4.4 Article

Time-dependent behaviour of radiocaesium: A new method to compare the mobility of weapons test and Chernobyl derived fallout

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
Volume 49, Issue 1, Pages 65-83

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0265-931X(99)00088-0

Keywords

radiocaesium; kinetics; Chernobyl; rivers; mobility

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Environmental radiocaesium (Cs-137) originates primarily from two sources, atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, and the Chernobyl accident. It has not, to our knowledge, previously been possible statistically to compare changes in the environmental mobility of Cs-137 from these two sources since the weapons test fallout varied in a complex manner over a number of years. A novel technique is presented for curve-fitting measurements with a time-dependent input function such as that for weapons test fallout. Different models were fitted to measurements of both: pre- and post-Chernobyl Cs-137 activity concentrations in five: major Finnish rivers. It was shown that there was no significant difference in the temporal changes in Cs-137 mobility from these two sources during the years after fallout. Transport parameters derived from:weapons test measurements gave good predictions of the long-term contamination of these rivers by Chernobyl fallout. Changes in Cs-137 activity concentrations in rivers after Chernobyl have previously been shown to decline as a result of slow sorption to clay minerals in catchment soils. It is shown that weapons test fallout also exhibited this slow decline over time. Rates of decline in Cs-137 activity concentrations 10 years after fallout correspond to effective ecological half-lives (T-e f f) in the range 10-30 years. Removal of activity from the catchment was found to have no significant effect on the long-term decline in Cs-137 activity concentrations in these rivers. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available