Radiological impacts from nuclear industrial facilities on the public and the environment : Their magnitude and the next 50 years forecast Sylvain Saint-Pierre Manager, Radiation Protection, COGEMA Obninsk – July 1, 2004

Presentation Outline 2. Basic radiological protection knowledge 1. Potential environmental indicators for the significance of radiological impacts 2. Basic radiological protection knowledge 3. Public radiation doses 4. Industry perspective on the radiological protection of animals and plants 5. The next 50 years forecast – radiological impacts 6. Conclusions

1. Potential environmental impact indicators Environmental impact is an essential factor for assessing sustainable energy sources The 3 potential environmental indicators for the significance of radiological impacts are: Radioactive effluent discharges Environmental radioactive concentrations Radiation doses to the public

1. Potential environmental impact indicators Indicator coverage for the key factors influencing the impacts Legend : Discharges: I-1 Concentrations: I-2 Radiation doses to the public: I-3

1. Potential environmental impact indicators Radiation doses to public The only integrated indicator that fully account for the key factors influencing the impacts Estimated by calculations using discharge data, environmental transfer models, and exposure scenarios for the individuals Dose per individual - from the most exposed group of “real” individuals

2. Basic RP knowledge Human health risk from ionizing radiation The “mSv” is a unit that expresses both the amount of exposure received and its potential damage to human health High doses >  100 mSv Risk of detrimental health effects has been conclusively demonstrated

2. Basic RP knowledge A few mSv/y < Low doses <  100 mSv For dose < 100 mSv, the risk of detrimental health effects is a theoretical assumption Leading authoritative RP bodies simply & prudently extrapolated the risk downwards from high doses They indicated that it is the part of the slope that begins at a few mSv/y that is relevant

Human Health Risk from Ionizing Radiation (Dose-Effect Relationship) 2. Basic RP knowledge Human Health Risk from Ionizing Radiation (Dose-Effect Relationship)

2. Basic RP knowledge General approach to RP For low doses, the dose-effect relationship The public dose limit per individual (1 mSv/y) Doses should be As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) below the dose limit

3. Public Radiation Doses Common values (per individual) Worldwide average value is 2-3 mSv/y: mostly… 2.4 mSv/y: natural background radiation typically ranges from 1 to 10 mSv/y 0.4 mSv/y: medical x-ray examinations Others: e.g., A transatlantic flight (N. America–Europe) is  0.04 mSv

3. Public Radiation Doses Typical values (per individual) for nuclear industrial sites From gaseous & liquid radioactive discharges For most exposed group of individuals Nuclear fuel cycle sites  0.001 to 0.1 mSv/y Nuclear reactors  0.0001 to 0.01 mSv/y

3. Public Radiation Doses Common Values and Typical Nuclear Industrial Site Values (the very bottom part of previous human health risk dose-effect relationship) Only off-site impacts from gaseous and liquid radioactive discharges on critical group individuals. There are notable exceptions not shown.

3. Public Radiation Doses Typical public doses from nuclear industrial sites Very small and well below: the dose limit (1 mSv/y) Approaching 100 mSv over lifetime is virtually impossible the dose from natural background radiation and its normal variation (1-10 mSv/y)

3. Public Radiation Doses Typical public doses from nuclear industrial sites Even below doses received from a single chest x-ray or from a few transatlantic flights ! Shows clearly that protection has been much more than adequate Benefits from nuclear energy to thousands and millions of people are notably incomparable !

3. Public Radiation Doses Detailed 2002 results for the four major nuclear-cycle industrial sites of COGEMA : Highest impact - 0.07 mSv/y at one site Driven by off-site external radiation from the inventories of radioactive materials stored at the perimeter of one site 2nd highest impact – 0.05 mSv/y at another site Driven by gaseous releases Impacts at the two remaining sites Less than about 0.01 mSv/y

4. Industry Perspective on RP of Animals/Plants An emerging topic internationally General recognition that the current RP system has in practice provided adequate protection : humans and the environment Is this surprising ?

4. Industry Perspective on RP of Animals/Plants …Is the adequate protection provided surprising ? Not at all as the industry includes : Which have been rigorously implemented at every nuclear facility Well proven, large scale, hi-tech industrial processes Suitable pollution control equipment Suitable environmental surveillance

4. Industry Perspective on RP of Animals/Plants Key end result from the current RP system applied to people Concentrations into the environment are very small and well below those indicative of potential harm to animal/plant populations This is true even for sites with the most significant historical discharges

4. Industry Perspective on RP of Animals/Plants Consensus to fill, for completeness, the “conceptual gap” in the current RP system : Where human being is absent, and for exceptions – e.g. sites with the highest impacts in particular local settings liable to accumulate radionuclides The “conceptual gap” mostly relate to a finer demonstration of protection

4. Industry Perspective on RP of Animals/Plants Industry welcomes the international leadership to modestly further develop the current RP system (fill the gap) Provided that the system stays simple and is practical of use

5. The next 50 years forecast - in terms of radiological impacts Normal operations Public doses will continue to be very small Effluent controls will continue to improve though at a lower rate than in the past decades as the rationale for this decreases

5. The next 50 years forecast - in terms of radiological impacts Incidents Extremely rare and steady improvements in the safety of containment of radioactive materials are expected Reduce the potential occurrence of significant loss of containment incidents and of potential severity of the related public doses

5. The next 50 years forecast - in terms of radiological impacts Incidents Two areas of improvements for new reactors are associated with: Reduction of core melt down probability Improved mitigation measures (or provisions) for severe accidents as well as improved reactor containment capability - increased protection against : external (e.g. man-made aggressions) risks internal (e.g. fire) risks

6. Conclusions Industry track record clearly indicates that radiation doses to the public are very low Both the public and the environment have been adequately protected Objectively, there is strong case for much favourably considering “nuclear energy” as a clean large-scale source of sustainable energy

6. Conclusions A finer demonstration of the protection for animals and plants – may be useful as a complement provided that : the RP system stays simple and is practical of use does not impose a disproportionate burden on the peaceful use of nuclear energy

6. Conclusions The next 50 years forecast - in terms of radiological impacts Normal operations Business as usual - Effluent controls will continue to improve though at a lower rate as the rationale for this decreases Incidents Extremely rare, steady improvements in the safety of containment of radioactive materials are expected