4.7 Article

Assessment of the caesium-137 flux adsorbed to suspended sediment in a reservoir in the contaminated Fukushima region in Japan

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 187, 期 -, 页码 31-41

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.12.018

关键词

Caesium-137; Fukushima accident; Kusaki Dam basin; Numerical hydrodynamic model; Reservoir sedimentation; Suspended sediment

资金

  1. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO)
  2. Environmental Research and Technology Development Fund (S-8) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan
  3. Green Network of Excellence (GRENE)
  4. Ministry of Education, Japan [24560616]
  5. Foundation of River and Watershed Environment Management
  6. Core Research for Evolutionary Science and Technology (CREST), Japan
  7. Sumitomo Foundation
  8. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24560616] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We estimated the flux of caesium-137 adsorbed to suspended sediment in the Kusaki Dam reservoir in the Fukushima region of eastern Japan, which was contaminated by the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant accident. The amount and rate of reservoir sedimentation and the caesium-137 concentration were validated based on the mixed-particle distribution and a sediment transport equation. The caesium-137 and sediment flux data suggested that wash load, suspended load sediment, and caesium-137 were deposited and the discharge and transport processes generated acute pollution, especially during extreme rainfall-runoff events. Additionally, we qualitatively assessed future changes in caesium-137 and sediment fluxes in the reservoir. The higher deposition and discharge at the start of the projection compared to the 2090s are most likely explained by the radioactive decay of caesium-137 and the effects of reservoir sedimentation. Predictions of the impacts of future climate on sediment and caesium-137 fluxes are crucial for environmental planning and management. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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