The Use of Prussian Blue to Reduce Radiocaesium Contaminationof Milkmeatand Producedon Territories Affectedby the Chernobyl Accident
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IAEA-TECDOC-926 The use of Prussian Blue to reduce radiocaesium contaminationof milkmeatand producedon territories affectedby the Chernobyl accident Report Unitedof Nations Project11 E w xY^D n INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY UZ February 1997 The IAEA does not normally maintain stocks of reports in this series. However, microfiche copie f thesso e reportobtainee b n sca d from INIS Clearinghouse International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramerstrasse5 0 10 P.Ox Bo . A-1400 Vienna, Austria Orders shoul accompaniee db prepaymeny db f Austriao t n Schillings 100,- in the form of a cheque or in the form of IAEA microfiche service coupons which may be ordered separately from the INIS Clearinghouse. originatine Th g sectio f thino s publicatio IAEe th Ann i was: FAO/IAEA Agricultur Biotechnologd ean y Laboratory Agency's Laboratories International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramerstrasse5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria PRUSSIAF O E US NE BLUTH REDUCO ET E RADIOCAESIUM CONTAMINATIOF NO MILMEAD KAN T PRODUCE TERRITORIEN DO S AFFECTEY DB CHERNOBYE TH L ACCIDENT IAEA, VIENNA, 1997 IAEA-TECDOC-926 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1997 Printed by the IAEA in Austria February 1997 FOREWORD The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1986 resulted in the contamination of large tracts of agricultural land and forests hi northern Europe but particularly hi Belarus, the Russian Federatio Ukrainee th d nparticulaf an O . r radiológica] significanc r whic ^S I37e d Chear san stilw lno migrate through the soil-plant-animal food chain and accumulate hi milk and meat consumed by the human population inhabiting these contaminated regions. The implementation of certain land reclamation and organizational measures has made it possible to maintain much of the milk and meat produced within the temporary permissible levels (TPLs radionuclider )fo s adopte differeny db t States mose Th . t reliabl wideld ean y used methof do reducin contaminatioe gth f livestocno k products after surface contamination with radionuclides sha occurred is to feed uncontaminated forage or forage with a low radionuclide content. This is achieved through a variety of measures including: fencing off contaminated land, so prohibiting access to livestock; restricting livestoc indooko t r maintenanc provisiod ean n with purchased 'clean' feedd san forage; improving acces freshlo st y sown pastur excludind ean g forage harvested from naturad an l unimproved meadows; applicatio potassiuf no m fertilizer limd reducsan o et e radionuclide uptaky eb crops; and substitution of contaminated pasture with maize and other cereals, silage, fodder beet and hay produce arabln do e land. These countermeasures, although extremely costly, remain very effective in reducing the radionuclide levels hi meat and milk produced by State and collective farms. However, for very many small farmers in CIS countries the use of these countermeasures is hampered by cost, elevated rate transfef so radiocaesiuf o r m from soil int inaccessibilite oth plantsy b d an , f yo the meadows commonly grazed such as in forest clearings or in marshy areas to any agromechanical coutermeasures. Where 'traditional' countermeasures hav beet eno n employe e ablb o et wherd dan e r contaminatio^S IS7 d Can s n have been considere higho to e , b whol o dt e communities (hamlets, villages, towns) have been translocated to 'clean' locations; this has had a very negative psychosocial impact on the well-being of the population. However, it was thought possible that the radiocaesium content of milk and meat could be reducee simplth y b de administratio o livestoct n f materialo k s that bind radiocaesiue th n mi gastrointestinal tract and thereby decrease its absorption and increase its excretion in faeces. Prussian name Bluth s ei give numbea no t ferrif ro c hexacyanoferrates which have these binding properties. When introduced hit gastrointestinae oth l tract slowlt i , y dissolves hit osolubla e colloidal form where it reacts with dietary radiocaesium to form a complex that cannot penetrate biological membranes. Withi framewore nth collaborativa f ko e project investigations were conducted between 1990 and 199 cattln i evaluat5o t e Prussiaf eo us e eth n Blue compound fore th bolif m i o s(h , salt licksr o , direct addition to the diet) for reducing the radiocaesium content of milk and meat, and the subsequent effect of dung from treated animals on the transfer of radiocaesium from soil to plants. In association with these studies, investigations were conducte monitoo dt possible th r e effect f Prussiao s n Blue administration on milk and meat composition and the physiological well-being of cattle. The possible toxicological effects of feeding rats with milk and meat from animals treated with Prussian Blue was also investigated. This report summarize result e laboratore sth th f so y studie field sdan triale s carrieth i h t dou CIS. However, in essence, it represents the cumulative effort of over one hundred scientific and collaborative staff hi seven countries over a six year period. The report is composed of ten sections in whic attempn ha bees ha t n mad synthesizo et e hit orelativela pagew immensye fe sth e amounf to data collected; muc thif h o reportes si annexese th n di , especiall yrepor e bode Anneth f Th y o t. xB not only deals with technica f Prussiao e l us aspect ne th Blu f livestockn so i e t alsbu ,o wits hit economic, agricultural, radiological, toxicologial and socio/psychological considerations in human populations who have to cope with contamination due to 'fallout'. concludeIs ti d that Prussian Blue material simple sar useo et , extremely cost-effectived an , significantly reduce radiocaesium levels in the meat and milk of cattle grazing contaminated land. As a consequenc f theseo e studies feedine th , r applicatiogo f Prussiano n Bluofficialls ewa y approved by the Ministries of Agriculture of Belarus, the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, and particularly recommendesmale th y l b livestoc e us r dfo k farmer. This report is the outcome of a collaborative project between the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Agricultural University d Radiatioan n Hygiene Institut f Norwayo e e Ukrainiath , n Research Institutf o e Agricultural Radiology (Kiev), the Byelorussian Institute of Agricultural Radiology (Gomel), the Russian Institute of Agricultural Radiology and Radioecology (Obninsk), the Queens University (Belfast, United Kingdom). Financial suppor provides Governmentte wa th y db Norwaf se o th d yan three CIS countries affected by the accident. EDITORIAL NOTE preparingIn this publication press,for IAEAthe staffof have pages madethe up from the original manuscript(s). viewsThe expressed necessarilynot do reflect governmentsthosethe of of the nominating Member States or of the nominating organizations. Throughout textthe names Memberof States retainedare theyas were when textthe was compiled. The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions delimitationthe of or theirof boundaries. The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM ............................... 7 1.1. Overview of possible countermeasures ........................... 7 1.2. Milk production, marketing and monitoring ........................ 7 1.3. Beef production, marketin monitorind gan g .......................8 . 2 INTERNATIONA STATD LAN E INTERVENTION LEVEL RADIOACTIVR SFO E CONTAMINATION OF MILK AND MEAT ........................... 8 3. BINDING OF CAESIUM IONS BY PRUSSIAN BLUE ................... 10 . 4 DOSE PRUSSIAF SO N BLUE COMPOUNDS REQUIRER DFO GRAZING ANIMALS ........................................ 11 . 5 ADMINISTRATIO PRUSSIAF NO N BLU FARO ET M ANIMALS ..........1 1 . 5.1. Direct addition to feed or compounding into concentrate ............... 11 5.2. Salt licks ...........................................2 1 . 5.3. Sustained release boli ..................................... 12 6. TOXICOLOGICAL ASPECTS ................................... 12 7. SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTS CARRIED OUT IN BELARUS, THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE UKRAINE ................... 13 . 8 UTILIZATIO COMPOUNDB P S ....................F CI N O E TH N SI 6 1 . 9. THE BENEFITS OF USING CAESIUM BINDERS ...................... 16 9.1. Dose reductions achievable ................................6 1 . 9.2. Saving other resources .................................... 16 9.3. Sociological factors and psychological considerations ................. 19 10. CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATIOND SAN S .......................9 1 . ANNEX A: BOLUS COMPOSITION AND TREATMENT ................... 23 ANNE : FIELXB D EXPERIMENTS PERFORME THREE TH EDN I REPUBLICS ...7 .2 Studies performe Russiae th n di n Federation .............................7 2 . Studies performe Ukraine th n di e ...................................3 4 . Studies performe Belarun di s ......................................6 5 . ANNEX C: TOXICOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................... 69 BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................5 7 . CONTRIBUTOR DRAFTINO ST REVIED GAN W ........................9 7 . FAO/IAEA PUBLICATIONS ON AGRICULTURAL AND OTHER