"Vad f å r man f ö r pengarna investerade i milj ö f ö rb ä ttringar

1. "Vad får man för pengarna investerade i miljöförbättringar - exempel från radioekologi och eutrofiering" • Optimering - kostnad och nytta • Expertsystem inom radioekologi banar vägen för……… • En ny generation prediktiva modeller inom radioekologin banar vägen för…..… • Ja, kanske för en ny Östersjöforskning?! Lars Håkanson Uppsala University Dept. of Earth Sciences Lars.Hakanson@geo.uu.se

2. Measures to reduce radiation dose to man, flora and fauna. Many different measures have been tested for aquatic systems, e.g., • Lake liming (Ca; from helicopter, boast, dosers) • Wetland area liming (generally by helicopters) • Full scale drainage area liming • Potash treatment (K) • Fertilization (P) • Extensive fishing and foodweb manipulations To conclude: Little can be done, but today we can have more realistic expectations, which is good! Smith, J.T., Voitsekhovitch, O.V., Håkanson, L. and Hilton, J., 2001. A critical review of measures to reduce radioactive doses from drinking water and consumption of freshwater foodstuffs. J. Env. Radioactivity, 56:11-32.

3. Decision support systems. RODOS and MOIRA

4. Many different models: • Hydrological Dispersion Module of the RODOS system, RIVTOX, RETRACE, LAKECO models (seehttp://www.rodos.fzk.de/) Authors: Gennadiy Donchyts (IMMSP)Dmitry Treebushny (IMMSP) Mikhail Kolomiev (TYPHOON) Wolfgang Raskob (FZK) Mark Zheleznyak (IMMSP)

5. RODOS DSS is mainly designed to handle short-term (hours to days) spatial variations. The predictions are driven by online meteorological data (winds, temperature and precipitation).

6. MOIRA includes • Validated predictive models for rivers, lakes and coastal areas • GIS-maps from Europe on fallout (Chernobyl), soil types, land use, population, vegetation, etc. • A menu of remedial measures • An ecosystem index approach to asses positive and negative aspects of remedial measures • An MAA, MultiAttribute Analysis, module to assess environmental, economical and social attributes related to the remedial measures Gallego, E., Brittain, J.E., Håkanson, L., Heling, R., Hofman, D. And Monte, L., 2004. MOIRA: A Computerised Decision Support System for the Management of Radionuclide Contaminated Freshwater Ecosystems, Radioprotection, 98: 83-102 (ISSN-0874-7016).

7. Multi-attribute analysis = MAA

8. Overall utilities and ranking obtained for the analysed intervention strategies simulated for Lake Svyatoye.

9. Optimal modellstorlek r2 = predictive power CV = accumulated uncertainty i x-variables “Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler”, according to Albert Einstein

10. Optimalskala för modellering Using data on N and P from Ringkobing Fjord CV = 0.18/2 CV = 0.18 OMS = f(CV, T·n) CV = osäkerhet i modellvariabler T·n = tillgänglighet av modellvariabler

11. “Revolution” in predictive power

12. Water For example for fish, the peak appears some time after the fallout - the “peak and tail” problem Fish

13. Old approach Arrows indicate fluxes New approach

14. General, fundamental transport processes All these transport processes can be quantified very well today! - Chernobyl

15. How will the Baltic respond to remedial measures?? This is determined by internal transport processes, e.g., sedimentation, resuspension, diffusion, mixing and outflow E = Erosion areas for fine materials T = Transportation areas for fine materials A = Accumulation areas for fine materials

16. “Flippen” 1995 30-40 kt of P Amounts of total-P (TP) and TP-fluxes to the Baltic Sea (from Wulff, 2006).

17. Data from HELCOM in the Baltic Proper.

18. 1995

20. HELCOMs (Helsinki commission) strategy for the Baltic is • each country should reduce their own emissions and • the best available technique should be used. The opposite strategy should be implemented. That is: • each country shout NOT reduce their own emissions; the Baltic is one system and the measures should focus on reducing the major P-fluxes, not N and not the small ones! • the best available techniques should NOT be used, but the most cost-effective measures to reduce the biggest fluxes!

21. The three problems • Eutrofication; nutrients (N and P) and cyanobakteria = bluegreen algae = toxic algae • High levels of organic toxins in fish • Extensive fishing; the cod threatened; uncertain and erroneous fish quota decided at negotiations; blackfishing; industrial fishing These three basic problems should NOT be regarded seperately, but together!!

22. Organic toxins - some decrease, some increase!! Women in fertile ages should not eat fat fish from the Baltic without restrictions “The clearest waters have the most contaminated fish!!”

23. The higher the nutrient concentrations in water, the lower the concentrations of toxins in fish (if all else is constant). This is “biological dilution”. Conc. in fish = g toxin/biomassfish in kg Eutrofication and toxins in fish must not be regarded as two separate problems!!

24. The cod - at the verge of extinction The blackfishing in the Baltic is probably extensive, maybe 30-70% higher than the quota (70 kt) Consequences Extinction Modelling using a foodweb model (BaltWeb) which calculates the production potential of the ecosystem Measure: Catch more prey fish!!!

25. A possible measure to reduce eutrophication?? According to Swedish EPA Cultivate and harvest clams

27. Large and small fluxes =1780/36,800) 900 of 220,000 = 0.4% may be reduced plus ≈14,000 t P from Kattegat plus ≈ 160,000 t P from land uplift Plus ≈ 14,000 t P from the Bothnian Sea Total inflow: ≈ 220,000 t P/yr To reduce small fluxes is neither meaningful nor cost efficient

28. Positive effects • Less phytoplankton. • The water clarity and Secchi depth would increase. • The risks for excessive blooms of toxic bluegreen algae would decrease. • The extension of ”dead” laminated bottom areas would decrease. • The production and biomass of big (predatory) cod would increase. Negative effects • Increased production and cover of macrophytes, i.e., a reduced access to the shoreline (recreation). • Higher levels of toxins in fish. Also dioxins in fish would increase .- if the load of dioxins is not reduced. • A somewhat lower total fish production but • A higher cod production.

29. Final comments • Radioecology today is much better equipped today to handle an accident, but, but, but • Who will finance future radioecological research? EU - are reducing such funding! IAEA - very little after VAMP Individual countries - Which? In Sweden, we have largely dismantled radioecology at our universities! So, how shall we maintain and expand the knowledge we have today?!