176 C Eriksen and J Turnbull
What, then, do notions of suspension, which challenge understandings
of the terrestrial and the atmospheric as separate, do to notions of sovereign power and accountability for environmental catastrophes? What are
the implications for thinking about insurance in the context of disasters that
unfold in uncontainable spaces?
Volumetric sovereignty and leaky materialities
Measurement and containment – or rather the lack thereof – is key to understanding the long-term and uninsurable consequences of the Chornobyl disaster. Notions of the CEZ as a contained space are complicated when we
think volumetrically and voluminously. Understanding the CEZ as a vertical
space that extends both upwards and downwards allows us to reframe the
movement of radioisotopes beyond standard 2D cartographic representations of contamination. How radioisotopes evade borders is increasingly
understood through their embodied existence in local ecologies, biologies,
and ecosystems (Brown 2015; Brown 2019). Moreover, radioisotopes from
Chornobyl continue to leak into consumable products that are consumed
locally and globally (Brown 2020; Davies 2015). Radioisotopes deposited
in the soil are absorbed by vegetation, becoming embodied in bark, leaves,
grass, fruit, and berries, amongst other things. In turn, animals, birds, and
insects ingest them, contributing to the ecological movement of radioisotopes through their own vertical and horizontal mobilities. When wildfires
occur, the radioisotopes are released via combustion into the atmosphere
where they circulate and, depending on the atmospheric and particulate
conditions, can drift with wind and rain across geopolitical boundaries.
This poses problems for determining accountability in relation to industrial
accidents that are not contained spatially and temporally.
Radioisotopes also leak and seep from the soil and unlined trenches into
the groundwater and waterways. As with creatures, they become embodied in people when the polluted water, vegetation, and air are consumed or
inhaled. Adequately mapping the leakage that has occurred in the decades
since the Chornobyl disaster is impossible, as radioisotopes are metabolised through complex socioecological systems. As Cons (2017) highlights,
‘seepage is a process, not an event. It is the ooze that heralds the failures
of projects aiming to produce space and territory as solid containers.’ In
attempting to ‘secure the volume,’ Elden (2013) states the need to know
where the law applies (and ceases to apply), and which law is operable.
Yet, this approach leaves any effort to secure or insure the volume of radioactive smoke particles released by CEZ wildfires in limbo, as there is no
international legal agreement on the vertical extent of sovereign airspace
(Billé 2017). This creates a problematic horizontal dilemma for governing
volumetric sovereignty.
The inability to control the movement of particulates – be they laced with
radiation or not – is a poignant example of the inadequacy of existing legal
What, then, do notions of suspension, which challenge understandings
of the terrestrial and the atmospheric as separate, do to notions of sovereign power and accountability for environmental catastrophes? What are
the implications for thinking about insurance in the context of disasters that
unfold in uncontainable spaces?
Volumetric sovereignty and leaky materialities
Measurement and containment – or rather the lack thereof – is key to understanding the long-term and uninsurable consequences of the Chornobyl disaster. Notions of the CEZ as a contained space are complicated when we
think volumetrically and voluminously. Understanding the CEZ as a vertical
space that extends both upwards and downwards allows us to reframe the
movement of radioisotopes beyond standard 2D cartographic representations of contamination. How radioisotopes evade borders is increasingly
understood through their embodied existence in local ecologies, biologies,
and ecosystems (Brown 2015; Brown 2019). Moreover, radioisotopes from
Chornobyl continue to leak into consumable products that are consumed
locally and globally (Brown 2020; Davies 2015). Radioisotopes deposited
in the soil are absorbed by vegetation, becoming embodied in bark, leaves,
grass, fruit, and berries, amongst other things. In turn, animals, birds, and
insects ingest them, contributing to the ecological movement of radioisotopes through their own vertical and horizontal mobilities. When wildfires
occur, the radioisotopes are released via combustion into the atmosphere
where they circulate and, depending on the atmospheric and particulate
conditions, can drift with wind and rain across geopolitical boundaries.
This poses problems for determining accountability in relation to industrial
accidents that are not contained spatially and temporally.
Radioisotopes also leak and seep from the soil and unlined trenches into
the groundwater and waterways. As with creatures, they become embodied in people when the polluted water, vegetation, and air are consumed or
inhaled. Adequately mapping the leakage that has occurred in the decades
since the Chornobyl disaster is impossible, as radioisotopes are metabolised through complex socioecological systems. As Cons (2017) highlights,
‘seepage is a process, not an event. It is the ooze that heralds the failures
of projects aiming to produce space and territory as solid containers.’ In
attempting to ‘secure the volume,’ Elden (2013) states the need to know
where the law applies (and ceases to apply), and which law is operable.
Yet, this approach leaves any effort to secure or insure the volume of radioactive smoke particles released by CEZ wildfires in limbo, as there is no
international legal agreement on the vertical extent of sovereign airspace
(Billé 2017). This creates a problematic horizontal dilemma for governing
volumetric sovereignty.
The inability to control the movement of particulates – be they laced with
radiation or not – is a poignant example of the inadequacy of existing legal