The papers I'll discuss in this post each discuss a major wildfire, one in Alaska, the other in the famous Chernobyl Exclusion Zone in Ukraine.
They are these:
Effects of Large-Scale Wildfires on the Redistribution of Radionuclides in the Chornobyl River System Yasunori Igarashi, Valentyn Protsak, Gennady Laptev, Igor Maloshtan, Dmitry Samoilov, Serhii Kirieiev, Yuichi Onda, and Alexei Konoplev Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (46), 20630-20641
...and...
Substantial Mercury Releases and Local Deposition from Permafrost Peatland Wildfires in Southwestern Alaska Scott Zolkos, Benjamin M. Geyman, Stefano Potter, Michael Moubarak, Brendan M. Rogers, Natalie Baillargeon, Sharmila Dey, Sarah M. Ludwig, Sierra Melton, Edauri Navarro-Pérez, Ann McElvein, Prentiss H. Balcom, Susan M. Natali, Seeta Sistla, and Elsie M. Sunderland Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (46), 20654-20664
The first is open to the public to read; the second requires access to a good scientific library, which, happily, I have, at least until the age of fascism begins in the US beginning in January.
Since the planet is on fire generally because, in my view, right wing rhetoric coupled with antinuclear rhetoric (much of which comes from the political left, although I'm on the left and am pronuclear), these two papers are, again in my view, worthy of consideration.
Both are related to energy production; one of the largest source of anthropogenic mercury releases comes from coal combustion where it is released in an aerosol form, ultimately depositing on soils. (I sometimes muse that the reason for the outbreak of political insanity, expressed as fascism, is mercury and lead toxicology, both of which are notable neurological toxins, and both of which are released as aerosols in coal combustion.) Geothermal energy is also a source of mercury pollution, but is a relatively trivial source. (cf. rock A. Edwards, Peter M. Outridge, Feiyue Wang, Mercury from Icelandic geothermal activity: High enrichments in soils, low emissions to the atmosphere, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 378, 2024, Pages 286-299)
The percentages of anthropogenic mercury emissions are shown in this graphic; it dates from 14 years ago, 2010, but as coal use is increasing worldwide, despite much mythology to the contrary connected with faith based belief that so called "renewable energy" is leading to the decline of coal use, it would be safe to assume that coal generated mercury is as bad or worse in 2024 than it was in 2010. (In Germany, so called "renewable energy" is leading to increases in coal use.)
Source: Mercury Policy at MIT blog. (Accessed 11/23/2024.)
The first paper refers, not to mercury, but to radionuclides released in the much and often discussed explosion of the reactor at Chernobyl, the radioactive residuals of which remain in the environment, although in the case of the discussed radionuclides, Cs (one of my personal favorite fission products) and Sr, (which I also find intriguing) they have significantly decayed since 1986. However these nuclides are not associated with use, but rather with contamination. As of this writing, 14,091 days have passed since the Chernobyl reactor failure on April 26, 1986, which can be attributed to poor reactor design (a positive void coefficient) and poor operational practice (conducting an unauthorized experiment with a major reactor without sufficient analysis), with much coal and gas burned to power to computers to carry on endlessly about the reactor failures. In "percent talk" 58.8% of the Cs has decayed to stable Ba, and 60.5% of the Sr has decayed to stable Zr.
It is notable, in my opinion, that radionuclides are released in bulk from nuclear reactors only in failure modes, whereas mercury, lead, carbon dioxide and particulate matter are released by coal plants continuously in normal operations. This should be an important distinction, but somehow isn't.
From the second paper, related to mercury (Hg) emissions from tundra wild fires: