EMRAS Biota Working Group –Main findings
description
Transcript of EMRAS Biota Working Group –Main findings
EMRAS Biota Working Group –EMRAS Biota Working Group –Main findingsMain findings
IAEA EMRAS Biota Working IAEA EMRAS Biota Working GroupGroup
Regular participants:
Belgium - SCK·CEN; Canada – AECL; France – IRSN; Japan – NIRS; Lithuania – IoP; Netherlands – NRG; Norway – NRPA; Russia – Spa-Typhoon; UK – CEH, EA, Westlakes; Ukraine – IRL; USA - ANL
ActivitiesActivities
• Two exercises to compare (i) dosimetry and (ii) transfer components of models.
• Two case study scenarios (predictions v’s data): Perch Lake (Canada) and terrestrial ecosystems within Chernobyl 30 km exclusion zone.
Models and approaches participatingModels and approaches participating• RESRAD-BIOTA (USA) [all]• Environment Agency ‘R&D 128’ (UK) [all] • ERICA (& FASSET) (European) [all]• Atomic Energy Canada Limited approach [all]• LIETDOS-BIO (Lithuania) [all]• DosDimEco (SCK·CEN approach) (Belgium) [1,2, Ch]• Dmax (UK) [PL,Ch]• EDEN-CENTEAUR (France) [1,2,PL]• LAKE(ECO) (Netherlands) [PL]• ECOMOD (Russia) [1,2,PL]• EPIC-DOSES3D (European) [all]• SÚJB approach (Czech Republic) [1,2]
Exercise 1 - dosimetry comparisonExercise 1 - dosimetry comparison• Assume 1 Bq per unit media or organism •Estimate unweighted internal and external dose rates for Cs-137, Am-241, Co-60, U-238, C-14, Sr-90, H-3 • Organisms selected from list of proposed ICRP Reference Animals & Plants• Equates to comparison of dose conversion coefficients (DCCs) used within models where:
)()/(
)/(
mediaororganismbodywholekgBqionconcentratActivity
hGyratedoseabsorbedunweightedDCC
Internal dose ratesInternal dose rates
• Internal dose estimates generally all within 20 % of mean (of predictions)– exception being for U-238: two approaches
including U-234 as daughter (resulting in 2x higher DCC)
External dose ratesExternal dose rates• Considerably more variable between models –
especially for β- emitters
e.g. Duck on soil surface e.g. Duck on soil surface predictions for Sr-90predictions for Sr-90
1.E-11
1.E-10
1.E-09
1.E-08
1.E-07
1.E-06
1.E-05
1.E-04
1.E-03
AECL EA EDEN ERICA LIETDOS RESRAD SCK SUJB
DCC
External dose ratesExternal dose rates• More variable between models – especially for β-
emitters– Especially H-3 & C-14 (e.g. external DCC for duck on
soil for H-3 ranged 0 to 5E-11)
• Media assumptions (density and distribution of contamination) can be seen to result in some variation
• Differences in approaches that do not matter:– use of specific geometries v’s nearest default– number of emissions assumed
Exercise 2 – transfer comparisonExercise 2 – transfer comparison• Assume 1 Bq per unit media to estimate wholebody
activity concentration of range of radionuclides (241Am,14C,60Co,137Cs,131I,210Po,239Pu,226Ra, 90Sr,99Tc,232Th & 238U) in 19 terrestrial & freshwater organisms
Terrestrial organisms Freshwater organisms
Grass/Herb Phytoplankton Pelagic fish
Shrub Zooplankton Benthic fish
Earthworm Macrophyte Fish egg
Herbivorous mammal Benthic mollusc Amphibian
Carnivorous mammal Benthic crustacean Duck
Bird egg
ApproachesApproaches• Many use concentration ratios (CR):
• But others using foodchain models, most often incorporating allometric relationships for dietary intake and radionuclide biological half-lives– Y=a∙(liveweight)b
• Some have ‘guidance’ derived values in the absence of defaults
)dry weight kg (Bq soilin ion concentratActivity
ht)fresh weig kg (Bqbody wholebiotain ion concentratActivity CR
1-
-1
Predicted activity concentrationsPredicted activity concentrations• Considerable variation between predictions (3-
orders of magnitude being common)
Pu-239
Predicted activity concentrationsPredicted activity concentrations• Some variation can be understood, e.g.:
– Missing value guidance approach often give comparatively high estimates (often for little studied organisms)
– Site specific (and national) data– Some approaches include reindeer data in derivation
of CRs leading to high predictions for mammals (especially Po-210)
• Tc-99 predictions had least variation– Very few data and all using similar approach
Perch Lake Case StudyPerch Lake Case Study
• H-3, Cs-137, Co-60, Sr-90 data for wide range of freshwater biota
PerchLake
Built-up Area
Chalk River Laboratories
Waste Management Area
Legend
Lake / River
Road
CRL Boundary
Stream0 1 2
kilometres
Sudbury
Ottawa
TorontoLake Ontario
Lake Erie
Lake Huron
CRL
Data presentationData presentation
• For each species/organism type mean prediction for each model normalised to mean measurement
Cesium-137 in Aquatic MacrophytesCesium-137 in Aquatic MacrophytesFreshwater Primary Producers
Model
AECL
ERICA (CEH)
EA R&D128
CASTEAURDmax
ECOMOD
LakeCo
RESRAD-BIOTA (UK)M
od
eled
-to
-Mea
sure
d 1
37C
s C
on
cen
trat
ion
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
Emergent MacrophytesFree-floating MacrophytesFloat-leafed MacrophytesSubmergent MacrophytesMinimum Measured (free-floating)Maximum Measured (free-floating)Minimum Measured (floating-leafed)Maximum Measured (free-floating)
Minimum Measured (submergent)Maximum Measured (submergent)
Strontium-90 in Freshwater FishesStrontium-90 in Freshwater FishesFreshwater Fishes
Model
AECL
ERICA (CEH)
EA R&D128
ERICA (NRPA)
Dmax
ECOMOD
LakeCo
RESRAD-BIOTA (UK)
RESRAD-BIOTA (NRPA)M
od
eled
-to
-Mea
sure
d 90
Sr
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
Brown BullheadCyprinidsPumpkinseedsMinimum Measured (bullhead)Maximum Measured (bullhead)Minimum Measured (cyprinids)Maximum Measured (cyprinids)
Minimum Measured (pumpkinseed)Maximum Measured (pumpkinseed)
Cobalt-60 in Freshwater MammalsCobalt-60 in Freshwater Mammals
Chernobyl Case StudyChernobyl Case Study
•Available data for Cs-137, Sr-90 Am-241, Pu-isotopes data - bias towards mammals (some birds, amphibians, invertebrate, plant, reptile). •TLD measurements for small mammals at 4 sites.
Species Common name Number of predictions
(English) 90Sr 137Cs Pu 241Am Dose rates TLD
Aegithalos caudatus Long-tailed tit - - 1 - 1 -
Apodemus flavicollis Yellow necked mouse 5 5 1 - 2 2
Apodemus sylvaticus Wood mouse 1 1 - - 1 -
Canis lupus Wolf 2 2 - - 1 -
Capreolus capreolus Roe deer 7 7 - - 1 -
Clethrionomys glareolus Bank vole 7 6 2 1 2 2
Erithacus rubecula Robin 2 2 - - 1 -
Hirundo rustica Barn swallow 1 1 - - 1 -
Lactera agilis Sand Lizard 1 1 - - 1 -
Microtus arvalis Common vole 2 2 - - 1 -
Microtus oeconomus Root vole 2 3 - - 1 1
Microtus spp. Vole species 1 1 1 - 1 1
Parus major Great tit 2 2 1 - 1 -
Perdix perdix Partridge - 2 - - 1 -
Rana esculenta Edible frog - 2 - - 1 -
Rana terrestris Brown frog 2 4 - - 1 -
Sicista betulina Northern birch mouse 1 1 - - 1 -
Sorex araneus Common shrew 5 5 - - 1 -
Sturnus vulgaris Starling 1 1 - - 1 -
Sus scofa Wild boar 9 9 - - 1 -
Beetles 1 1 - - 1 -
Grassy vegetation 4 4 - - 1 -
Data presentationData presentation
• Each prediction normalised to the data mean for a given site
• Normalised predictions averaged by organism group for each model
TLD reading prediction TLD reading prediction (= external Cs-137 prediction)(= external Cs-137 prediction)
Total unweighted dose ratesTotal unweighted dose rates
• Presented as normalised to the mean prediction for each site
SummarySummary
• Estimation of dose rate (DCC) adds little to variability in exposure estimates
• Efforts should concentrate on transfer component– Support IAEA TRS 364 for biota
• Can begin to understand some variability between predictions & improve the participating models
Comparison of Exercise 2 Cs-137 predictions by DoseDimEco
SummarySummary
• … But we have only completed two model-data comparisons – and overall considered a fairly limited range of
radionuclides
• Recommendations will contain a justification for continuing activities of BWG into EMRAS II