4.4 Article

Nonhuman biota dose rate estimation from liquid effluent releases during normal operations of light water reactors using the LADTAP II computer code

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
卷 196, 期 -, 页码 141-149

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2018.10.018

关键词

Concentration ratios; Bioaccumulation factors; LADTAP; Nuclear power plants; Radioactive material; Liquid effluent

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-06CH11357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The LADTAP II computer code was used to estimate the dose rates to seven nonhuman biota (fish, algae, invertebrate, muskrat, raccoon, heron, and duck) from liquid effluent releases during the normal operations of new light water reactor facilities in the United States. The estimated dose rates to nonhuman biota depended on the nuclear power plant design but were orders of magnitude less than the 'derived consideration reference levels' (DCRL) in International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 108. The estimated dose rates were at least three orders of magnitude lower than the guideline values identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements to cause observable changes in populations of biota. Radionuclides that contributed most of the dose rates for seven nonhuman biota depended on the nuclear power plant design. The differences in the estimated dose rates to seven nonhuman biota calculated from the default bioaccumulation factors used in the LADTAP II computer code and the dose rates calculated from the concentration ratios of radionuclides in the IAEA Technical Report Series (TRS) wildlife handbook were less than one order of magnitude for most default biota in LADTAP. The concentration ratios for some radionuclides in liquid effluent releases from nuclear power plant designs that contributed more than 5% of the internal dose rates for invertebrates (P, and Ru) and algae (La and Pr) were not available in the IAEA TRS wildlife handbook.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据