"Vad får man för pengarna investerade i miljöförbättringar - exempel från radioekologi och eutrofiering"
• Optimering - kostnad och nytta
• Expertsystem inom radioekologi banar vägen för………
• En ny generation prediktiva modeller inom radioekologin banar vägen för…..…
• Ja, kanske för en ny Östersjöforskning?!
Lars HåkansonUppsala UniversityDept. of Earth [email protected]
Measures to reduce radiation dose to man, flora and fauna.
Many different measures have been tested for aquatic systems, e.g.,• Lake liming (Ca; from helicopter, boast, dosers)• Wetland area liming (generally by helicopters)• Full scale drainage area liming• Potash treatment (K)• Fertilization (P)• Extensive fishing and foodweb manipulations
To conclude: Little can be done, but today we can have more realistic expectations, which is good!
Smith, J.T., Voitsekhovitch, O.V., Håkanson, L. and Hilton, J., 2001. A critical review of measures to reduce radioactive doses from drinking water and consumption of freshwater foodstuffs. J. Env. Radioactivity, 56:11-32.
Decision support systems.
RODOS and MOIRA
Many different models:Many different models:
• • Hydrological Dispersion Hydrological Dispersion Module of the RODOS system, Module of the RODOS system, RIVTOX, RETRACE, LAKECO RIVTOX, RETRACE, LAKECO
modelsmodels
(see http://www.rodos.fzk.de/)
Authors: Gennadiy Donchyts (IMMSP)Dmitry Treebushny (IMMSP)Mikhail Kolomiev (TYPHOON)Wolfgang Raskob (FZK)Mark Zheleznyak (IMMSP)
RODOS DSS is mainly designed to handle short-term (hours to days) spatial variations. The predictions are driven by online meteorological data (winds, temperature and precipitation).
MOIRA includes
• Validated predictive models for rivers, lakes and coastal areas• GIS-maps from Europe on fallout (Chernobyl), soil types, land use, population, vegetation, etc.• A menu of remedial measures• An ecosystem index approach to asses positive and negative aspects of remedial measures• An MAA, MultiAttribute Analysis, module to assess environmental, economical and social attributes related to the remedial measures
Gallego, E., Brittain, J.E., Håkanson, L., Heling, R., Hofman, D. And Monte, L., 2004. MOIRA: A Computerised Decision Support System for the Management of Radionuclide Contaminated Freshwater Ecosystems, Radioprotection, 98: 83-102 (ISSN-0874-7016).
Multi-attribute analysis = MAA
Overall utilities and ranking obtained for the analysed intervention strategies simulated for Lake Svyatoye.
Optimal modellstorlek
“Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler”, according to Albert Einstein
r2 = predictive powerCV = accumulated uncertainty i x-variables
Optimalskala för
modellering
Time Time
units (T)
CV
(X) n=(CV·2/0.2)2 T·n OMS=100·(1/T·n)·(0.62-CV)
Daily 365 0.18 3.2 1168 0.037 Weekly 52 0.29 8.4 437 0.075 Monthly 12 0.30 9.0 108 0.30 Yearly 1 0.56 31.4 31 0.19
CV = 0.18/2CV = 0.18
Using data on N and P from Ringkobing Fjord
OMS = f(CV, T·n)
CV = osäkerhet i modellvariablerT·n = tillgänglighet av modellvariabler
“Revolution” in predictive power
For example for fish, the peak appears some time after the fallout - the “peak and tail” problem
Water
Fish
Benthos
Catchment load
River input OutflowDirect lake load
Sedimen-tation Bioturba-tion
Diffusion
Diffusion
DiffusionSedimentation
Resuspension
Fishing
Arrows indicate Hg fluxes
Water
Sediments
Top predator Zooplankton,
Algae
Phytoplankton
DyTraditional dynamic approach
Small fish 1
Small fish 2A.
B.Water
Top predator Small fishModerator expressing impact from environ- mental factors:• pH • T • DR
New approach, "mixed" model
B.
Arrows indicate fluxes
Old approach
New approach
Outflow
Burial
Diffusion
Wave base
Inflow
Sedimentation
Resuspension
Precipitation
Surface water =epilimnion
Deep water =hypolimnion
Mixing
Bioturbation
Compaction
General, fundamental transport processes
All these transport processes can be quantified very well today! - Chernobyl
Coastal zone
Transition zone
Deep water area
N
Section area
How will the Baltic respond
to remedial measures??
This is determined by internal transport processes, e.g.,
sedimentation, resuspension, diffusion,
mixing and outflow
E = Erosion areas for fine materialsT = Transportation areas for fine materialsA = Accumulation areas for fine materials
Amounts of total-P (TP) and TP-fluxes to the Baltic Sea (from Wulff, 2006).
“Flippen”
1995
30-40 kt of P
Data from HELCOM in the Baltic Proper.
1995
HELCOMs (Helsinki commission) strategy for the Baltic is
• each country should reduce their own emissions and
• the best available technique should be used.
The opposite strategy should be implemented. That is:
• each country shout NOT reduce their own emissions; the Baltic is one system and the measures should focus on reducing the major P-fluxes, not N and not the small ones!
• the best available techniques should NOT be used, but the most cost-effective measures to reduce the biggest fluxes!
The three problems• Eutrofication; nutrients (N and P) and cyanobakteria = bluegreen algae
= toxic algae
• High levels of organic toxins in fish
• Extensive fishing; the cod threatened; uncertain and erroneous fish quota decided at negotiations; blackfishing; industrial fishing
These three basic problems should NOT be regarded seperately, but together!!
Organic toxins - some decrease, some increase!!Women in fertile ages should not eat fat fish from the Baltic without restrictions
“The clearest waters have the most contaminated fish!!”
The higher the nutrient concentrations in water, the lower the concentrations of toxins in fish (if all else is constant). This is “biological dilution”.
Conc. in fish = g toxin/biomass fish in kg
Eutrofication and toxins in fish must not be regarded as two separate problems!!
The cod - at the verge of extinctionThe blackfishing in the Baltic is probably extensive, maybe 30-70% higher than the quota (70 kt)
Modelling using a foodweb model (BaltWeb) which calculates
the production potential of the ecosystem
Extinction
Consequences
Measure: Catch more prey fish!!!
Ringkobing Fjord(assuming a salinity of 22‰)
BPBACLAMS (67% of 263 kt ww)JEMAPHPDPYZBZHZP
A. Biomasses
A possible measure to reduce eutrophication??According to Swedish EPA
Cultivate and harvest clams
Fallout (3.5 t TP/yr)Inflow from sea (212 t TP/yr)Uptake by clams (0.39% or 1.3 t TP/yr)River inflow (120 t TP/yr)
Ringkobing Fjord(assuming a salinity of 22‰)
BPBACLAMS (67% of 263 kt ww)JEMAPHPDPYZBZHZP
A. Biomasses
B. TP-fluxes
C. TP-amounts
ADWETSWBLBSClams (0.5% of 1020 t TP)
Total-N Total-P tons % tons %
Sweden 44,300 6 1780 5 Baltic states 72,600 10 1890 5 Poland 109,900 5 19,100 52 Germany 20,000 3 2750 7 Denmark 51,000 7 7860 22 Precipitation 289,900 41 3420 9 Nitrogen fixation 130,000 18 - -
Large and small fluxes
To reduce small fluxes is neither meaningful nor cost efficient
900 of 220,000 = 0.4% may be reduced
plus≈14,000 t P from Kattegatplus≈ 160,000 t P from land upliftPlus≈ 14,000 t P from the Bothnian Sea
Total inflow: ≈ 220,000 t P/yr
=1780/36,800)
Positive effects
• Less phytoplankton. • The water clarity and Secchi depth would increase. • The risks for excessive blooms of toxic bluegreen algae would decrease. • The extension of ”dead” laminated bottom areas would decrease. • The production and biomass of big (predatory) cod would increase.
Negative effects
• Increased production and cover of macrophytes, i.e., a reduced access to the shoreline (recreation).• Higher levels of toxins in fish. Also dioxins in fish would increase .- if the load of dioxins is not reduced.• A somewhat lower total fish production but • A higher cod production.
Final comments
• Radioecology today is much better equipped today to handle an accident, but, but, but
• Who will finance future radioecological research?
EU - are reducing such funding!IAEA - very little after VAMPIndividual countries - Which?
In Sweden, we have largely dismantled radioecology at our universities!
So, how shall we maintain and expand the knowledge we have today?!
Top Related