Advertisement

Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 314, Issue 2, pp 1237–1244 | Cite as

Online estimation of radionuclide transportation in water environment

Article
  • 137 Downloads

Abstract

Transportation evaluation of the radionuclide waste discharged from nuclear power plants is an essential licensing issue, especially for inland sites. Basically, the dynamics of radionuclide transportation are nonlinear and time-varying. Motivated by its time-consuming computation, the work proposed an online estimation method for the radionuclide waste in water surface. After extracting the nonlinearity of factors influencing radionuclide transportation, the method utilizes transfer function and generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models to perform deterministic and probabilistic estimations. It turns out that, the resulting predictions show high accuracy and can optimize the online discharge management of radioactive waste for nuclear power plants.

Keywords

Dynamics Nonlinearity Radionuclide transportation Probabilistic estimations Online discharge management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Kim Dongmin from Chungbuk National University, for providing an explanation for the flow velocity data. We would also like to thank Qin-Li Xu from Shanghai Jiao Tong University who gave us some valuable advice on the manuscript. Finally, Anna Lisa provided an effort to polish the language of the paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Kleinschmidt R (2017) Reference natural radionuclide concentrations in Australian soils and derived terrestrial air kerma rate. J Environ Radioact 172:160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Hamarneh IF, Alkhomashi N, Almasoud FI (2016) Study on the radioactivity and soil-to-plant transfer factor of 226Ra, 234U and 238U radionuclides in irrigated farms from the northwestern Saudi Arabia. J Environ Radioact 160:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hormann V, Fischer HW (2013) Estimating the distribution of radionuclides in agricultural soils—dependence on soil parameters. J Environ Radioact 124(5):278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Georgiev P, Groudev S, Spasova I, Nicolova M (2017) Transport of radionuclides and heavy metals during the cleanup of a polluted cinnamonic soil. J Geochem Explor 174:148–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Qian AG, Duan JH, Ji P (2007) Three-dimensional modeling of radionuclide effluent flow in reservoir for nuclear power station. J Hydraul Eng 12:012Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen J, Xinjian R, Tan G (2011) Numerical simulation of low level radioactive cooling water released from nuclear power plants in lakes and reservoirs. Eng J Wuhan Univ 44(3):307–344Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IAEA (2001) Generic models for use in assessing the impact of discharges of radioactive substances to the environment. In: Safety Report Series No. 19. International Atomic Energy Agency, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slob W, Pieters MN (1998) A probabilistic approach for deriving acceptable human intake limits and human health risks from toxicological studies: general framework. Risk Anal 18(6):787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang SS (1999) Implementing probabilistic risk assessment in USEPA Superfund program. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 5(4):737–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu L, Cheng SY, Guo HC (2004) A simulation-assessment modeling approach for analyzing environmental risks of groundwater contamination at waste landfill sites. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 10(2):373–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li J, Huang GH, Zeng G, Maqsood I, Huang Y (2007) An integrated fuzzy-stochastic modeling approach for risk assessment of groundwater contamination. J Environ Manag 82(2):173–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhemzhurov ML, Serebryanyi GZ (2006) Probability estimation of the distribution of expected results for prediction models of radionuclide migration in porous media. J Eng Phys Thermophys 79(6):1164–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eslinger PW, Schrom BT (2016) Multi-detection events, probability density functions, and reduced location area. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 307(3):1599–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ye M, Pan F, Wu YS, Hu BX, Shirley C, Yu Z (2005) Assessment of radionuclide transport uncertainty in the unsaturated zone of Yucca Mountain. Adv Water Resour 30(1):118–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dibiase RA, Whipple KX (2011) The influence of erosion thresholds and runoff variability on the relationships among topography, climate, and erosion rate. J Geophys Res. doi: 10.1029/2011JF002095 Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bollerslevb T (1986) Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. J Econ 31(3):307–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AutomationShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.China Nuclear Power Design Co. LTDShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations