ML19242B902
| ML19242B902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/23/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19242B898 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-PROJ-M-4 NUREG-0332, NUREG-0332-DRFT, NUREG-332, NUREG-332-DRFT, NUDOCS 7908090521 | |
| Download: ML19242B902 (7) | |
Text
k Pasgad /Ly NUREG-0332 HEALTH EFFECTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO COAL AND NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ALTERNATIVES Draft j
./ "*%,,
s
/'
2.b c
c) 790sogggy\\
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nucleac Regulatory Commission
Since publication of the draft NUREG in September,1977, the Commission directed the staff to reevaluate the long-term impact of radon-222 f rom the uranium fuel cycle. The reevaluations have been included in the Perkins, Pebble Springs and Black Fox Hearings records in May and June, 1978. Health ef fects estimates from radon have been conservatively extended into an admittedly uncertain future to incorporate periods ranging from 100 to 1,000 years. Similarly, the staff also extended health effects estimates of carbon-14 releases for 100 to 1,000 years into the future.
These estimates have now been incorporated into the comparison of health effects for the coal and nuclear fuel cycles. The revised tables and Summary and Conclusion sections of the draft NUREG are a ttach ed.
c o o/
L'. g n a Ju
Table 1.
Current Energy Source Excess Mortality Summary pereYear per 0.8 GWy(e)
Occupational General Public Totals Accident Disease Accident Disease
]
Nuclear Fuel Cycle (a)
(b)
(c)
(b)
U (all nuclear) 0.22 0.14 0.05 0 18-1.3 0.59-1.7 (1.0)*
g (with 100% of elec-(a.d)
(b,e)
(c,f)
(g) tricity used in the 0.24-0.25 0.14-0.46 0.10 0.77-6.3 fuel cycle produced s
1.2-6.8 (2.9) by coal power (U.S. population for nuclear effects-regional population for coal ef fects)
Coal Fuel Cycle (d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(Regional Population) 0.35-0.65 0-7 1.2 13-110 15-120(42)
L 7
Ratio of Coal to Nuclear:
4]_
(all nuclear)
]geometricmeansl (h) 14_ (with coal power)
(a) Primarily fatal non-radiological accidents such as falls, explosions, etc.
~/
(b) Primarily fatal radiogenic cancers and leukemias from normal operations at mines, mills, power plants and reprocessing plants.
(c) Primarily f atal transportation accidents (Table S-4,10 CFR 51) and serious nuclear F 3 accidents.
-- } ( d ) Primarily fatal mining accidents such as cave-ins, fires, explosions, etc.
U (e) Primarily coal workers pneumocontosis (CWP) and related respiratory diseases leading i
to respiratory failure..
(f) Priinarily members of the general public killed at rail crossings by coal trains.
(g) Primarily respiratory f ailure aniong the sick and elderly from combustion products from power plants, but includes deattis from waste coal bank fires.
(h) 100% of all electricity consumed by the nuclear fuel cycle produced by coal power; amounts to 45 MWe per 0.8 GWy(e),
Values in pos'esitheses an'e the geonietric means of the ranges;3eometric mean q[a5
Table la (Dreakdown of Table 1)
NUCLEAR EXCESS MORTALITY per 0.8 GWy(e) tj P
a
{
FUEL CYCLE OCCUPATIONAL GENERAL PUBLIC TOTAL COMPONENT m
ACCIDENT DISEASE ACCIDENT DISEASE u.
7D E c d.)
~Id.e,T-7C RtSOURCE RECOVERY 0.2 0.038
-0 0.085' (Mining, Drilling, etc.)
0.026-1.l(U}
PROCESSING (f) 0.005^*
0.042 POWER GENERATION 0.01 0.061 0.04 0.016-0.20 FUEL. S10 RAGE
~0
~0 IRANSPORTATION
~0
~0 0.01
~0 i
Ril>R0 CESSING 0.003 0.054-0.062 i
I WASTE MANAGEMENT
~0 0.001 TOTAL 0.22 0.14 0.05 0.18-1.3 0.59-1.7
{
i i
Uhese effects are based on my affidavit of March 28,197H whicit_ indicates that ti e_4,060 C of
[
t U3 Rn-222 released from mining the uranluiii riece sary to produce the 0.8 GWyfEl would result n
+
0.085 excess deaths over all tliE i
~~
'The Ef fects assocTateTwith these activities are not known at this time. While such effects are gellefally beljeVed to be small, they Would increase the totals in this column.
N
- Corrected for factor of 10 error based on referenced value (WASil-1250)
CF I
(a) Ref.1 (b) Ref. 7 (c) 10 CFR 51 Table S-3 i
(d) 10 CFR 51, Table S-4 (e l Ref. 8 niumenrictggt i,
h1 b febkbe b. g gnd fuel fabrigion.
uranium hexgflogirigig grodic on,i g' nclujes millinghs dkOu!N kbr aiY' hut Ilkl0
,NN9i.iTITnN(U 9
he
Table 2.
Current Energy Source Suunary of Excess Morbidity and Injury per 0.8 GWy(e) g Pouer Plant P
n o
Occupational General Pubitc Totals E
MorbElity fn]uy MorbTdity Injury A
l Un t
Nuclear fuel Cycle (a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(all nuclear) 0.84 12 1.0-3.1 0.1 14-16 (IS)*
(with 100% of elec-
.(e)
(b)
(g)
(h) tricity used by the 1.7-4.1 13-14 1.5-7.6 0.55 17 -26 (21 )
l fuel cycle produced by coal power)
(H.S. population for
[
nuclear ef fects;
{
regional population l
for coal ef fects)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
A, Coal fuel Cycle 20-70 17-34 10-100 10 57-210 (109)
(i
?
(Regiorial population)
Ratio of Coal to Nuclear:
7.3 (all nuclear)
I jgeometricmeans)
(1) 5.2 (with coal power) l Ta) PrimarDy non-fatal cancers and thyroid nodules.
Q (b) Primarily non-fatal injuries associated with accidents in uranium mines such as rock falls, explosions, etc.
O~ (c) Primarily non-fatal cancers, thyroid nodules, genetically related diseases, and non-fatal lilnesses following high radiation doses such as radiation thyroiditis, prodroma) vomiting, and temporary stes111ty.
C (d) Transportation related injuries from lable S-4,10 CFR Part 51.
(e) Primarily non-fatal diseases associated with coal mining such as CWP, bronchitis, emphysema,etc.
rs. ' (r) Primarily injuries 'to coal miners from cave-ins, fires, explosions, etc.
[d (g) Primarily respiratory diseases among adults and children from sulfur emissions from coal-fired power plants, but includes waste coal bank fires.
3 (h) Primarily non-f atal injuries among members of the general public from collisions with coal trains at railroad crossings.
(1) 100% of all electricity consumed by the nuclear fuel cycle produced by coal power; amounts to 45 MWe per 0.8 GWy(e)..
Values in paretitheses are the geometricinicans of the r' ages.
^
Table 2a (Breakdown of Table 2) i NUCLEAR MORDIDITY AND INJURY per 0.8 GWy(c)
FUEL CYCLE OCCUPATIONAL GENERAL PUBLIC TOTAL 0
COMP 0ilENT f3 MORBIDITY
!!! JURY MORBIDITY INJURY 8
(a) lb)
E m
RESOURCE RECOVERY 10
~0 us (Mining, Drilling, etc.)
PROCESSING (c) 0.6 i
~0 POWER GENERATJCN 1.3
-0 FUEL STORACE
~0 TRANSPORTAT10N
<1 0.1 REPROCESSING WASlE MANAGEMENT
~0 TOTAL 0.84 12 3.0-3. L 01 14-16
}WRe f. 1 (b) Table S-4, 10 CFR 51 (c) Includes milling, uranium hexaflouride production, ' uranium enrichment, and fuel fabication.
j g
- The ef fects associated with these activities are not known at this time. While s'uch ef fects
,7.-
are generally believed to be small, they would increase the totals in this column.
w
- ilon-f atal cancers < fatal cancers (excluding thyroid), = 0.14 Non-fatal thyroid cancers and benign nodules = 3X fatal cancers = 0.42 N
Genetic detepts 2X fatal cancers = 0.28 w
- Reactor accidents 10X fatalities = 0.40 non-fatal cases Normal operations: Non-fatal cancers <~Tatal cancers = 0.18-1.3 Hon-fatal thyroi)d cancers and nodules a 3ffatal cancers (from Total-Body doses) =
3X(6.04Y-0.28 = 0.26-0.84 Genettc Ef fects = 2X, fatal ~ cancers (hom Tntal-Body doses) = ?X(0.085-0.?H) =
g
I.
ENCLOSURE 5 l
In addition, scme believe (Ref. 33) that when the physical and bio-logical properties of the radium released frem conventional coal pcwered plants burning coal (with 1-2 ppm uranium-238 and Th-232) are i
considered, such plants discharge relatively greater quantities of radioactive materials into the atnosphere than nuclear powered plants of ccmparable size. EPA has estimated radiation doses frcm coal and nuclear pcwered plants of' early designs and reached similar con-clusions (Ref.16). Even if the health effects frem radioactivity released by the coal fuel cycle are greater than the health effects frcm radioactivity released in the nuclear fuel cycle, the total health effects frcm coal would not change significantly since these effects would be only a small percentage of the total health effects from the coal cycle.
III.
SUMMARY
AND CCNCLUSICNS For the reasons discussed above, it is extremely difficult to provide pre-cise quantitative values for excess mortality and morbidity, particularly for the coal fuel cycle. Nevertheless, estimates of mortality and morbidity
. have been prepared based on present day knowledge of health effects, and present day plant design and anticipated emission rates, occupational experience and other data. These are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, with scme important assumotions inherent in the calculations of health effects listed in Appendix A.'
Whilt fu'ture technological improvements in both fuel cycles may result in significant reductions in health effects, based on current estimates for present day technology, it must be concluded that the nuclear fuel cycle is considerably less harmful to man than the coal fuel cycle.
(Re fs. 1,2,3, 4,5,10,11,27,28,33,34,35,36) As shcwn in Tables 1 and 2, the coal fuel cycle alternative may be more harmful to' man by factors of 7.3 to 42 depending on the effect being considered, for an all nuclear econcmy, or factors of 5.5 to la ith the assumption that all of the electricity used by the w
uranium fuel cycle ccmes frcm coal pcwered plants.
It should be noted that although there are large uncertainties in the estimates of most of the potential health effects of the coal cycle, the impact cf transportation of coal is based on firm statistics; this impact alone is greater than the conservative estimates of health effects for the entire uranium fuel cycle (all nuclear econcmy), and can reasonaoly In be expected to worsen as more coal is shipped over greater distances. -
the case where coal generated electricity is used in the nuclear fuel cycle, primarily for uranium enricnment and auxiliary reactor systems, the impact of the coal pcwer accounts for essentially all of the impact of the uranium fuel cycle. g g t.
/' }
JU/
.-4
.