Advertisement

Cesium and Uranium Radioisotopes Monitoring in Kuwait Bay Seawater

  • Aishah AlboloushiEmail author
  • Abdulaziz Aba
  • Omar Alboloushi
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)

Abstract

Both people and the environment are continuously exposed to sources of radioactivity. Continuous monitoring of the concentration of natural and anthropogenic radioisotopes is of the utmost importance in the estimation of an individual’s received dose. In order to evaluate the radiological safety of locally sourced desalinated water and seafood, the activity concentrations of Cesium-137 (137Cs), Uranium-234 (234U), and Uranium-238 (238U) in Kuwait Bay seawater were measured. Ten 25-L seawater samples were collected from Kuwait Bay and underwent radiochemical analysis. 137Cs levels in the samples were determined by the Ammonium Molybdenum Phosphate (AMP) co-precipitation method, followed by gamma spectrometry measurement. 234U and 238U levels were determined by a radiochemical separation using anion exchange chromatography, followed by an alpha spectrometry measurement. The levels of 137Cs, 234U, and 238U in Kuwait Bay are considered low and comparable to other regional marine water levels. These low levels do not pose a radiological hazard of locally sourced desalinated water and seafood consumption. The ratio of 234U/238U was also calculated in order to investigate the the impact of any anthropogenic sources. These data can be considered a baseline reference for any future comparative analysis, especially since some Gulf countries are initiating their first nuclear reactors within the next few years.

Keywords

Radioisotopes 137Cs, 234U, 238AMP co-precipitation Gamma spectrometry Anion exchange Alpha spectrometry Radiological hazard 234U/238U ratio 

References

  1. 1.
    Carter, M.W., Burns, P.: Radiotoxicity Hazard Classification—The Basis and Development of a New List, 2nd version. Australian Government Publishing Service, Australia (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Al-Qaradawi, I., Abdel-Moati, M., Al-Yafei, M.: Radioactivity levels in the marine environment along the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Qatar. Marine Pollut. Bull. 90(1–2), 323–329 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Men, W., Jianhua, H., Wang, F.: Radioactive status of seawater in the northwest Pacific more than one uyear after the Fukushima nuclear accident. Sci. Rep. 5, 7757 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Monty, C.: UNSCEAR report 2000: sources and effects of ionizing radiation. J. Radiol. Protect. 21(1) (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Mamish, S., Al-Masri, M.S., Durgham, H.: Radioactivity in three species of eastern Mediterranean jellyfish. J. Environ. Radioactivity 149, 1–7 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chabaux, F., Riotte, J., Clauer, N.: Isotropic tracing of the dissolved U fluxes of Himalayan rivers: implications for present and past U budgets of the Ganges–Brahmaputra system. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 65(19), 3201–3217 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miyake, Y., Sugimura,Y., Uchida,T.: Ratio U234/U238 and the uranium concentration in seawater in the western North Pacific. J. Geophys. Res. 71 (1966)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aishah Alboloushi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Abdulaziz Aba
    • 1
  • Omar Alboloushi
    • 1
  1. 1.Kuwait Institute for Scientific ResearchSafatKuwait

Personalised recommendations