|
Dear
friends!
Excluding
combat, military operations around the world
today account for 5.5% of global emissions. As
Nina Lakhani wrote in an article
published in the Guardian, if the world’s
militaries were a separate country, their total
carbon footprint would exceed Russia’s total
emissions. Calculating the total emissions
caused by wars and armed conflicts is currently
impossible. After all, this not only includes
combat operations, but infrastructure
restoration. At the same time, new sources of
pollution are constantly appearing, such as the
fiber optics used by FPV drones. Read more about
this and much more in our
review:
Armed
conflicts also have indirect consequences. One
of the most high-profile this year was the
Decemvber 2024 fuel oil spill in the Black Sea
when river fuel tankers servicing a Russian
“shadow fleet” vessel sank. The UWEC Work Group
previously analyzed in detail both the environmental
consequences of the disaster and its
causes. A new study by UWEC experts
explores the international response. Ukrainian
lands were significantly polluted due to the
accident, in both occupied and free areas.
Ukraine’s representatives have demanded that the
Russian government be held accountable and
punished, but the reaction of international
organizations has been underwhelming. At the
same time, the spill’s instigator has received
international support to eliminate the
consequences of the
disaster.
Another
example of pollution not directly related to
military action is the improper closure of coal
mines in the Donbas region, most of which is
occupied by Russian troops. Water fills the
mines, not only causing heavy metal pollution,
but also severe
drought
in the Donetsk region. Contributor Inha
Pavliy investigates how the Ukrainian coal
industry has been affected by the war and the
consequences for the
environment.
Evidence
that the occupied territories are facing an
ecological catastrophe appears almost every day.
For example, this summer the Black Sea Biosphere
Reserve burned, with a devastating fire in
Yahorlytsky Kut, a unique steppe ecosystem home
to rare steppe bird species.
Founded in
1927, the reserve is a combination of high
conservation value steppe, wetlands, forests,
water areas and islands. It was one of the first
in the Soviet Union to be included in the
international UNESCO network of biosphere
reserves in 1979. Russian forces occupied the
reserve in the first months of its full-scale
invasion. The largest fire there to date
occurred recently, a few days after the Russian
Federation announced the creation of the Federal
State Budgetary Institution Black Sea Reserve, a
“Russian” analogue of the Ukrainian nature
reserve.
Despite
the many challenges (including environmental
ones) in “controlled” territories, Russia
continues its international demarche. On July
22, Russia’s State Duma (representative body of
the Russian government) denounced the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands. The Convention on
Wetlands was adopted in 1971 in Ramsar, Iran to
protect wetlands and the habitats of migratory
waterfowl. The USSR ratified it in 1979.
Withdrawal from the convention threatens 35
nature conservation areas covering an area of
over 10 million hectares that were protected by
this agreement. Expert Eugene Simonov studies
the possible reasons for withdrawal and the
consequences for the environment:
War deals
crushing blows to nature every day, and
political crises only worsen the situation. The
term “ecocide” is increasingly frequently
mentioned in both the media and everyday
conversation. What does ecocide mean for
Ukrainians? Is it only a legal term or something
more? It can also be a personal and collective
experience that contemplates the destruction of
native nature. UWEC Work Group reviewed Darya
Tsymbalyuk’s book “Ecocide in Ukraine:
Ecological Price of War in
Russia”:
Meanwhile,
Ukraine continues planning the nation’s “green
recovery” when the war ends. On June 30, the
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
presented the first draft of a legislative bill
“On the Fundamentals of the Green Recovery of
Ukraine.Ukraine’s green recovery: legislative
step toward eco-integration in
reconstructio”.
Ukraine’s
“green recovery” will be a long journey. In
addition to external factors, there are also
internal ones, in particular, the government
moved to restructure and effectively abolish the
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources in
July. UWEC Work Group will be tracking these
developments and how they may affect
environmental problem-solving in both Ukraine
and the larger region and what opportunities
environmental organizations may identify. Find
updates on our website and in
social networks: Facebook, X
(Twitter), Telegram, BlueSky.
Friends,
we publish our research and materials at no cost
in the public domain so that everyone can read
about the environmental consequences of Russia's
full-scale invasion of Ukraine. We also actively
work with journalists and other media. The
Guardian recently interviewed our
experts in an article about the
prospects for Velyky Luh’s environmental
recovery following the Kakhovka dam’s
destruction. This allows us to disseminate
information about the environmental consequences
of war as widely as possible to a global
audience, which is our mission.
We need
your support to continue our high-quality
publications. We invite you to make a one-time
or recurring contribution to our
work.
Support UWEC Work
Group
We wish
you strength, peace and good
news!
Alexej Ovchinnikov,
editor in chief, UWEC Work
Group | 
