DOI: 10.4324/9781003157571-17
13 Insure the volume?
Sensing air, atmospheres, and
radiation in the Chornobyl
Exclusion Zone
Christine Eriksen and Jonathon Turnbull
Introduction
This chapter examines a novel and intriguing occurrence concerning
recent wildfires in the Chornobyl 1 Exclusion Zone (CEZ) in Ukraine, which
rerelease radioisotopes originally deposited into local ecosystems during the Chornobyl nuclear accident of 1986. In particular, we focus on the
wildfires that burned in the CEZ and elsewhere in Ukraine in April 2020,
blanketing the capital, Kyiv, in smoke. The chapter considers what this kind
of uncontainable, airborne, and hazardous phenomenon potentially means
for insurance, as well as insurance and disaster research.
Examining this phenomenon in the context of insurance is somewhat
paradoxical. Traditionally, to make an event insurable there has to be a
clear causal event. Yet, how do you calculate insurance, let alone determine
liability, for a harmful event (the Chornobyl disaster) that occurred decades
ago by an actor (the Soviet Union) that no longer exists and can no longer
be held accountable? As we demonstrate in this chapter, the original volume
of damage in 1986 has expanded over time with the leakage and seepage
of radioisotopes into the ground, out into waterways, and up into the air
via natural processes. This creates a problematic dilemma for governance
and insurance. It points to a spatiotemporal problem inherent to insurance
studies. We attempt to address this problem with the help of a theoretical framework that draws on recent scholarly work in the social sciences,
particularly in human geography, to foreground affective atmospheres,
sensing assemblages, and volumetric sovereignty. Rather than pointing
specifically to what might be insured in this context, we aim to problematise
the very notion of insuring against disasters in the techno-natures of the
Anthropocene.
In this chapter, we argue that affective atmospheres – not insurance
frameworks – governed how people reacted to and managed the wildfires
and smoke in 2020. The tangible and intangible risks of the rerelease of
radioisotopes by wildfire in the CEZ are an example of the long-term consequences of ‘high-tech risks’:
13 Insure the volume?
Sensing air, atmospheres, and
radiation in the Chornobyl
Exclusion Zone
Christine Eriksen and Jonathon Turnbull
Introduction
This chapter examines a novel and intriguing occurrence concerning
recent wildfires in the Chornobyl 1 Exclusion Zone (CEZ) in Ukraine, which
rerelease radioisotopes originally deposited into local ecosystems during the Chornobyl nuclear accident of 1986. In particular, we focus on the
wildfires that burned in the CEZ and elsewhere in Ukraine in April 2020,
blanketing the capital, Kyiv, in smoke. The chapter considers what this kind
of uncontainable, airborne, and hazardous phenomenon potentially means
for insurance, as well as insurance and disaster research.
Examining this phenomenon in the context of insurance is somewhat
paradoxical. Traditionally, to make an event insurable there has to be a
clear causal event. Yet, how do you calculate insurance, let alone determine
liability, for a harmful event (the Chornobyl disaster) that occurred decades
ago by an actor (the Soviet Union) that no longer exists and can no longer
be held accountable? As we demonstrate in this chapter, the original volume
of damage in 1986 has expanded over time with the leakage and seepage
of radioisotopes into the ground, out into waterways, and up into the air
via natural processes. This creates a problematic dilemma for governance
and insurance. It points to a spatiotemporal problem inherent to insurance
studies. We attempt to address this problem with the help of a theoretical framework that draws on recent scholarly work in the social sciences,
particularly in human geography, to foreground affective atmospheres,
sensing assemblages, and volumetric sovereignty. Rather than pointing
specifically to what might be insured in this context, we aim to problematise
the very notion of insuring against disasters in the techno-natures of the
Anthropocene.
In this chapter, we argue that affective atmospheres – not insurance
frameworks – governed how people reacted to and managed the wildfires
and smoke in 2020. The tangible and intangible risks of the rerelease of
radioisotopes by wildfire in the CEZ are an example of the long-term consequences of ‘high-tech risks’: