Chernobyl's exclusion zone to be revived with solar 
 
 The Ukrainian government has announced plans to use Chernobyl's nuclear wasteland for solar energy generation. Meanwhile in Belarus, a 22.3 MW PV plant is already under construction in Brahin district, around 20 miles from Chernobyl. 
 
 Flickr/thisisbossi One time European PV power plant leader, Ukraine is turning back to solar in unlikely places. 
 
 30 years after the Chernobyl accident, the Ukrainian government aims to give a new renewable life to thousands hectares of the exclusion zone in the northern part of the country. While long-lasting radiation makes the area unfit for human habitation, agriculture or forestry, its cheap land and remaining electric transmission facilities can be used for solar power generation. 
 
 “Land and transmission line connection are the most expensive parts of any solar project, and we have both of them here,” general director of the Chernobyl plant Igor Gramotkin told local news outlets in April, when the country was commemorating the 30th anniversary of the nuclear disaster. 
 
 At the end of June, Ukraine's minister of the environment and natural resources Ostap Semerak presented country's plans for the revival of the exclusion zone at Canada-Ukraine Business Forum in Toronto. After the forum, he announced that a number of Canadian investors are looking at developing solar and biofuel power plants near Chernobyl. 
 
 Semerak also noted that the implementation of such projects requires new legislation in terms of allocation of land in the exclusion zone. “We expect that this issue will be fully settled by the end of the current session of Parliament. In early June, the corresponding bill already passed a first reading,” the minister said. 
 
 In a recent interview Semerak has confirmed that the ministry of environmental and natural resources was already negotiating with two U.S. investment firms and four Canadian energy companies interested in the Chernobyl's solar potential. Ukrainian developers plan to install a 4 MW project at the site by the end of the year, Bloomberg reports. 
 
 According to the ministry of environmental and natural resources, 34 solar power plants with the total capacity of over 120 MW are scheduled to be completed in Ukraine in 2016. Despite the political and economic difficulties facing the country, Ukraine is aiming to increase the share of renewables in its energy mix up to 11% by 2020, the ministry reports. 
 
 As recent developments demonstrate, after several years of stagnation, international solar developers have begun showing renewed interest in Ukraine. Yesterday, a 4 MW PV plant was successfully connected to the grid in Vysokopillya, a southern part of the country. According to the developer, the German-based Work Team, heavy rainfall, snow, and freezing rain have frequently posed challenges for solar developers in the area. China-based PV-inverter manufacturer Sungrow supplied its SG60KTL inverters for the PV plant. 
 
 Belarus' PV plan for Chernobyl 
 
 Belarus, Ukraine's northern neighbor, has its own solar plans for the land affected by the Chernobyl disaster. In April this year, the telecommunications company Velcom, a subsidiary of the Austrian company Telecom, announced an investment of more than €23 million ($ 25.3 million) for a 22.3 MW PV plant in Brahin district, located at the Ukrainian border, next to the nuclear wasteland. 
 
 Velcom is planning to sell the generated electricity, as well as use it for the company's needs. “We expect the solar plant to cover about 50% of the company's energy needs and pay itself off in four to five years”, Velcom CEO Helmut Duhs said at a press-conference in Minsk. He added that the company had chosen this particular area not only because of its southern location but also because of the cheap price land prices. 
 
 According to the company, the solar facility in Brahin district will be comprised of 85,000 PV panels installed across the area of 56 hectares. The construction works are scheduled to be completed by the end of this summer. ||||| SHARE THIS ARTICLE Share Tweet Post Email 
 
 Photographer: Sean Gallup/Getty Images Photographer: Sean Gallup/Getty Images 
 
 Ukraine’s looking toward the sun to put a radioactive wasteland back into business. 
 
 Thirty years after atomic fallout from the Chernobyl meltdown rendered an area the size of Luxembourg uninhabitable for centuries, Ukraine is seeking investors to develop solar power near the defunct Soviet reactors. 
 
 Sunshine is one of the only things that can be harvested from Chernobyl’s 1,000 square mile exclusion zone, where long-lasting radiation makes farming and forestry too dangerous. Save for the guards and workers who maintain the roadblocks and barriers, the area about 100 kilometers (62 miles) north of Kiev remains devoid of productive activities. 
 
 “The Chernobyl site has really good potential for renewable energy,” Ukraine’s environment minister Ostap Semerak, 44, said at an interview in London. “We already have high-voltage transmission lines that were previously used for the nuclear stations, the land is very cheap and we have many people trained to work at power plants.” 
 
 The move to solar at Chernobyl may also help Ukraine move closer toward the European Union and influence public opinion in conflict zones along the Russian border. 
 
 “We have normal European priorities, which means having the best standards with the environment and clean energy ambitions,” said Semerak. “We want to be a successful Ukraine, to show people in the conflict zone that life is better and more comfortable with us.” 
 
 Ukraine’s government remains in an uneasy cease-fire with Kremlin-backed rebels in the eastern region of Donbass along the Russian border. Both sides have struggled to implement obligations outlined under the Minsk Accords and international monitors still report outbreaks of violence, which has left thousands dead and displaced from their homes. 
 
 Until recently, Ukraine was heavily dependent on natural gas imported from Russia. The government has been weaning itself from over-reliance following consecutive winters when Russia threatened to withhold supplies because of payment disputes. Last year Ukraine more than halved consumption from its eastern neighbor, according to Ukrtransgaz PJSC. 
 
 With solar resources better than Germany’s, which has almost 39 gigawatts of panels installed, Ukraine is increasing its focus on renewables. The government’s initial 1 gigawatt solar target could cost about 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion). 
 
 Source: Solargis 
 
 The environmental ministry has received expressions of interest for its Chernobyl solar complex from two U.S. investment firms and four Canadian energy companies, Semerak said. Ukrainian developers plan to install 4 megawatts of panels on the site by year-end. 
 
 The European Bank for Reconstruction & Development is also considering financing, though the talks are at early stages. 
 
 “We can consider such projects like all other renewable projects subject to there being credible and viable investment proposals and all other environmental issues and risks can be addressed to our satisfaction,” said Sevki Acuner, the EBRD’s director for Ukraine. 
 
 If the project takes off, it may evolve into a bigger initiative that leverages the transmission lines with 4 gigawatts capacity that are already onsite -- a legacy of the nuclear plant. 
 
 Watch Next: Capturing Iceland's Winds ||||| People were evacuated after the Chernobyl accident, but what happened to the local wildlife? A new study shows that wildlife in the Chernobyl disaster zone is thriving, indicating that the presence of humans is more damaging to wildlife than is radiation poisoning 
 
 After a fire and explosion destroyed the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 1986, more than 100,000 people were permanently evacuated from the area to avoid radiation levels that were twenty times greater than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. But what happened to the local wildlife? According to a letter published today in the journal, Current Biology, scientists report that the Chernobyl disaster area is home to a rich and varied wildlife community, indicating that the mere presence of people is more damaging to wildlife than is radiation poisoning. 
 
 Chernobyl was a disaster for people, but for wildlife? Not so much 
 
 When the Chernobyl nuclear power plant melted down in 1986, more than 116,000 people were permanently relocated from a contaminated area comprising 4200 km2, an area that was later designated the Chernobyl exclusion zone. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Chernobyl radiation map from the CIA’s online World Factbook. Chernobyl is indicated with a gold star. ( Sting [vectorisation], MTruch [English translation], Makeemlighter [English translation]). Illustration: CIA/Wikipedia. 
 
 But what happened to the local wildlife? Previous studies indicate that wildlife numbers initially dropped in the months after the accident (i.e.; doi:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0778). However, thirty years later, what effect is radiation contamination having on the abundance of Chernobyl’s large mammals? 
 
 An international team of researchers, headed by Tatiana Deryabina of the Polessye State Radioecological Reserve (PSRER), conducted surveys to find out. The PSRER is the Belarus sector of the Chernobyl exclusion zone. It covers 2,165 km2 (half of the total Chernobyl exclusion area) and has similar radiation levels to the Ukrainian sector. The findings for PSRER were compared to four nearby nature reserves that were uncontaminated by the Chernobyl accident: Berezinsky Biosphere Reserve, a state nature reserve covering 852 km2; Braslav Lakes National Park, which covers 645 km2; Belovezhskaya Puscha National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage site situated both in Poland (105 km2) and Belarus (1501 km2); and Narochansky National Park, which covers 874 km2. Of these, just two (Belovezhskaya Puscha and Narochansky National Park) allow limited wildlife hunting. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Ermine (or stoat), Mustela erminea, in the Chernobyl exclusion zone. Photograph: Valeriy Yurko/T.G. Deryabina et al/Current Biology 2015 
 
 The team tested three fundamental hypotheses concerning the resilience of wildlife to the world’s worst nuclear accident: 
 
 Hypothesis 1: densities of mammals were suppressed due to the levels of radioactive contamination in the Chernobyl exclusion zone Hypothesis 2: densities of large mammals were suppressed at PSRER compared with those in four uncontaminated nature reserves in Belarus 
 
 Hypothesis 3: densities of large mammals declined between 1 and 10 years after the accident 
 
 To test these hypotheses, trained staff conducted wildlife snow track censuses between 2008 and 2010 along 35 permanent track survey routes (total combined length of 315 km with an average track length of 9 km) (doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.10.025). Specific PSRER habitat types (former agricultural lands, former villages, evergreen forest, and deciduous forest) and levels of radiocæsium contamination density were mapped using GIS along each of these routes. 
 
 Aerial surveys were conducted between 1987 and 1997 from February through early March when snow cover was present. The study area survey took place from a height of 100 metres at a speed of 70-100 km/h and extended to approximately 250 metres on each side of the helicopter. 
 
 As you can see, the empirical data show no evidence of long-term radiation damage to the large mammal populations at Chernobyl, and thus, the evidence does not support any of the three hypotheses being tested (Figure 1): 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Figure 1. Animal abundances in the Chernobyl exclusion zone. (Top) Mean number of track counts per 10 km (in 2008–2010) for elk and wolf plotted against mean 137-Cs contamination density of each route. Analysis using linear mixed models including habitat variables found no evidence of correlation between mammal density and contamination density. (Bottom) Change in relative abundance of three species in the 10 years after the Chernobyl accident. Illustration: T.G. Deryabina et al (2015)/T.G. Deryabina et al/Current Biology 2015 
 
 In fact, increases in elk (moose) and wild boar populations in the Chernobyl exclusion zone occurred in the early 1990s, when these species’ populations were undergoing a rapid decline in former Soviet Union countries due to increased rural poverty and weakened wildlife management. 
 
 Further, the relative abundance of wolves living in and around the Chernobyl exclusion zone site is more than seven times greater than in the four nearby uncontaminated nature reserves. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Wolves were seven times more abundant in the Chernobyl exclusion zone site than in nearby uncontaminated nature reserves. Photograph: Valeriy Yurko/T.G. Deryabina et al/Current Biology 2015 
 
 “There have long been rumours that the Chernobyl site has abundant wildlife — including carnivores — so I welcome this piece”, said wildlife demographer Tim Coulson, a Professor of Zoology at the University of Oxford, who was not part of this study. 
 
 “Because it is contaminated land, it is not easy to study wildlife in detail, and any studies are going to have to rely on approaches like this taken here”, said Professor Coulson in email. 
 
 In fact, this study demonstrates that, regardless of potential radiation effects on individual animals, the Chernobyl exclusion zone supports a thriving and abundant mammal community despite nearly three decades of chronic radiation exposure. 
 
 “It’s very likely that wildlife numbers at Chernobyl are much higher than they were before the accident,” said co-author Jim Smith, a Professor of Environmental Science at the University of Portsmouth, in a press release. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest Wild boar in the snow in the Chernobyl exclusion zone. Wild boar populations plummeted in 1993–1994 (Figure 1), due to a large increase in wolves as well as an outbreak of African swine fever. Photograph: Tatyana Deryabina/T.G. Deryabina et al/Current Biology 2015 
 
 Chernobyl’s wild boar populations grew especially fast -- until 1993-1994, when they suddenly crashed (Figure 1). This was due to a large increase in wolves, which are particularly fond of dining on wild boar, combined with an outbreak of African swine fever. 
 
 Humans are more damaging to wildlife and ecosystems than is radiation poisoning 
 
 “This study is a very positive move forward in conducting research concerning the potential health and environmental impacts of nuclear accidents”, said population biologist Timothy Mousseau, a Professor in the Biology Department at the University of South Carolina, who was not part of this study. 
 
 “I applaud the authors in their efforts to bring hard scientific data to bear on the question of impacts to wildlife in the stricken regions of Ukraine and Belarus. Much more research on this and related questions are desperately needed”, said Professor Mousseau in email. 
 
 “This doesn’t mean radiation is good for wildlife, just that the effects of human habitation, including hunting, farming, and forestry, are a lot worse,” said Professor Smith. 
 
 “This is an extremely sad indictment on how bad people are for wildlife”, agreed Professor Coulson. “Once [people] have left an area the wildlife appear to thrive — even if the habitat is laced with radiation.” 
 
 Although the detrimental effects of radiation on individual animals has been well documented, particularly on Chernobyl’s wildlife, its effects on populations isn’t so clear. 
 
 “This study does not address the issue of whether radiation has effects on reproduction, survival, longevity, or general health of the animals surveyed”, Professor Mousseau pointed out. 
 
 Nonetheless, this study indicates that populations of large mammals in the Chernobyl exclusion zone are doing at least as well as those in uncontaminated national parks in the vicinity. But sadly, this study clearly shows that putting a big fence around an area to keep people out is beneficial to wildlife, even if the negative effects of radiation contamination on wildlife -- increased mutation rates, cancers and other abnormalities -- may be masked by this advantage. 
 
 “Obviously I am not condoning nuclear accidents for the sake of wildlife! Far from it”, said Professor Coulson. “But hopefully some good can come from it. Hopefully we will realise that for wildlife and ecosystems to flourish, we must leave them be and stop interfering.” 
 
 In short, this paper suggests that not every nuclear wilderness is a bad thing. 
 
 Facebook Twitter Pinterest A group of wild boar frolic in front of abandoned buildings in the Chernobyl exclusion zone, free from human interference. Photograph: Valeriy Yurko/T.G. Deryabina et al/Current Biology 2015 
 
 Source: 
 
 T.G. Deryabina, S.V. Kuchmel, L.L. Nagorskaya, T.G. Hinton, J.C. Beasley, A. Lerebours, and J.T. Smith (2015). Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl, Current Biology, published online on 5 October 2015 ahead of print | doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.017 (OA) 
 
 
 
 also cited: 
 
 Anders Pape Møller and Timothy A. Mousseau (2009). Reduced abundance of insects and spiders linked to radiation at Chernobyl 20 years after the accident, Biology Letters, 5:356–359 | doi:10.1098/rsbl.2008.0778 (OA) 
 
 Anders Pape Møller and Timothy A. Mousseau (2013). Assessing effects of radiation on abundance of mammals and predator–prey interactions in Chernobyl using tracks in the snow, Ecological Indicators, 26:112–116 | doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.10.025 (free) 
 
 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 
 
 GrrlScientist is very active on twitter @GrrlScientist ||||| Photo 
 
 WASHINGTON — A long-lasting radioactive element has been measured at levels that pose a long-term danger at one spot 25 miles from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, raising questions about whether Japan’s evacuation zone should be expanded and whether the land might need to be abandoned. 
 
 The isotope, cesium 137, was measured in one village by the International Atomic Energy Agency at a level exceeding the standard that the Soviet Union used as a gauge to recommend abandoning land surrounding the Chernobyl reactor, and at another location not precisely identified by the agency at more than double the Soviet standard. 
 
 The measurements, reported Wednesday, would not be high enough to cause acute radiation illness, but far exceed standards for the general public designed to cut the risks of cancer. 
 
 While the amount measured would not pose an immediate danger, the annual dose would be too high to allow people to keep living there, according to Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an American organization that is often critical of nuclear safety rules. Cesium persists in the environment for centuries, losing half its strength every 30 years. 
 
 The International Atomic Energy Agency stressed that levels of contamination varied considerably from place to place. Experts said the measurement might represent a “hot spot” and might not be representative of larger areas, though that remains to be seen. 
 
 Advertisement Continue reading the main story 
 
 Dr. Lyman said that if a plume of contaminants had drifted with the wind, a large amount could have been dumped in one spot by a rainstorm. “I think it’s not surprising that there would be local concentrations that high,” he said. But Japan should expand the evacuation zone, now set at 19 miles, he said, and the International Atomic Energy Agency should release data faster. The measurements were made between March 18 and March 26, the agency said. 
 
 Yukio Edano, the chief cabinet secretary, said on Thursday morning that officials were studying the contamination levels, but that there were currently no plans to expand the evacuation zone. 
 
 Land can be cleaned up by scraping off the contaminated dirt, or paving it over. Asked if land abandonment was likely, Dr. Lyman said, “It depends on the cost of cleanup and how much people are willing to spend.” 
 
 Video 
 
 Japan, experts noted, is far more densely settled than the Chernobyl region of Ukraine, where a reactor explosion in 1986 contaminated large areas. 
 
 The international team, using a measure of radioactivity called the becquerel, found as much as 3.7 million becquerels per square meter; the standard used at Chernobyl was 1.48 million. 
 
 In another development, seawater near the plant showed significantly higher levels of radioactive iodine than in recent days, Japan’s nuclear safety agency reported Wednesday. In addition, the operator of the plant acknowledged for the first time that at least four of the six reactors at the multibillion-dollar complex would have to be scrapped. 
 
 Hidehiko Nishiyama, deputy director general of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, said Wednesday that seawater collected about 300 yards from the Fukushima Daiichi station was found to contain iodine 131 at 3,355 times the safety standard. On Sunday, a test a mile north showed 1,150 times the maximum level, and a test the day before showed 1,250 times the limit in seawater taken from a monitoring station at the plant. 
 
 The level of radioactive iodine 131 in the waters off the Daiichi plant continued to increase on Thursday, rising to 4,385 times the statutory limit, Mr. Nishiyama said at a news conference. The increases raise the possibility that contaminants from the plant are continuously leaking into the sea, he said. 
 
 Advertisement Continue reading the main story 
 
 Workers have been dousing the nuclear fuel rods with seawater and now from freshwater sources to prevent full meltdowns, but they have had to release harmful amounts of radioactive steam into the atmosphere, and their efforts have set off leaks of highly contaminated water. 
 
 Iodine 131, one of the radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission, can accumulate in the thyroid and cause cancer. But unlike cesium 137, it degrades relatively rapidly, becoming half as potent every eight days. The risk can be diminished by banning fishing. 
 
 Mr. Nishiyama said the new readings posed no immediate threat to public health, and no fishing was occurring in the area. 
 
 Regarding the international agency’s findings, he said on Thursday, “One sample is over the limit, so we have to continue monitoring the situation.” As to whether the evacuation zone should be expanded, he said, “We’ll be considering that.” 
 
 The plant’s operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, acknowledged that it would write off Reactors 1 through 4.
– If anything, the land in the 1,000-square-mile exclusion zone left largely untouched since the Chernobyl disaster of 1986 is cheap. After all, studies suggest it won't be inhabitable until the year 4986, reported McClatchy DC in April, and pretty much nothing can be harvested from it. But now Ostap Semerak, Ukraine's environment minister, is drumming up foreign interest in solar power projects across the wasteland, which he says is uniquely, if a bit ironically, suited to renewables, reports Bloomberg. PV Magazine reports that Igor Gramotkin, today the general director of the Chernobyl plant, in April pointed out that "land and transmission line connection" are the most expensive elements of a solar undertaking. Lucky then, that "we already have high-voltage transmission lines that were previously used for the nuclear stations," says Semerak. "And we have many people trained to work at power plants" (thousands still work at Chernobyl). Plus there's all that inexpensive land. Ukraine's interest in renewables is partly politically motivated given the fragile cease-fire with Kremlin-backed rebels near the Russian border, not to mention increasing friction with the Putin camp over natural gas bills. Semerak says four energy companies from Canada and two investment firms from the US have expressed interest in a solar complex at the Chernobyl site, while Ukrainian developers intend to install panels there before 2016 is through. (Apparently human habitation is worse for wildlife than radiation, according to this exclusion-zone activity.)