who fled Kyiv on February 24, said that the links between fossil fuels in the current war are evident, as Russia is using funds from its oil sector to fund it.
Muffett stated that Putin’s regime has been looking to use its natural gas and oil resources to intimidate other countries from coming to Ukraine for aid. “And so, we have a fossil-fueled conflict in every conceivable manner.”
The E.U. is a nation of environmental activists, and those who aren’t helping with immediate humanitarian relief are still in Ukraine. Boiko said that the U.S. has been dependent on Russia for many years.
While the U.S. has placed sanctions against all Russian oil, and other energy sources, the European Union embargo only applies to coal, not oil or gas. According to the observatory about 40% of EU’s natural gas comes from Russia.
Boiko stated, “This is exactly Russia’s leverage that has been used to pressure other countries not to impose any sanctions to not do something about this war to help Ukraine.”
Boiko believes that the conflict and its aftermath may eventually lead to positive actions in the fight against climate changes, as Russia’s sanctions result in less fossil fuel consumption. Boiko said that the phasing-out of fossil fuels may be more rapid now that Russia is no longer a major player in oil exports.
Muffett stated, “The fact this conflict is accelerating discussions within Europe about how they can free themselves from reliance upon fossil oil or fossil gas is also an important step forward.”
