the fukushima daiichi npp accident and the role of nirs ... · 2011 sent many experts to fukushima...
TRANSCRIPT
The Fukushima Daiichi NPP Accident and
the role of NIRS and UNSCEAR
in its Remediation
Yoshiharu Yonekura, MD, PhD
Chair, UNSCEAR
Past President, NIRS
Background
Interest in Space and Physics
1967: Kyoto Univ. Medical School
1973: Radiology and Nucl. Med. in Kyoto Univ.
1980: PET in Brookhaven National Lab (US)
1983: PET in Kyoto Univ.
1991: Brain science program in Kyoto Univ.
1995: Biomedical Imaging Res. Ctr. in Fukui
2006: NIRS
2015: Chair, UNSCEAR
2
First FDG PET in Human
“Tumor Metabolism” by O. Warburg (1930)
Anaerobic glucose metabolism in tumor cells
FDG PET Imaging (1882)
Colon carcinoma with liver metastases: Yonekura Y, et al, J Nucl Med 1982
3
National Institute of Radiological Sciences
Started in 1957:
Unique institution in Japan dedicated to comprehensive
research and development for radiation and health
NEEDS OF SOCIETY IN THE 1950’S
Applying nuclear technology and radiation:
Electricity, Industry, Agriculture and Medicine
Increasing need for studies on:
preventing harmful effects
medical applications (diagnosis & treatment)
4
History of NIRS
5
【Events in the World】 【Radiology / Safety & Protection】
IAEA started 1957 Established (by Science and Technology Agency)
1979 Developed first PET scanner in Japan
Chernobyl NPP accident 1986
Survey and decontamination of travelers
1994 Clinical research of carbon ion radiotherapy (HIMAC)
JCO criticality accident 1999 Treatment of 3 patients heavily exposed
2005 Molecular Imaging Center Designated as IAEA Collaborating Centre
2010 REMAT(Radiation Emergency Medical Assistant Team)
Fukushima NPP accident
2011 Sent many experts to Fukushima area Received 11 workers from NPP site
2013 Designated as WHO Collaborating Centre
2016 Reformed as NIRS in QST (National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology)
Fukushima accident
JCO accident
Fukushima Project for recovery from nuclear accident
CLINICAL TARGET
Intractable cancer • Sarcoma • Pancreatic cancer
Short term treatment • Lung cancer (1 day) • Liver cancer (2 day)
•Dose estimation
•Biological effects
•Risk assessment
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT CENTER support NIRS activity by developing technology, safety maintenance,
and training / education of human resources
Dose assessment
Burn Wound
External/Internal exposure
Combined injury
• Dose Assessment • Radiological/medical triage
• Diagnosis • Radiation protection
• PET probes (GMP level)
• Imaging technology • C-ion RT clinical
trials since 1994.
• Advanced medicine by MHLW in 2003.
RESEARCH CENTER
FOR RADIATION
PROTECTION
Low dose radiation effects on humans and
environment
RESEARCH CENTER FOR CHARGED
PARTICLE THERAPY
MOLECULAR IMAGING
CENTER
Activities in NIRS
6
RESEARCH CENTER FOR RADIATION
EMERGENCY MEDICINE
RADIATION EMERGENCY
MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TEAM
CLINICAL RESEARCH
Tumor imaging • Cell proliferation • Hypoxia
Brain imaging • Cognitive function • Abnormal protein
(Amyloid / Tau)
Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
7
Epicent
er
Occurred 14:46 March 11, 2011
Magnitude: 9.0 Mw
Epicenter location: N38.1, E142.9, and
24km in depth
It is said that the height of tsunami
which attacked Fukushima NPP was
higher than 14 m (Max. 39 m at Taro
town)
Fukushima-2 (Dai-ni) NPP
Fukushima-1 (Dai-ichi) NPP
Source: www.tepco.co.jp
Source: www.tepco.co.jp
Damage by Earthquake and Tsunami
8 NOAA/US Dept of Commerce, http://wcatwc.arh.noaa.gov/ KYODO NEWS
KYODO NEWS
Casualties : 22,010
- Death 19,418
(including disaster-related death)
- Missing 2,592
(As of March 2016, by Tokyo Fire Department)
Nuclear Reactors near the Epicenter of the Earthquake
9
automaticshut down
coldshut down
Unit 1 524 MW, 1984-Unit 2 825 MW, 1995-Unit 3 825 MW, 2002-
Unit 1 460 MW, 1971-Unit 2 784 MW, 1974-Unit 3 784 MW, 1976-Unit 4 784 MW, 1978-Unit 5 784 MW, 1978-Unit 6 1,100 MW, 1979-
Unit 1 1,100 MW, 1982-Unit 2 1,100 MW, 1984-Unit 3 1,100 MW, 1985-Unit 4 1,100 MW, 1987-
Unit 1 1,100 MW, 1978-
Tokai Dai-ni
Onagawa
Fukushima Dai-ichi
Fukushima Dai-ni
Periodical
inspection
Damage to Fukushima Daiichi NPP
10
1Seawater Pump
Elevation:
about 10m
Turbine
Building
①+② ⇒ Station Black Out
Tsunami (estimated more than 10m)
Grid Line
② D/G Inoperable due to Tsunami flood
D/G
Seawater level
① Loss of offsite power
due to the earthquake
All Motor Operated pumps (including ECCS
pumps) became inoperable
Reactor
Building
Note:
-All operating units when earthquake occurred were automatically
shut down safely.
-Emergency D/Gs have worked properly until the Tsunami attack.
Response of NIRS to NPP Accident
11
1. At NIRS 2. Send Experts 3. Onsite Assistance
4. Providing knowledge and information about radiation
5. Contribution to the Health Management Survey of Fukushima Residents
Over 250 experts sent to the site & government organizations
Telephone consultation Lectures Providing information Sharing information
Diagnosis/treatment and dose assessment of exposed patients (accepted 11 patients)
•Body surface contamination
monitoring
•WBC calibration
•Support for “Home-visits”
・The external dose of residents in was estimated using a system developed by NIRS based on record
Survey on residents’ behavior
Chronological dose distribution
Estimation of external exposure dose
•Estimation of the internal exposure dose for the
Fukushima public was performed with a whole body
counter at NIRS
Internal dose evaluation
REMAT (Radiation Emergency Medical Assistant Team)
12
March 12 2011
Fukushima Daiichi NPP
*Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF)
8:10 a.m., March 12 2011
(17 hr after the earthquake)
REMAT was sent from NIRS to
Fukushima by a helicopter of JSDF*
Off-site Command Center in Okuma-machi
from 12 to 15 March
13
No electricity
No water supply
Internet ×
Mobile phone ×
Facsimile ×
Telephone ×
Satellite phone ◎ (2 lines)
Combined Disaster
Damage to
lifelines
From The Asahi Shimbun
March 14, 2011 From Sankei photo
Local Hospitals for Radiation Emergency Medicine
14
Fukushima Medical
University (FMU)
Imamura Hosp
Futaba Kousei Hosp
Oono Prefectural Hosp
Minamisouma City
General Hosp
Fukushima Labor
Accident Hosp
Secondary level
OFCC*
Fukushima Daiichi NPP
Fukushima
Daini J -
Village
Initial
OFCC
10km
20km
30km
Iwaki City Kyoritu
General Hosp
Primary level
*OFCC: Off-site command center
Radiation Protection for Responders
15
Radiation protection for firefighters during the operation of cooling reactors
(spraying water)
http://www.asahi.com/special/10005/TKY201105280389.html http://photo.tepco.co.jp/library/110620_3/110620_21.jpg
Administration of stable
iodine to first responders
from fire departments of Tokyo, Yokohama,
Kawasaki, and Osaka
Radiation Protection for Workers
16
Supporting contamination control for responders at “J-Village”
Supporting radiation protection for medical staff Exercise on management
of contaminated patient
Dose Assessment of Residents by NIRS
17
- Fukushima Health Management Survey -
Based on questionnaire for
residents about behavior in
Fukushima prefecture after
the earthquake
March 12 10:00 a.m.
Starting evacuation
March 12 11:00 a.m.
Completing evacuation
Time sequential maps of
radiation dose rate near NPP
with intervals of 1hour for
initial phase and 1day for the
remained period.
Calculation of dose for 4 months after March 11, 2012
Dose Distribution in Residents
18
287,225
146,458
25,537
1,495 505 389 230 116 78 41 36 30 13 12 6 15 0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
( Max 25 mSv ) https://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/site/portal/kenkocyosa-kentoiinkai-23.html
(As of March 31, 2016)
( Workers are excluded )
Sharing Information with International Community
19
The 69th session of CRPPH, OECD/NEA
17th May, 2011 (in Paris)
The 64th session of WHO,
17th May, 2011 (in Geneva)
The 58th session of UNSCEAR,
23rd May, 2011 (in Vienna)
Contribution to International Community
20
Contribution to Reports on Fukushima Accident by International Organizations
Sending experts, collecting data & advising
Word Health Organization
(WHO)
2013
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects
of Atomic Radiation
(UNSCEAR)
2014
International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA)
2015
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 21
Introduction to UNSCEAR
• Scientific Committee of UN General Assembly
• Assess sources and effects of ionizing radiation
– evaluate exposure levels and risks
– identify emerging issues
– improve knowledge
for General Assembly, scientific community & public
as sound basis for decisions on radiation-related issues
UNEP provides the secretariat
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 22
Science underpins protection
ILO convention 115:
occupational
radiation protection
FAO/WHO
Codex Alimentarius Commission
(food contamination guides)
UN transport regulations for
radioactive material
implemented by
Member States
IAEA, WHO, ILO, FAO etc. -Safety standards
-Protection programmes
UNSCEAR
Scientific basis
UNSCEAR’s 63rd session & 60th anniversary
Reception hosted by Governor and Mayor of Vienna in Vienna
City Hall; attended by session participants and dignitaries
Video message from UN Secretary-General commending
impartial and independent approach
Messages from heads of CTBTO, IAEA, UNEP, UN Vienna and
WHO
Revised UNEP booklet “Radiation: Effects and Sources”
launched + USB stick with all publications and resolutions
Fukushima accident
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 24
Actions taken by Government
• Evacuation of about 78,000 people within
20km radius
• Sheltering of about 62,000 people living 20 -
30 km
• April 2011: Evacuation of about 10,000
more people because of high radiation
levels on ground
• Reduced exposure by up to 90%
• Other repercussions:
– Deaths associated with evacuation itself
– Socio-economic impact (e.g. loss of
livelihood, discrimination)
– Impact on mental and social well-being
UNSCEAR evaluation launched May 2011
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 26
– Over 80 experts offered as contributions-in-kind
– Attendance at meetings and work – cost-free to UN
– Channels to Japanese experts
– Trust Fund contributions provided buffer
– Data from Member States, scientific literature, international
organizations, other sources
– International Organizations contributed data and expertise:
CTBTO, FAO, IAEA, WHO, WMO
Coordination Group
Data compilation, quality assurance Releases and
dispersion
Public and environmental
dose assessment Worker doses
Health implications
UNSCEAR 2013 Report
• Main report & six appendices on:
– Data sources
– Releases, dispersion and deposition
– Doses to the public
– Doses to workers
– Health implications (public & workers)
– Doses and effects for non-human biota
• Data, methodologies etc. in 28 electronic
attachments
Two main radioisotopes
• Iodine-131, in thyroid, delivered moderate dose few weeks only
• Caesium-137 will continue to irradiate whole body at low dose rates over many years
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 28
Data for dose estimation, non-evacuees
MEXT 137Cs on
1km cells with
pop. >100/km2)
MEXT 137Cs
deposition
Time-integrated
modelling of 131I and 137Cs in air and
deposition from WMO
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 30
Dose estimates for the public
Table. Estimated settlement- or district-average effective doss and absorbed doses to the thyroid for evacuees for the first year
a Precautionary evacuation refers to the evacuation of settlements that was instructed between 12 and 15 March 2011 as an urgent protective action to prevent high exposure.
b Deliberate evacuation refers to evacuation of settlements that was instructed between late March and June 2011. C Prefectures of Iwate, Miyagi, Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaraki and Chiba.
Age Group Precautionary
evacuated
settlementsa
Deliberately
evacuated
settlementsb
Non-evacuated
districts in
Fukushima Pref.
Adjacent
prefecture
districtsc
Remaining
prefectures in
Japan
Effective dose (mSv)
Adults
Infant (1 y. o.)
1.1-5.7
1.6-9.3
4.8-9.3
7.1-13
1.0-4.3
2.0-7.5
0.2-1.4
0.3-2.5
0.1-0.3
0.2-0.5
Absorbed dose to the thyroid (mGy)
Adults
Infant (1 y. o.)
7.2-34
15-82
16-35
47-83
7.8-17
33-52
0.6-5.1
2.7-15
0.5-0.9
2.6-3.3
Japanese general public
• Exposure was generally low, or very low, with correspondingly low risks
of radiation health effects later in life. Protective actions significantly
reduced exposures.
• No immediate radiation health effects
• Prudent to maintain cautious approach
• Can infer increased risks of cancer and other diseases from models
though increased incidence of radiation health effects in future among
general public are not likely to be discernible
Thyroid cancer among children
• Models imply increased risk of thyroid cancer, especially for children
• Most child thyroid doses in range where no increased risk has been confirmed from observations
• Some at levels which if in large populations could lead to a discernible increase in statistics. Dose distributions need further refinement. Can exclude large numbers such as after Chernobyl
• Major thyroid screening programme of 360,000 children in Fukushima Prefecture
• Increased detection of thyroid abnormalities and cancer reported; confounded by use of highly-sensitive ultrasonography
• Radiation-related cancers indistinguishable from other cancers
• Early results compatible with screenings in unaffected areas
• Screening effect significant, but further follow up is needed.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 32
Worker dose estimates
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 33
Numbers of occupationally exposed between 11 March 2011 and 31 October 2012.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 34
Worker doses
>25,000 workers
Average effective dose:
about 10 mSv
High dose population:
170+ workers with more than 100 mSv
Maximum reported: 679 mSv
Absorbed dose to thyroid:
13 workers: 2-12 Gy (mostly from 131I)
Uncertainty among those working in the early
days
Environment
• Exposures generally too low for acute effects
– effects in marine environment would be confined to areas
where highly radioactive water was released
– biomarker changes for terrestrial species cannot be ruled out,
but significance for populations unclear. Effects would be
limited to highest deposition areas
• Protection actions and remediation have significant impact on
environmental goods and services, resources and amenities
Three years on
• Deterministic effects: not observed, unlikely in future
• Cancer rates: discernible increases not expected generally,
models imply risks may have increased
• Thyroid cancer: Uncertainties in dose distribution mean no firm
conclusions on potential discernible increase, warrants follow-up
• Heritable effects: Not discernible
• Birth defects: No impact
• Workers: No discernible increase expected, though risks
increased, warrants follow-up among most exposed
• Wildlife: Transient impact
• Large indirect impact on social and mental well-being
Conclusions apply to radiation effects only
UNSCEAR 2013 Report
37
Launched 2 April 2014 (Vienna) and May 2014
(Fukushima City and Tokyo)
Dialogues in September & November 2014,
and February 2016.
Continuing work:
Follow-up to 2013 Fukushima Report
• Expert group continuously reviews
new literature published after 2013 Report
• So far, none of Report’s major assumptions challenged; main
findings unaffected
• No evidence of increase in thyroid cancer rates attributable to
radiation exposure
• Second White Paper (2016) published
• Outreach efforts continued in Japan
38
Future scientific research needs
• Atmospheric releases: accident progression, weather,
dispersion & deposition……
• Leaks and releases to the aquatic environment & Pacific
Ocean: scenarios and long-term transport….
• Continued monitoring of exposures: remediation…
• Improved understanding of dose distributions: probabilistic
modelling, behaviours, uncertainties…..
• In vivo measurements
• Public health: Fukushima Health Management Survey...
• Worker doses: health monitoring, tissue bank…
• Environmental exposures: biomarkers….
Acknowledgements
40
UNSCEAR Secretariat
M. J. Crick, F. Shannoun, H. Yasuda, A. Brunader, S. Habersack
UNSCEAR Coordination expert group
Chair: W. Weiss (Germany); Senior Adviser: Y. Yonekura (Japan)
UNSCEAR Expert Group A (Data and quality assurance)
Group Leader: E.V. Holahan Jr. (United States); Lead Writers: A. Rannou (France), D. de Souza Santos (Brazil); Contributing Writers: J. Johansson Barck-Holst (Sweden), M. Zähringer
(Germany); Technical Adviser: M. Nakano (Japan); Commentators: P. Bérard (France), S.H. Na (Republic of Korea), T. Takahashi (Japan)
UNSCEAR Expert Group B (Radionuclide releases and dispersion)
Group Leader: G. Kirchner 28 (Germany); Lead Writer: R. Draxler (United States); Contributing Writers: P. Chen (WMO), D. da Costa Lauria (Brazil), C. Estournel (France), O. Isnard
(France), R. Períáñez (Spain), K.S. Suh (Republic of Korea); Technical Adviser: J. Sugimoto (Japan); Commentators: M. Chino (Japan), F. Gering (Germany), M.C. Hort (United
Kingdom), G.-B. Lee (Republic of Korea), M. Monfort (France), M. Nikkinen (CTBTO), M. Zähringer (Germany)
UNSCEAR Expert Group C (Pathways and exposure assessment: the public and the environment)
Group Leader: S. Solomon (Australia); Lead Writers: M. Balonov (Russian Federation), J. Simmonds United Kingdom), P. Strand (Norway); Contributing Writers: P. Bedwell (United
Kingdom), J. Brown (Norway), G. Dercon (FAO), F. Gering (Germany), V. Golikov (Russian Federation), G. Hirth (Australia), P. Verger (WHO); Technical Adviser: N. Ban (Japan);
Commentators: M. Aerts (Belgium), T. Aono (Japan), M. Chartier (France), M. Dinovi (United States), S. Fesenko (IAEA), J. Garnier- Laplace (France), S. Haywood (United Kingdom), T.
Homma (Japan), A. Hosseini (Norway), D.-K. Keum (Republic of Korea), V. Kliaus (Belarus), C.-M. Larsson (Australia), I. Naletoski (FAO), J.M. de Oliveira Godoy (Brazil), G. Proehl
(IAEA), C. Rääf (Sweden), K. Sakai (Japan), T. Sazykina (Russian Federation), J. Sherwood (United Kingdom), S. hinkarev (Russian Federation), J. Vives i Batlle (Belgium)
UNSCEAR Expert Group D (Worker exposure and health effects)
Group Leader: J.-R. Jourdain (France); Lead Writers: G. Etherington (United Kingdom), R. Lane (Canada), A. Wiley (United States); Contributing Writers: E. Salminen (Finland);
Technical Adviser: M. Akashi (Japan); Commentators: D. Bazyka (Ukraine), E. Blanchardon (France), J. Harrison (United Kingdom), L. Lebaron-Jacobs (France), J.K. Lee (Republic of
Korea), Z. Luo (China), D. Rabelo de Melo (Brazil), M. Rickard (Canada), S. Romanov (Russian Federation), S. Saigusa (Japan), B. Thériault (Canada)
UNSCEAR Health implications task group (Health implications)
Group Leader: P. Jacob (Germany); Lead Writers: J. Harrison (United Kingdom), L. Hubbard (Sweden), J. Kenigsberg (Belarus), R. Lane (Canada), W.-U. Mueller (Germany); Technical
Adviser: K. Kodama (Japan); Contributing Writers: L. Holanda Sadler Veiga (Brazil), V. Ivanov (Russian Federation), V. Krasnyuk (Russian Federation), Y.-K. Lim (Republic of Korea),
F. Ménétrier (France)
UNSCEAR Critical reviewers
L. Anspaugh (United States), P. Jacob (Germany)
UNSCEAR Final quality assurance team
Team Leader: C.-M. Larsson (Australia); Contributing Writers: M. Balonov (Russian Federation), M. Chino (Japan), R. Draxler (United States), G. Etherington (United Kingdom), F.
Gering (Germany), O. Isnard (France), P. Jacob (Germany), J.-R. Jourdain (France), G.N. Kelly (United Kingdom), S. Solomon (Australia), W. Weiss (Germany), M. Zähringer (Germany)
Other contributing experts
C. Blackburn (FAO/IAEA), J.D. Boice Jr. (United States), L. Brookmire (United States), D.H. Byron (FAO/IAEA), J. Carpenter (Australia), T. Charnock (United Kingdom), S. Field (United
Kingdom), H. Ishida (Japan), V. Kryuchkov (Russian Federation), K. Leuraud (France), Q. Liang (FAO/IAEA), K. Mortimer (United Kingdom), M.-L. Nguyen (FAO/IAEA), S. Nielen
(FAO/IAEA), B. Orr (Australia), M. del Rosario Perez (WHO), K. Sakamoto (Japan), J. Smith (United Kingdom), A. Thomassin (France), R. Tinker (Australia), A. Ulses (IAEA), D. Urban
(Australia), S. Watson (United Kingdom), J. Wellings (United Kingdom), Y. Yamada (Japan), I. Zvonova (Russian Federation)
International Organisations
Preparatory Commission for CTBTO, FAO, IAEA, WHO, and WMO
Scientific staff and consultants cooperating with UNSCEAR
G. N. Kelly, V. Golikov,L. S. Constine,H.D. Nagel, D. Nosske,R. Shore
Concluding Remarks
Continue our challenge to NPP accident
Review the activities to respond the accidents
Lack of knowledge to radiation introduced serious
confusion
Appreciate support provided by the international
community
41