Chernobyl Analyses

Fire: Danger and Mitigation

A preproposal was developed to assess the needs, opportunity, and costs for fire mitigation through thinning, as a joint proposal of NAU (later NULES), Yale University, and DePaul University. (June_26_2006_Chernobyl_preproposal)

With support of the Chopivsky Family Foundation, it was first necessary to determine how accurate the perceived fire danger was in the CEZ through objective analysis of the CEZ forest inventory. Then, it was necessary to determine objectively if active management could reduce the fire danger markedly. A joint analysis of the fire hazard and opportunities for mitigation were done by a collaboration of scientists from the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences using Ukrainian Forest Service data and a landscape model (Link: http://landscapemanagementsystem.org/ ; also, link to Landscape Management webpage) developed by Dr. Jim McCarter (“Major Participants”). The model assessed a large part of the CEZ and concluded that the fire danger was very high, that it would subside over time, and that active thinning of the crowded forests could reduce the fire danger (Chernobyl_Wildfire_Hazard_Assessment_McCarter_et_al_2007).

Based on the study of McCarter et al., a budget was proposed for mitigating the fire danger (Chernobyl_Radioactive_Forest_Fire_Mitigation_suggested_budget_09_March_08).

Worst Case Scenario of Wildfire, Smoke Impacts on Health

A team of scientists from the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences developed a model and used it to analyze the worst case scenario of a catastrophic fire in the CEZ. The methodology was developed and critiqued (Chernobyl Wildfire Project Report on Model Methodology Draft0011; Model input from Ukraine Institute of Agricultural Radiology_April_2009).

It was then analyzed preliminarily and presented at scientific meetings (See “Meetings”) for further input:

October 6-8, 2009. Wildfires and human security. Fire management on terrain contaminated by radioactivity, unexploded ordnance (UXO), and land mines. Kyiv & Chornobyl, Ukraine. October_6_8_2009_Final_Agenda,

August, 2010: XXIII World Congress,Pentennial World Meeting of the International Union of Forest Research Organizations, Seoul, South Korea.  August_2010_IUFRO_abstract

A review draft was developed by mid-December, 2010 (Chernobyl_Wildfire_Worst_Case_Scenario_Analysis_12_11_10). Names of knowledgeable scientists capable of reviewing the study were obtained from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and similar sources abroad. From this list, letters were sent to selected scientists, enclosing a copy of draft paper (Example letter to potential reviewers Dec 28 2010)

The following scientists wrote reviews, as shown below.  The authors responded to the reviews as also shown and modified the study as described.

The authors studied the reviews, made revisions as they felt appropriate, and explained their revisions relative to the specific reviewer comments.  These comments are found at Responses to Reviews on Chernobyl paper by A Hohl 2011. The final paper was accepted and published in Earth Bioresources and Quality of Life:

Hohl, Aaron, Andrew Niccolai, Chad Oliver, Dmytro Melnychuk, Sergiy Zibtsev, Johann Georg Goldammer, Volodymyr Gulidov. 2011. The Human Health Effects of Radioactive Smoke from a Catastrophic Wildfire in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone: A Worst Case Scenario. Earth Bioresources and Quality of Life. Vol. 1, pg. 1.(http://gchera-ejournal.nubip.edu.ua/index.php/ebql/article/view/24)

Lessons Learned

A consideration of lessons learned was presented at the meeting: October 6-8, 2009. Wildfires and human security. Fire management on terrain contaminated by radioactivity, unexploded ordnance (UXO), and land mines. Kyiv & Chornobyl, Ukraine. Oliver_summary_Oct_6_8_2009

** Back to Contents