SERVING THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRYFukushima and Chernobyl ~ What have we Fukushima and Chernobyl ~ What have we learnt about the offlearnt about the off--site consequences of site consequences of these accidents and what is relevant from these accidents and what is relevant from

a UK perspective? a UK perspective?

CRA's mission is to be the premier risk management consultancy of the 21st century and beyond.

Professor Paul Leonard BSc. (Hons.), CRadP, MSRP, CSci., C. Biol., FI Biol., CMarSci., FI MarSci., FLS

Former Nuclear Inspector & Chief Consultant @ CRA

14 September 2012

222

This presentation will cover

A Brief History of the Chernobyl A Brief History of the Chernobyl accident from a UK perspectiveaccident from a UK perspectiveOffsite challenges at FukushimaOffsite challenges at FukushimaLessons for the UK from the Chernobyl Lessons for the UK from the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidentsand Fukushima accidentsQuestions and AnswersQuestions and Answers

333

We cannot afford to get it so badly wrong …

ever again!

Chernobyl (Chornobyl)

• Four reactors of a type not found in the UK

• Soviet designed• Unstable under certain

operating conditions

Ref. Google images, Dec. 2011

Radioactivity released

Total activity c. 14 Ebq. = 10-18

I – 131 = 1.8 EBqCs- 137 = 85 PBqSr – 90 = 10 PBqPu α –emitting isotopes

= 0.1 PBq Ref. Google images, Dec. 2011

Chernobyl deposition across Europe in1986

Chernobyl deposition across the UK

The challenge of what to sample where e.g.

Rainwater / domestic suppliesGrassMilkIntertidal seafoodCrops: Commercial and home grownWild foods e.g. fungi & honeySilage

Therefore: Precautionary Advice

Radiocaesium in fish from Cumbria

Devoke Water: Perch & Brown Trout

Sheep monitoring

Began in mid-May 1986Free grazing sheep on upland pasturesOrganic, peaty soils, low in mineral content. 1000 Bq kg1000 Bq kg--1 conservative 1 conservative limit for total caesiumlimit for total caesiumEngland, Wales & Scotland in England, Wales & Scotland in 1986 had 8,914 farms under 1986 had 8,914 farms under restriction with 4.225m sheeprestriction with 4.225m sheepLogistically difficult Logistically difficult ……..35,000 sheep monitored 35,000 sheep monitored during 1986during 1986use of Government field staff use of Government field staff + radiological scientists+ radiological scientists

Sheep restrictions in January 2010

England Wales Scotland TotalFarms 8 330 2 340Area (ha)Sheep 4,000 71,000 120 c. 75,000Location West Cumbria North Wales SW Scotland

Ref: RIFE 16

2012 Restrictions removed, i.e. 25 years after deposition

Lessons learnt from Chernobyl related sampling ~ UK perspective in 2012

Trained staff, easily expandedDirect correlation between radionuclide concentrations & dietHighly localised deposition10,000 + samples++ Media interestPredicted doses smallPublic reassurance ~ essential 2011 RIFE report shows contamination of sheep and fish with caesium-137 from Chernobyl remains evident but is decreasing. Concentrations in fish are now less than 10 per cent of those observed in the immediate aftermath of the accident

Fukushima

An overview of the nuclear accidents and the environmental impact at Fukushima, Japan from 11 March 2011

Fukushima tsunami

Ref. Google images

Fukushima tsunami

Ref. Tepco Units 1, 2 & 3 operational, no fuel in reactor 4. Sea defence 5.7m, tsunami ~ 14m.Ref. Google images

Fukushima

• Six BWR reactors of a type not found in the UK

• Operational from 1970s • Risk of combined

extreme events underestimated

Ref. BBC March 2011

Reactor 3, 14 March 2011

Sequence of events

Early MarchBackground

c. 0.1 µSv/hHighest recorded 150 µSv/h on 15 March

Fukushima contaminated area

Over 70,000 residents moved from main contaminated areaMain Evacuation set up 12 March 2011, c. 200,000 people. Ground contaminated on 15 March when wind changed from westerly to north-easterly + rain

Ground contamination could lead to exposure exceeding Japanese acceptable level of annual doseSoil contaminated with fallout from Fukushima

Ref: National Geographic Ref: National Geographic December 2011: Data to 29 April December 2011: Data to 29 April

Fukushima: Helping residents

National Geographic December 2011: Nuclear Zone: JapanNational Geographic December 2011: Nuclear Zone: Japan’’s Abandoned Towns p. 102 s Abandoned Towns p. 102 -- 113 113

Current extent of contamination Due to extreme weather (typhoons), much of the initial deposition has been remobilised: radio-Cs generally associated with fine particles that can be transported into river, lake & marine sedimentsArea around FDI and to the NW > 20 mSv y-1: all other areas < 20 mSv y-1

(Average global dose is 3 mSv y-1; highest natural background area is Ramsar; Iran with

up to 260 mSv y-1; radiation worker limit is 20 mSv y-1)

Lessons for the UK

Advice to UK citizens in Japan included:

To stay away from a large area around the siteNot to eat locally produced foodOn keeping and disposing of contaminated items

Introduction of controls on importation of food into the UKIncreased monitoring following positive detection of radionuclides in air across the UK, with measurements of air, rain, grass and food in the UK to check for the effects of atmospheric transport and deposition from Japan.

More Lessons for the UK

• Small amounts of iodine-131 from the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power station were detected in air, rain and food in theUK. The concentrations measured meant there was no risk to public health from contamination.

• Monitoring returned to routine frequency in July 2011. No contamination of food at points of entry into the UK had been detected by the time of writing the RIFE report (July 2011).

Office for Nuclear Regulation An agency of HSE

Japanese earthquake and tsunami: Implications for the UK nuclear industry

Final Report HM Chief Inspector of Nuclear Installations September 2011

Recommendations included:

•Implications for the operation of existing & new nuclear sites•Improving Safety culture•Better Emergency Planning•Consideration of extreme external events from 1 in 1,000 years to 1 in 100,000 years?•Better understanding of Human capabilities & capacities•Safety case work should strive for science - based~ need for evidence •The Quest for improvement should never stop

Implications for the UK …………………

Evacuated AreasInitially, main concern focused on shorter-lived I isotopes evacuation, issue of I tablets, restriction of consumption of some foodstuffsEvacuation within 20 km radius extended to “deliberate evacuation area” under main fallout plume (where cumulative dose may have reached 20 mSv within 1 year after the accident)

In total 86 000 people were displaced, 76 000 of which were resident within the 20 km evacuated area

Plan for sampling

Map of Cs-137 (Bq/m2)

100 km

20 kmca. 100 K

ca. 10 K

ca. 1000 K

>3000 K

Observation of suspended sediment discharge from paddy field by puddling

343434

35

Fukushima remediation overviewA wide range of focused clean-up projects were rapidly initiated by municipalities and local communities for sensitive areas ( e.g. schools and playgrounds)2 small test projects were initiated by JAEA in August: development and testing of technology (ended in March 2012)Further technology demonstrations initiated in November in 11 municipalities, including those in the evacuation zone (ended in July 2012)Parallel tests of novel decontamination technology (25 proposals funded) have been completedRegional decontamination is presently being initiated

353535

Residential Decontamination

Hot Spot RemovalStrimming

Turf StrippingTree FellingPruning

Roofs & Gutters

*All photos sourced from www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/1FWS_handout.html

Decontamination example: Date CityResidential area in steep-sided valley: houses (including gardens), fields, meadows, orchards, etc.Adopt decontamination methods that:

could be easily implementeduse as small an amount of water as possible Focus on simple

manual cleaning

Dose Rate MeasurementsDose rate (μSv h-1)

Less than 1 1 to 3 3 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 Higher than 30

Outside the decontamination target area

Before decontamination

After decontamination

Different remediation options compared as to extent of dose reduction

Guidelines developed for future work

Temporary Storage

Impervious Liners

Impervious Covers

3 year storage envisaged

Internal & external concerns

*All photos sourced from www.nisa.meti.go.jp/english/files/1FWS_handout.html

Lessons for the UK

• Dose limit 20 mSv, presents an individual risk of serious cancer of 1 in 1,000 compared with average background risk of 1 in 4.

• Foodstuffs & drinking water were contaminated and restrictions implemented

• Health impact ~ minimal? Psychological impact to local communities ~ ‘significant’?

• Need for more monitoring for radiological assessments and training.Ref: Wakeford R. (2011) J. Radiol. Prot. 31, pp 167 - 176

424242

Principle UK Nuclear Industry Sites

Our Team members have been to most

434343

Where does your food come from?

444444

Health & Quality of Life

Relating doses in air to doses in tissue is complexEffective quality factors, absorbed dose ratesDose equivalent is expressed in Sv or rem.What is the RISK?

454545

Go4SET

Capacity for competence

Conclusions for the UK …

• The RIMNET system provides coverage of doses in air across the UK, providing help to maximise resources

• The 2012 Olympics has shown that the Defra Emergency Co-ordination Team can effectively liaise across policy departments and other Government Departments with emergency planning responsibilities

• Evacuation of residents causes stress• There is a need for better information about radiological

risks and nuclear plant operations• On site operations may have significant off- site

consequences • ~ Therefore we need Probabilistic Risk Analysis and

Human Factor Assessments

Useful web sitesIAEA

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/fukushima/statusreports/fukushima22_12_11.html

Society for Radiological Protection www.srp-uk.orgEnvironment Agency www.environment-agency.gov.uk

Food Standards Agency www.food.gov.uk/science/surveillance/radiosurv/rife16

SEPA data for Fukushima related monitoring(http://www.sepa.org.uk/radioactive_substances/public

ations/other_reports.aspx).Corporate Risk Associates www.c-risk-a.co.uk

AcknowledgementsBBC Web SiteMEXTProf. Yuichi Onda, University of Tsukuba, JapanDr. Susie Fawley, MCM International, SwitzerlandGoogle ImagesProf. Richard Wakeford

Questions & Answers?

505050

Our mission is to be the

premier risk management consultancy

of the 21st century and beyond