NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS

Relevant accidents for animal productsRadioactive atmospheric releases (TBq)
Isotopes

Kyshtym Windscale

I-131

NA1800Cs-137260

180

Cs-134Po-210

Sr-90

Chernobyl

Fukushima Daiichi

1,760,000 100,000-400,000~85,000

7,000-20,000~47,000

8,300-20,000

42

2,000

0.75

10,0003.3-140

3

0.02

6,100

0.0035-1.2

Zr-95

18,40016

196,000

17

Ce-144 & 141

48,70013

212,000

11

Ru-1062,700

3>73,000

0.002

Pu isotopes

Kyshtym accident• 29 September 1957
• Producing weapons grade Pu atChelyabinsk-40 (now Ozersk),Urals, USSR
• Failure of cooling system forstorage tank
• Non nuclear thermal explosion• Contaminated plume - East Urals
radioactive trace (EURT)

Batorshin et al 2013 Experience in eliminating theconsequences of the 1957 accident at the Mayak Production
Association. IEM, IAEA

Emergency phase - countermeasures• EURT 23000 km2•

defined as: 90 Sr deposition density> 3.7 kBq / m 2• Major initial contributor to dose was external ʏradiation• Highest rad content in most foodstuffs - 144 Ce& 95 Zr (60-70%) ([total rad]10-10000 kBq/kgdw)• Milk – 90 Sr was 70% of rad content of milk
• Food intervention limits imposed
Fesenko et al 2010 Remediation of contaminated environments:
description of case studies. In TRS 475, ed Fesenko and Howard.

Remediation• Long term intensive remediation from spring
1958• Focus on deposition density and soil type• High 90Sr uptake in some soils with lowexch[Ca]•Grey forest soils, chernozem, acid soils• Remediation strategy focused on agricultural,fisheries and forestry production• Remediation reference level – 74 kBq.m2 90Sr•1000 km2, 55% agricultural landRemediation of animals• 90Sr mainly deposited in animal bones
 the long biological half-life of 90Sr in the bone led tosustained secretion of 90Sr into milk

• enhanced contamination if there is chronic 90Sr
intake by dairy animals• Ingestion of contaminated food was key longterm exposure pathway, only milk 5-8 y after
accidentRemediation options used
• Topsoil removal• Deep ploughing, shallow ploughing• Turnover ploughing• Liming and extra mineral fertilisers• Selecting crop varieties• Preference to pig and poultry productionRemediation reference levels

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
1000740

Pork 3700
370
185
93

Without remediation

Beef

With remediation

Milk

Strontium-90 Limits in Bq/kg

Deposition kBq/m2

Maximum Deposition Densities of 90Sr for
production of different Animal Products

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
200

Food Safety Standards

18555

1958

Beef

11.8 12.6

3.7 5.51968

1979

Milk

Clean feeding• Objective is to prevent or control the contamination ofanimal products by ensuring that feedstuffs which are
too highly contaminated are not ingested byagricultural animals.
• one of the most highly preferred options for animal
products by stakeholders (including farmers)• one of the most effective and practically applicablemeasures for agricultural animals• used extensively

Clean feeding• Agricultural animals given nutritionally balanced diets– either un- or low level contaminated feed

• Needs production of suitable, local forage
 Ensures animal products (normally milk or meat) haveactivity concentrations below the specified limit Much easier to control if animals are housed Wastes - faeces and urine do not require special
disposal routes
 Reduces amount of waste milk and meat fromotherwise contaminated animals

Effect ca intake on 90Sr transfer to milk
0.007
0.006

FmSr (d -1)

0.005

0.004

0.003

0.002

0.001

0050

100

150

Ca intake (g d-1)

200

250

300

Windscale• 10 October 1957
• Supplying Pu for British atomic
bomb project and to generate
other nuclides through theneutron irradiation of appropriatematerials placed in channels
within the core
• Stored Wigner energy lead to afire in Unit 1 for 3 d• INIS level 5• Key releases - 131I, 137Cs, 210Po• Cow milk in coastal area
Garland & Wakeford 2007 Atmospheric emissions from theWindscale accident of October 1957 Atmos Environ 41

Windscale• 10 October 1957
• Supplying Pu for British atomic
bomb project and to generate
other nuclides through theneutron irradiation of appropriatematerials placed in channels
within the core
• Stored Wigner energy lead to afire in Unit 1 for 3 d• INIS level 5• Key releases - 131I, 137Cs, 210Po• Cow milk in coastal area
Garland & Wakeford 2007 Atmospheric emissions from theWindscale accident of October 1957 Atmos Environ 41

Windscale particle- release
due tocorrosion

Pictures by Agricultural University of Norway

Countermeasures• Environmental monitoring - 131I was major radiological hazard•

Little guidance available on what constituted an acceptable limit
for [131I] in milk

• Derived limit of 0.1 μCi L-1 (3700 Bq L-1) to constrain thyroid doses• Milk ban based on these ad hoc calculations• West Cumbrian coastal strip running from 10 km north ofWindscale to 20 km south.
• Cow milk diluted and dumped into Irish Sea, for c. 1 monthDeposition of 137Cs in Cumbria

Booker (1962)

Jackson & Jones (1991)

Wright et al 1980s

Temporal variation in lamb 137cs

Global fallout + Windscale
3000
Minimum

Lamb 137Cs (Bq kg-1 FW)

2500

Mean
Maximum

2000
1500
1000
5000
1955

1960

1965

1970
Year

1975

1980

1985

Flock restriction probability
GLOBAL FALLOUT + WINDSCALE

Spatial variation in lamb 137Cs

WINDSCALE ONLY

Temporal variation in lamb 137Cs
Windscale 137Cs only
3000

Lamb137-1Cs (Bq kg FW)

Minimum
Mean

2500

Maximum
2000
1500
10005000
1955

1960

1965

1970
Year

1975

1980

1985

Flock restriction probability

WINDSCALE ONLYSummary of global fallout and Windscale• Based upon current intervention limits
restrictions would have been needed– Global fallout + Windscale– Global fallout only
– Windscale only

• Main contributor is global fallout – both interms of level and spatial extent

Chernobyl accident• 26 April 1986, 10 d release• 1040, 910, 25 and 250 PBq
respectively for 132 I, 133 I, 134 I
and 135 I (132 I in rad
equilibrium with 132 Te)• Many W. European countries
also affected• High [RI] in cow milk
• High [RCs] in milk and meat•

Agricultural and semi-naturalanimals

Emergency phase - countermeasures• I isotopes intercepted byplants, eaten by ruminants,high transfer to milk
• Response focused onbanning milk from collectivefarms, not privatehouseholds• Consumption of milk fromprivate cows caused thyroid
cancers in young children

Existing situation - Radioecological sensitivity• High RCs uptake for soils••

Ukraine, Belarus, Russian federation
Western Europe• Long term, sustained transfer of radiocaesium
to animals•••

Agricultural areas with sensitive soils
Extensive farming in uplands with low fertiliser
status and high [OM]
Game and semi-domesticated animals

Transfer to semi-natural animals

Reindeer
GrouseRoe deer, wild boar

High RCs transfer,seasonal trends
long effective half lives

Moosesemi-domesticated animals

Animal productsContamination of agricultural animal products wasoften a major contributor to ingestion dose
60%% contribution todaily Cs-137
intake bypopulation of
Milaych Ukraine

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%0%

MilkFungiBerries

MeatFishPotatoes Vegetables BreadMost relevant options for livestock• Remediation of fodder production• Clean feeding, in vivo monitoring• prevent gut absorption by application ofradiocaesium binding agents to animals• changing animal feeding strategies

Radical improvement• ploughing• improved drainage• wide range of fertilizer
mixtures• reseeding• Cs sorbents
One of the most effective options to: increase productivity of grass stands by 3-5 fold
 decrease the transfer of radiocaesium to fodder by 2-10 fold
 Farmers like itChanging animal feeding strategies• Utilize contaminated feed for young animals• Then decontaminate•

Decontamination of an 18-20 month bull

Clean feeding
Use of Cs binders

feed contaminated forage

feed uncontaminated forage

3000
137Cs in meat (Bq kg-1 fw)

•

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0450500

550

Days of feeding

600650Preventing gut absorption – clay minerals• Clay minerals used
• bentonites
vermiculites

zeolites• Add to fodder, incorporate into concentrates• Needs daily administration• Costs depends on ease of access• Moderate effectiveness• up to 5 fold reduction• Some adverse effects if clay intake high

AFCF
• Effectiveness: v high• Feasibility– size, delivery routes forfree ranging animals• Acceptability– BLUE, boli

• Constraints– Licensing

Milk radiocaesium (Bq l-1)

1500

1250
1000
750

AFCF fed goats

500
250

0
0 7 14 21 35 42 48 54 62 70 77 84 91
Time on mountain pasture (d)Administration rates & reduction factors for AFCF

Livestock

AFCF
administration

Reduction
factorReduction
factorRate (g d-1)

fSU

Other sources

Dairy cows

33-5

5-10

Bull calf

34-5

Pig

1.5-2

4-6

Chicken

1.5

3-5

Fesenko et al., 200710

Preventing gut absorption – AFCF
35
Rus s ia

30Ukra ine

25Belarus

20
15
105

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

01991

treated cows(x1000)
Numberof treatedcows (×1000)

Changes with time in the use of AFCF in the fSU

YearsYears(IAEA, 2005)

POST CHERNOBYLINITIATIVESDisposal of contaminated milk and meat
• Disposal routes for milk
•

•
•
•

disposal to sea
incineration,landspreading
processing and storage• Disposal routes for meat•••burialburning carcasses (potentially by incineration)
carcasses rendered downEC Maximum Permissible Levels (MPLs) for radiocaesiumin animal feeds
Following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiologicalemergency
Animal feed intended for:

Pigs
Poultry, lambs and calves
OtherMPL(Bq kg-1 as ready forconsumption)
1250
2500
5000

*The regulation does not specify a DM assumption for the feedingstuffs(CEC, 1990)

The social dimension for applying management options• Farmers / producers concerns:
••
•
•

•
•
•

animal welfare
feeding contaminated feedstuffs
compensation
residual levels of contamination in foodthe use of secondary products such as composted
material and manure on landeffects on landscapeenvironmental side effects

Fukushima Daiichi accident• 11 March 2011
• Earthquake and tsunami• Loss of cooling capacity• Several initial releases due toventing and hydrogen explosions;•Weeks of subsequent releases• Low [RI] and [RCs] in agriculturalanimal products• High [RCs] in game animals

Emergency phase• Relatively low [RI] and[RCs] in agricultural animalproducts••••

Dairy animals housed
No grazing in March 2011
Feeding stored feed
Less potential for transfer ofradioiodine to milk

• Extensive, comprehensive
food bans imposed quickly

Existing situation-1• Tendency to refer tominimum measureable[RCs] rather than the“low” food standard limits• Limited clean feeding• Development of v. lowlevel in vivo monitoring
methods

010-1

10-2

10-3

2015
ababab2• Low [RCs] in agricultural
animal products

T• High [RCs] in game
animals – trashing fields(m kg fw)

10ag

c
10-4

10-5

Asian Wild boar
black bear

Sikadeerc

Copper Wild duck
Greenpheasant pheasantAnimal nameSummary• Kyshtym•

Wide range of rads initially, 90Sr long term, firstdevelopment of wide range of remediation options• Windscale•Some relevant radionuclides missed, identified anddumped milk

• Chernobyl•

Severe impact of I isotopes in private milk, high andsustained transfer of RCs to animal products, importanceof soil type, extensive and game animals, Cs binders,
live monitoring, social dimension• Fukushima•

Agricultural practices and time of deposition minimised
animal contamination in emergency phase, highly
conservative approach in existing situationGLOBAL FOOD CONSUMPTION

Consumption (kg/capita/y) in 2003
43

Data source:FAO database

With thanks to….
• Nick Beresford, Cath Barnett, Claire Wells
CEH, UK• Gerhard Proehl, Sergey Fesenko (IAEA),
Mikhail Balonov, (RF), Shinichi Nakayama(JAEA, Japan)• MODARIA participants

Questions?