Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nick Beresford (CEH) & David Copplestone (Stirling Univ.)
Advertisements

Application of ERICA outputs and AQUARISK to evaluate radioecological risk of effluents from a nuclear site J. Twining & J. Ferris Objectives of this study.
David Copplestone (University of Stirling). Whats the issue? Obtaining air concentrations for noble gases Estimating doses to wildlife from noble gases.
David Copplestone Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster October 2011.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
Introduction to the ERICA Tool
Integrated Assessment Working group or coordinated activity?
Numerical benchmarks: proposed levels and underlying reasoning
Nick Beresford (CEH).  Give an overview of what may impact on assessment results using the available approaches  In part based on things we know are.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
David Copplestone CEH Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
PROTECTFP Screening tier comparisons ERICA, RESRAD-BIOTA & EA R&D128 Follow-up actions from Vienna workshop.
Copyright © 2014 ALLIANCE Noble gas dosimetry for non-human biota International Conference on Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity, Barcelona,
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
PROTECT Work Package 2 Meeting (June 2007) Institute for Sustainable Water Integrated Management and Ecosystem Research (SWIMMER) 1 Experiences of applying.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
PROTECTFP Terrestrial Assessment Comparison of human and non human dose assessments for prospective new nuclear power stations.
PROTECTFP PROTECT: First Proposed Levels for Environmental Protection against Radioactive Substances Definitions, Derivation Methods to Determine.
“International context and response to draft D5b – a conservation agencies view” PROTECT Workshop, Aix en Provence. 14 May 2008.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014 David Copplestone & Nick Beresford.
PROTECT Protection of the environment from ionising radiation in a regulatory context Oslo meeting, January 2008 OSPAR Convention for the Protection.
PROTECTFP Radioprotection of the environment in France: IRSN current views and workplan K. Beaugelin-Seiller, IRSN Vienna IC, June 2007.
Biodiversity and Fisheries Management Daniel Pauly Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada United Nations Fisheries Training.
Copyright © 2014 ALLIANCE Updates to the ERICA Tool Barcelona – 10 th September Nick Beresford & Justin Brown (NERC-CEH,
Experiences from testing the ERICA Integrated Approach Case study application of the ERICA Tool and D-ERICA.
Module 8: Risk Assessment. 2 Module Objectives  Define the purpose of Superfund risk assessment  Define the four components of the human health risk.
“to provide and apply an integrated approach of addressing scientific, managerial and societal issues surrounding environmental effects of ionising.
A Review ISO 9001:2015 Draft What’s Important to Know Now
Towards a protection of species at the population level: derivation of PNEDR values by modelling population responses to ionizing radiations Emilie Lance,
SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of the environment from ionising radiation - views of a regulator.
Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science Meeting April 22, 2003 Pediatric Population Pharmacokinetics Study.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster October 2011 Brenda Howard.
PROTECTFP Numerical Benchmarks for protecting biota against radiation in the environment Methodology to derive benchmarks, selected methods used.
 The IAEA EMRAS programme has compared predictions of various models, to each other and to site data.  Model-model intercomparison showed considerable.
Introduction to the ERICA Tool Radiation Protection of the Environment (Environment Agency Course, July 2015)
EMRAS Biota Working Group – Main findings. IAEA EMRAS Biota Working Group Regular participants: Belgium - SCK·CEN; Canada – AECL; France – IRSN; Japan.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster October 2011 David Copplestone & Nick Beresford.
Radionuclide dispersion modelling
Radiation Protection of the Environment (Environment Agency Course, July 2015)
1 An Update on EPA Attainment Modeling Guidance for the 8- Hour Ozone NAAQS Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS/EMAD/AQMG November 16, 2005.
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION —————————————————————————————————————— ICRP And Protection of The Environment Dr Jack Valentin Scientific.
Supported by the European Commission, contract number: Fission , and the Research.
TREE project, Challenges and Future Updates Radiation Protection of the Environment (Environment Agency Course, July 2015)
Supported by the European Commission, contract number: Fission , and the Research.
RAPID ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (RAP) Terrestrial Ecosystems Freshwater Ecosystems Marine Ecosystems.
A Tool for Estimating Nutrient Fluxes in Harvest Biomass Products for 30 Canadian Tree Species CONTEXT: With a growing interest in using forest biomass.
PROTECTFP Derivation of Environmental Radiological Protection Benchmarks an overview
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Contributing to the sustainable recovery of the Chernobyl affected areas S. Fesenko NAAL, IAEA.
CEH Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June What is a benchmark? Why are benchmarks needed? How are benchmarks derived? How are benchmarks used?
1 MOBILE6 -Input and Modeling Guidance -SIP and Conformity Policy North American Vehicle Emission Control Conference Atlanta, April 4, 2001 Gary Dolce.
Overview of the RIA Process - Bryan Hubbell. 2 Goals of an RIA Provide national estimates of costs and benefits of fully attaining current and proposed.
PROTECTFP PROTECT recommendations – application in practice.
Experiences in assessing deposition model uncertainty and the consequences for policy application Rognvald I Smith Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh.
European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity Range.
Setting Standards: The Science of Water Quality Criteria EA Engineering, Science, and Technology ® Presented by: James B. Whitaker Review of Annex 1 of.
Nick Beresford & David Copplestone Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
Modelling noble gases Radiation Protection of the Environment (Environment Agency Course, July 2015)
A study to the effectiveness of the HM & POP Protocols and costs of additional measures Phase II - Emission reduction and cost of a possible revision of.
Brenda Howard (CEH) Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
Science Translation, Conservation Adoption and Delivery: Revised process for needs and projects related to science translation and adoption Steve Fuller.
ECOST PROJECT WP.4. ECOLOGICAL MODELING FOURTH REGULAR MEETING APRIL 2007 GUANGZHOU, CHINA WP.4 ECOLOGY CO-LEADER’S FINAL REPORT Karl Aiken, PhD.
1 Life Cycle Assessment A product-oriented method for sustainability analysis UNEP LCA Training Kit Module k – Uncertainty in LCA.
New Ecological Science Advice for Ecosystem Protection The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office supports three external scientific advisory committees.
Aquatic Life Metals Criteria Under Development in OW
Time Series Consistency
Time Series Consistency
Making the most of what we have: application of extrapolation approaches in radioecological transfer modelling Nicholas A. Beresford, Michael D. Wood,
D1 Species Conclusions.
Paul Whitehouse Environment Agency, UK
Presentation transcript:

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014

 Since 2007 release have been updates  Typically addressing ‘bugs’

 Since 2007 release have been updates  Typically addressing ‘bugs’  The 2014 release will have more substantial updates  Default radionuclides  CR & k d values  Reference organisms  EMCL values  Uncertainty factors

 Added:  Ba-140, Ca-45, Cr-51, Cf-252, Ir-192, La-140, Pa-231 & Zn-65  ERICA now consistent with ICRP (Publication 108 & 114) radionuclide lists for their developing RAP approach  CRs, k d s and DCC generated for the new default radionuclides

 Added freshwater reptile  There are European protected freshwater reptile species  Removed bird egg  Lack of CR values and inconsistent with other organisms  Marine macroalgae – geometry now consistent with ICRP 108 (increase in mass from kg to kg)

 Some changes in naming

 December 2013 version of Wildlife Transfer Database used to revise ERICA Tool  Have used data at broad wildlife group level – no justification to use more refined categories on basis of analyses conducted to date  c CR values required  Approximately 50% derived from empirical data  Extrapolation/Guidance approaches to provide missing data still required  k d received less attention that CR  Tried to minimise previous use of marine k d s in freshwater ecosystems

Option 10 – includes approaches to derive pdf (mean and standard deviation)

Option 10 – includes approaches to derive missing pdfs (mean and standard deviation) Information on how derived will be given Data for elements not included in Tool used to derive default values for options 4 & 5 where appropriate (e.g. Cu used to provide some Ag CR values)

 Where an SD available then lognormal distribution assumed  Original ERICA Tool assumed exponential distributions when  no SD value for CR or k d  data extrapolation approach used to derive CR value  Approach did not make best use of available information and can lead to some extreme EMCL estimates  For revised Tool database  Tried to derive default SD values when not available and hence assume lognormal not exponential distributions

Original

Original 2014

 Terrestrial amphibian and reptile – default occupancy now 100% in soil  Lichen & bryophytes – all external DCCs recalculated

 All need to be recalculated using revised parameters (k d & CR (+ associated pdfs), occupancy, DCCs)  The EMCL is currently the media activity concentration that gives rise to the 95 th %ile dose rate to the most exposed organism  Under discussion  Should 99 th %ile be used when CR or k d derived from extrapolation approach?

40 µGy/h will apply to aquatic mammals & birds

 Current UF values of 3 and 5 used  Intended to approximate 95 th and 99 th %ile RQs  Paper published suggesting that these should be 7 & 28

 Demonstrated that UFs of 7 and 28 approximate to 97.5 and 99.5 th %iles  But acknowledge that UF=5 for 95 th %ile may be an underestimate (≈7?)

 Demonstrated that UFs of 7 and 28 approximate to 97.5 and 99.5 th %iles  But acknowledge that UF=5 for 95 th %ile may be an underestimate (≈7?)  Probabilistic outputs from derivation of revised EMCLs will be used to evaluate the values of UF to be recommended.

 Intending to run a short update course once new Tool version released  Will try to do this as webinar  To register an interest