HAL Id: hal-02417729
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02417729
Submitted on 18 Dec 2019
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of
sci-entific research documents, whether they are
pub-lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.
L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.
Site-specific organism vs ROs/RAPs an improvement of
the environmental risk assessment
B. Charrasse, E. Cohenny
To cite this version:
B. Charrasse, E. Cohenny. Site-specific organism vs ROs/RAPs an improvement of the environmental
risk assessment. 4th International Conference on Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity,
Sep 2017, Berlin, Germany. ICRER - International Conference on Radioecology and Environmental
Radioactivity, 2017. �hal-02417729�
?
A key component for the assessment of ionizing radiation impact to wildlife is the determination of which ecosystem and wildlife species could be affected and
should be considered in the environmental risk assessment (ERA). In most cases, risk assessment is conducted using the default ROs in the ERICA tool
(Batlle et al. 2011). This simplification raises several questions in the context of routine environment impact assessment. Does the use of ROs / RAPs in an ERA really protect all species (e.g. endangered/protected species) in the different target ecosystems in terms of dosimetry?
I. Introduction.
In other cases, some studies assessed the risk by completing with identified species relevant to the study site (Batlle et al. 2016). The subsequent question might be: Would the creation of new organism within the methodologies increase the accurate of the analysis? Finally the question could be resume to In which situation do we have to consider site-specific species in addition to RO in ERA for radionuclides chronic atmospheric releases?
II. Methodology.
The representativeness of ROs at a dosimetric level was assessed in the context of a routine atmospheric radionuclide release from a nuclear research
centre in the Mediterranean by comparing the estimated dose rates received by ROs and site-specific species.
III. Results.
V. Conclusion.
Compilation of ecological surveys (more than 400
species)
Final list of site-specific species
Site-specific species (28 species)
Dose Coefficient
calculation (EDEN tool) Reference
Organisms defined
in ERICA Approach
Consideration of site-specific species instead of RO does not change the final dose rate calculated
Effort to define realistic geometries (ellipsoids), better definition of the habitats, and the habits do not improve the risk assessment quality Use of ROs is sufficient when the sum of theβ+γemitters represent 1/400 or 1/4,000 of the14C or3H releases respectively
To help other facilities to determine whether a reference organism can be used or not, a quantifiable metric was created. This metric consists of two
ratios.
(1) Ratio of the3H activity released from the facility to the sum of all the
otherβ+γemitters, excluding14C.
(2) Ratio of the14C activity released from the facility to the sum all other
β+γemitters released, excluding3H.
Species selection based on ecological
and shape criteria (ellipsoid) Exposure scenario definition (characteristic,
habitat, occupancy factor)
1. The first step was to define a relevant list of site-specific with their lifestyles
2. The second step was to calculate activities within the air and the soil, based
on realistic scenarios. The calculation of the proposed dispersion of substances was based on annual release at the permitted maximum limit values of 21 nuclear research facilities of the Cadarache centre
3. The third step was to calculate dose coefficient for the site-specific species
and for the ROs defined in ERICA with the EDEN dosimetric tool (v.3) (Beaugelin-Seiller et al., 2005)
IV. Discussion.
The threshold was created using the following conservative criteria : i. The DR difference between a specific organism and the RO should be less than a factor of two (considered as marginal in light of the significant uncertainties associated with the transfer models ii. The minimum internal dose rate contribution of 3H or of14C to
total dose rate is 52 % (Sensibility tests were done)
iii. The threshold was calculated by taking in account110mAg and 140Ba asβ+γemitter patterns (most effective dose rate contributor)
iiii. The transport was assumed by SRS 19 with default parameters (reverse modelling)
Site-specific organism vs ROs/RAPs: an improvement of
the environmental risk assessment
Laboratoire de Modélisation des Transferts dans l’Environnement, CEA Cadarache, France
Benoit Charrasse, Emilie Cohenny
0.0040 0.0042 0.0044 0.0046 0.0048 0.0050 0.0052 0.0054 Lang's short-tailed blue
Cricket specie Southern festoon Spiked Magician Festive Toothed Grasshopper Flying insects- RO Hermit beetle Scarabaeus specie Yellow scorpion Arthropod - detritivorous-RO Montpellier snake Sand lizards specie Reptile- RO Red squirrel European badger Eurasian beaver Wood mouse Mammal Small- RO Red deer Wild boar Mammal Large- RO Black-crowned night heron Moustached warbler Eurasian blue tit Eurasian nuthatch Tawny pipit Red-legged partridge Eurasian eagle-owl Griffon vulture Bird- RO European toad Marsh frog Mediterranean tree frog Common parsley frog Amphibian- RO
Total Dose Rate (µG. h-1)
Site-specific species
4. The fourth step was to compare the DR of site-specific species and the DR
of ROs
Surprisingly despite the large discrepancy between the geometrical characteristics, habits, and habitats of the site-specific species and the ROs,
we found no difference in dose rates (less than a factor of 2).
This is due to the fact that 3H and 14C are the main radiation contributors
(main activities released) to the total dose rate +Dose coefficients for 3H
and 14C are size and shape independent, whatever the radiation type
Fig.1 Dose rates of the site-specific selected species and their ROs resulting from exposure to chronic releases of the facilities of the Cadarache centre
OR 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
1E-03 1E-01 1E+01 1E+03 1E+05
1 4C i n te rn a l d o s e r a te c o n tr ib u ti o n t o to ta l d o s e r a te
Discharge rate ratio of 14C / β+γ emitter
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
1E-02 1E+00 1E+02 1E+04 1E+06
3H i n te rn a l d o s e r a te c o n tr ib u ti o n t o D RT o t
Discharge rate ratio of 3H / β+γ emitter
OR ∆DR intra-species lower than a factor of 2 ∆DR intra-species lower than a factor of 2 = 4,000 = 400
When the sum of the β+γ emitters released from the
facility represent 1/400 OR1/4,000 to the 14C or 3H released 3-8 September 2017 - BERLIN A difference between the DRTot
intra-species lower than a factor of two
is intended
Fig.2 3H and 14C internal DR contribution to the DR Tot as a
function of the discharge rate ratio < 4,000
< 400
> 4,000
> 400
for this specific scenario
Batlle, J.V.I, Smith, A., Vives-Lynch, S., Copplestone, D., Pröhl, G., Strand, T. 2011. Model-derived dose rates per unit concentration of radon in air in a generic plant geometry. Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 50, 513. Batlle, J.V.I., Sweeck, L., Wannijn, J., Vandenhove, H. 2016. Environmental risks of radioactive discharges from a low-level radioactive waste disposal site at Dessel, Belgium. J. Environ. Radioact. 162–163, 263–278.
Beaugelin-Seiller K, Garnier-Laplace J, Gariel JC, et al (2005) E.D.E.N.: A tool for the estimation of dose coefficients for non-human biota. Radioprotection 40:S921–S926.
Amphibian Annelids Arthropod Birds Flying insect Mammal Large Mammals small Mollusc Reptile
