Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

PROTECTFP6-036425 Terrestrial Assessment Comparison of human and non human dose assessments for prospective new nuclear power stations.

Published byJohanna Brookes Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PROTECTFP6-036425 Terrestrial Assessment Comparison of human and non human dose assessments for prospective new nuclear power stations."— Presentation transcript:

1 PROTECTFP6-036425 Terrestrial Assessment Comparison of human and non human dose assessments for prospective new nuclear power stations

2 PROTECTFP6-036425 Outline Background Human assessment (assumptions) Non-human assessment (assumptions) Comparison of the results from the two assessments Discussion of results? Summary/Issues for PROTECT

3 PROTECTFP6-036425 Background

4 PROTECTFP6-036425 Background Assessment loosely based on proposed build of new nuclear power stations (AGR and PWR types) Terrestrial assessment looking at exposure to –humans via foodstuff/living nearby –Non-human species living in a (protected) Natura 2000 site at approximately the same distance as that for humans Uses probable permitted discharge limits as input Single source of radioactivity to assessment assumed

5 PROTECTFP6-036425 Map of proposed facility Facility with sea discharge Terrestrial Natura 2000 site 500m from aerial discharge Agricultural land used for food crops/milk production 500m from aerial discharge Humans living at 100m from site

6 PROTECTFP6-036425 Permitted discharge limits AGRPWR H-368 C-1450.6 S-350.16 Noble Gases 60300 Other beta I-131 0.001 0.005 0.01 In TBq per year

7 PROTECTFP6-036425 Human assessment

8 PROTECTFP6-036425 Approach Modelled using the Environment Agency Initial Radiological Assessment Tool Prospective assessment Simple spreadsheet tool

9 PROTECTFP6-036425 Assumptions Assumes a ground level release & uniform windrose Exposure to humans is at 100m from discharge point; assumed to be consuming high levels of locally sourced foods such as milk, beef, lamb, offal, green vegetables, root vegetables and fruit (sourced 500m from discharge point) Other beta modelled as I-131 Noble gases modelled as C-14 (not available in ERICA) No direct shine assessment included (can’t do it for non-human species yet)

10 PROTECTFP6-036425

11 PROTECT

12 PROTECT

13 PROTECT

14 PROTECT Non-human assessment

15 PROTECTFP6-036425 Assumptions Modelled terrestrial input concentrations through IAEA SRS19 transfer model Assumed ground level release Distance to receptor = 500m Used ERICA tool Tier 2, assuming reference organisms in the assessment and using all default concentration ratios, occupancy factors, etc for terrestrial environment Other beta modelled as I-131 Noble gases modelled as C-14

16 PROTECTFP6-036425 AGR - Screened against 10 µGy/h

17 PROTECTFP6-036425 PWR - Screened against 10 µGy/h

18 PROTECTFP6-036425 Results comparison

19 PROTECTFP6-036425 Predicted dose rates - human AGR Inhalation dose External dose (cloud and deposited) Food dose Total dose % Contrib ution uSv/y Tritium4.0E+000.0E+009.0E-014.9E+000.2% Carbon-141.2E+033.1E-021.9E+033.1E+0397.0% Sulphur-353.2E+002.7E-045.8E+016.1E+011.9% Other beta/gamma1.8E+002.6E-012.8E+013.0E+010.9% Total doses1.2E+033.0E-012.0E+033.2E+03uSv/y PWR Tritium5.4E+000.0E+001.2E+006.6E+000.05% Carbon-145.4E+031.4E-018.7E+031.4E+0499.61% Other beta/gamma3.0E+004.4E-014.6E+014.9E+010.35% Total doses5.4E+035.8E-018.8E+031.4E+04uSv/y

20 PROTECTFP6-036425 Predicted dose rates - human AGR Inhalation dose External dose (cloud and deposited) Food dose Total dose % Contrib ution uSv/y Tritium4.0E+000.0E+009.0E-014.9E+000.2% Carbon-141.2E+033.1E-021.9E+033.1E+0397.0% Sulphur-353.2E+002.7E-045.8E+016.1E+011.9% Other beta/gamma1.8E+002.6E-012.8E+013.0E+010.9% Total doses1.2E+033.0E-012.0E+033.2E+03uSv/y PWR Tritium5.4E+000.0E+001.2E+006.6E+000.05% Carbon-145.4E+031.4E-018.7E+031.4E+0499.61% Other beta/gamma3.0E+004.4E-014.6E+014.9E+010.35% Total doses5.4E+035.8E-018.8E+031.4E+04uSv/y

21 PROTECTFP6-036425 Non- human results – total doses µGy/h OrganismAGRPWR Amphibian1.3E+006.1E+00 Bird1.4E+006.4E+00 Bird egg8.9E-014.1E+00 Detritivorous invertebrate4.3E-012.0E+00 Flying insects4.3E-012.0E+00 Gastropod4.3E-012.0E+00 Grasses & Herbs8.8E-014.1E+00 Lichen & bryophytes8.8E-014.1E+00 Mammal (Deer)1.4E+006.4E+00 Mammal (Rat)1.4E+006.4E+00 Reptile1.4E+006.4E+00 Shrub8.8E-014.1E+00 Soil Invertebrate (worm)4.3E-012.0E+00 Tree1.3E+006.2E+00

22 PROTECTFP6-036425 Non- human results – total doses µGy/h OrganismAGRPWR Amphibian1.3E+006.1E+00 Bird1.4E+006.4E+00 Bird egg8.9E-014.1E+00 Detritivorous invertebrate4.3E-012.0E+00 Flying insects4.3E-012.0E+00 Gastropod4.3E-012.0E+00 Grasses & Herbs8.8E-014.1E+00 Lichen & bryophytes8.8E-014.1E+00 Mammal (Deer)1.4E+006.4E+00 Mammal (Rat)1.4E+006.4E+00 Reptile1.4E+006.4E+00 Shrub8.8E-014.1E+00 Soil Invertebrate (worm)4.3E-012.0E+00 Tree1.3E+006.2E+00

23 PROTECTFP6-036425 Non- human results – total doses µGy/h OrganismAGRPWR Amphibian1.3E+006.1E+00 Bird1.4E+006.4E+00 Bird egg8.9E-014.1E+00 Detritivorous invertebrate4.3E-012.0E+00 Flying insects4.3E-012.0E+00 Gastropod4.3E-012.0E+00 Grasses & Herbs8.8E-014.1E+00 Lichen & bryophytes8.8E-014.1E+00 Mammal (Deer)1.4E+006.4E+00 Mammal (Rat)1.4E+006.4E+00 Reptile1.4E+006.4E+00 Shrub8.8E-014.1E+00 Soil Invertebrate (worm)4.3E-012.0E+00 Tree1.3E+006.2E+00 C-14 is the main contributor

24 PROTECTFP6-036425 Risk Quotients Human results compared to 1mSv/y Biota results compared to 10 and 40 µGy/h (EA uses 40 as action value currently)

25 PROTECTFP6-036425 Risk Quotients Human –AGR = RQ of 3 –PWR = RQ of 14 Biota v 10 µGy/h (using reptile as most affected) –AGR = RQ of 0.14 –PWR = RQ of 0.64 Biota v 40 µGy/h (using reptile as most affected) –AGR = RQ of 0.035 –PWR = RQ of 0.16

26 PROTECTFP6-036425 Risk Quotients Human –AGR = RQ of 30.36 (using Ar-41 not C-14) –PWR = RQ of 140.23 (using Ar-41 not C-14) Biota v 10 µGy/h (using reptile as most affected) –AGR = RQ of 0.14 –PWR = RQ of 0.64 Biota v 40 µGy/h (using reptile as most affected) –AGR = RQ of 0.035 –PWR = RQ of 0.16

27 PROTECTFP6-036425 Open discussion of results

28 PROTECTFP6-036425 Summary/Issues for PROTECT

29 PROTECTFP6-036425 Issues/Future Include noble gases in the non-human assessments (unsure of actual dose predictions) However human and biota results should change ‘proportionally’ if/when noble gases are included in biota assessments This is a simple terrestrial only assessment (note in E&W’s no terrestrial habitat assessments ever triggered at Stage 2) Need to expand evaluation for purposes of ICRP Committee 4 (include ICRP approach in assessment?) –Combine terrestrial and aquatic assessments

Download ppt "PROTECTFP6-036425 Terrestrial Assessment Comparison of human and non human dose assessments for prospective new nuclear power stations."

Similar presentations

Nick Beresford (CEH) & David Copplestone (Stirling Univ.)

Nick Beresford (CEH) & David Copplestone (Stirling Univ.)
1 PROTECT: Numerical Benchmarks Workshop, May 2008 Update of UNSCEAR 1996 Presented To: Workshop on Numerical Benchmarks for Protecting Biota Against Radiation.

1 PROTECT: Numerical Benchmarks Workshop, May 2008 Update of UNSCEAR 1996 Presented To: Workshop on Numerical Benchmarks for Protecting Biota Against Radiation.
Application of ERICA outputs and AQUARISK to evaluate radioecological risk of effluents from a nuclear site J. Twining & J. Ferris Objectives of this study.

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 (University of Stirling). Whats the issue? Obtaining air concentrations for noble gases Estimating doses to wildlife from noble gases.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
Introduction to the ERICA Tool

Introduction to the ERICA Tool
Integrated Assessment Working group or coordinated activity?

Integrated Assessment Working group or coordinated activity?
The Need for Requirements and Guidance for Protection of Biota: Basis for DOE’s Biota Dose Limits and Guidance Biota Dose Assessment Committee Meeting.

The Need for Requirements and Guidance for Protection of Biota: Basis for DOE’s Biota Dose Limits and Guidance Biota Dose Assessment Committee Meeting.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
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.

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 October 2011.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology - Lancaster October 2011.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
WSC Radioecology Research Group A new methodology for the assessment of radiation doses to biota under non-equilibrium conditions J. Vives i Batlle, R.C.

WSC Radioecology Research Group A new methodology for the assessment of radiation doses to biota under non-equilibrium conditions J. Vives i Batlle, R.C.
David Copplestone CEH Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.

David Copplestone CEH Lancaster 1 st – 3 rd April 2014.
PROTECTFP6-036425 Screening tier comparisons ERICA, RESRAD-BIOTA & EA R&D128 Follow-up actions from Vienna workshop.

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,

Copyright © 2014 ALLIANCE Noble gas dosimetry for non-human biota International Conference on Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity, Barcelona,
PUBLIC DOSES ESTIMATION BASED ON EFFLUENTS DATA AND DIRECT MEASUREMENTS OF TRITIUM IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES AT CERNAVODA E. Bobric, I. Popescu, V. Simionov.

PUBLIC DOSES ESTIMATION BASED ON EFFLUENTS DATA AND DIRECT MEASUREMENTS OF TRITIUM IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES AT CERNAVODA E. Bobric, I. Popescu, V. Simionov.
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.

Centre for Ecology & Hydrology – Lancaster 27 th – 29 th June 2012.
Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards Radiation Protection Division formerly the National Radiological Protection Board EMRAS II – Working.

Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards Radiation Protection Division formerly the National Radiological Protection Board EMRAS II – Working.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google