NATO SfP RESCA Project Peter Stegnar Jožef Stefan Institute and Jožef Stefan International...
-
Upload
dulcie-powers -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
0
Transcript of NATO SfP RESCA Project Peter Stegnar Jožef Stefan Institute and Jožef Stefan International...
NATO SfPRESCA Project
Peter Stegnar
Jožef Stefan Institute and Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Brit Salbu, UMB, Aas, Norway
NATO SfP Legacy Projects in CA
• RESCA (Radioactivity Environment Security Central Asia): on Legacy of U Extraction and Environmental Security in Central Asia
• JNKKT (Joint Norway Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan) Project (UMB) supported RESCA
• SEMIRAD I (Semipalatinsk)• SEMIRAD II (Semipalatinsk)
UMREG 2012 2
3
U Legacy Related Problems
• Uranium legacy sites in inhabited areas prone to natural disasters
• Majority of sites not properly managed due to lack of money and inadequate regulatory infrastructure
• Low living standard of resident populations, health and social problems, migration, etc.
• Concern of resident population due to lack of information
UMREG 2012 4
RESCA OBJECTIVES
• Characterisation of source-term and determination of local contamination at selected uranium legacy sites
• Radiation dose and impact assessment • Identification of appropriate
mitigation/remediation countermeasures
Budget: NATO – 430,000 EURSlovenia – 150,000 EURNorway – ?
UMREG 2012 5
RESCA PARTICIPANTS
• Volkovgeologiya, Kazakhstan• Al-Farabi, Kazakhstan• CHU EcoLab, Kyrgyzstan• INP, Uzbekistan• Vostokredmet,Tajikistan• J. Stefan Institute,Slovenia• UMB, Norway
RESCA: from 2006 to 2010
UMREG 2012 6
U Legacy Sites Investigated
Kurday // Kadji Sai // Taboshar
Digmai // Minkush // Shekaftar
Charkesar – 15 multinational field missions
UMREG 2012 7
Hazards
• Radioactivity
Gamma, alpha + Rn doses
Drinking water/food intake
Particles/aerosols (JNNKT)
Ecosystem transfer (JNNKT)• Metals – levels, transport, uptake (JNNKT)• Multiple stressor exposures (JNNKT)• Geohazards: earthquakes, landslides,
flooding – physical risk
UMREG 2012 8
Samples - measurements
• Gamma dose rate, alpha track, Rn dose rates• Analysis of radionuclides in environmental samples• Particle analysis: 2D composition, size, structure• Water: In situ fractionation, lakes, rivers, groundwater,
run-off• Fish: gills, organs, trophic levels, BCF• Soils/sediments: sequential extractions• Vegetation: transfer factors
Methods: alpha-, gamma-spectrometry, beta counting, INAA, RNAA, ICP-MS, ICP-OES, FIMS, IRMS, SEM, 2D
synchrotron XRD, XRFUMREG 2012 9
RESULTS
Environmental Impact Assessment
• Radioactivity of the source (tailings): elevated
• Radioactivity of the environment: gamma dose rates and Radon: high at some sites/places; drinking water, food products – clean
UMREG 2012 10
Digmai, high gamma,
Rn emanation, dust
Intervention needed
UMREG 2012 11
CCRnRn = 1500 Bq = 1500 Bq
mm−3−3
CCRnRn = 1000 Bq m = 1000 Bq m−3−3
CCRnRn = 450 Bq m = 450 Bq m−3−3
Digmay – Tajikistan, outdoor Rn
Intervention needed
UMREG 2012 12
Min-Kush; Kyrgyzstan
IAEA TM on 13
Dose rates at Tuyuk-Suu - remediated: 0.2 to 1.0 µGy/h, Rn: up to 10 Bq/m3
Indoor Rn: low (~100 Bq/m3), higher in some public buildings
Tuyuk-Suu tailings dump: landslide threat, transfer to D recommended
Spent filter materials from former U mill: immediate removal needed
U waste rock and coal used for insulation purposes of houses
Charkesar, Uzbekistan Gamma doses
Contaminated mine water drunk by animals and used for irrigation
Gamma dose rates of the soil from 3 - 7 µGy/h
Ra-226 in contaminated soil: 10 kBq/kg,
Ra-226 in water: 2.7 Bq/L
More information needed
Hot spots – Radioactive particles - digital autoradiography
Soil from Kadji-say, Kyrgyzstan
Soil from Kurday, Kazakhstan
Sediment from Taboshar Pit Lake
In situ measurements High gamma doses
Max dose rates = 0.4 µGy/h
U=1384 µg/L
Ra-226= 26 mBq/L
As=31 µg/L
High transfer
Downstream Taboshar extraction site
Drinking water Taboshar village: exceeds WHO U limit
Other findings High U and As levels in
Taboshar pit lake
High 210Po and Hg uptake in fish
226Ra key dose contributor
to terrestrial plants
UMREG 2012 17
Dose and Risk Assessment
Radiation doses low, radiological risk low with no actual health impact on resident populations
Radiological risk versus non-radiological:• Chemical contaminants • Physical risk – due to free access to legacy sites,
geohazard impactPerceived radiological risk versus actual risk:• Perceived risk by population high, based on lacking
information, low living standard, emotions – radiophobia• Actual radiological risk: low
UMREG 2012 18
• Upgrading analytical labs – provision of equipment (some cost-shared with IAEA): ɣ,α spectrometers, radiochemistry, Rn equipment, field instruments, sampling kits, etc.
• Training of personnel - young specialists: on-the-job, basic, advanced (spectrometry, Rn, other techniques)
• Promoting education (several MSc and PhD degrees completed or in progress)
UMREG 2012 19
Intervention Criteria
INTERVENTIONMAY BE
REQUIRED
INTERVENTIONUSUALLY NOT
REQUIRED
INTERVENTIONALMOST ALWAYS REQUIRED
mSv in a year
1,000
300
100
30
10
3
1
INDIVIDUALS’ CURRENT
ANNUAL DOSE
Filtration material - >300 mSv/y
Insulation materials – 10 mSv/y
MINKUSH
Conclusions
• Radiation doses to man relatively low, insignificant radiological risk and no actual health impact on resident populations
• Radiation at investigated sites localised to limited areas, could potentially influence/impact downstream areas due to river and airborne transport
• Metal exposure, especially of As, is high at mining sites, and is transported downstream
• High ecosystem transfer of selected radionuclides and metals
• Multiple stressor aspect should be considered
UMREG 2012 20
RESCA CONTRIBUTIONS
• Upgrading analytical labs – provision of equipment (some cost-shared with IAEA): ɣ,α spectrometers, radiochemistry, Rn equipment, field instruments, sampling kits, etc.
• Training of personnel - young specialists: on-the-job, basic, advanced (spectrometry, Rn, other techniques)
• Promoting education (several MSc and PhD degrees completed or in progress)
UMREG 2012 21
RESCA CONCERNS
• Lack of national financing for self-sustainable activities for follow-up programme/projects, i.e. site specific monitoring
• Leaving of already trained/experienced personnel for other jobs• Utilisation (availability, technical support, repair possibilitis, etc.)
of equipment• QA/QC issues – reliability of results
UMREG 2012 22
FUTURE
• RESCA follow – up: radioactivity + metals
– Comprehensive EIA of investigated sites– EIA of other sites:
• Sumsar (heavy metals pollution), • Shekaftar (radioactivity)• Ak-Tyuz, Orlovka (radioactive tailings from rare earth elements production, heavy metals)• Taboshar• Digmai
UMREG 2012 23
Special Issue Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 2012
10 peer review articles