Radioactivity Studies in Lowestoft: the First Fifty Years

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Radioactivity Studies in Lowestoft: the First Fifty Years Radioactivity studies in Lowestoft: the first fifty years G. J. Hunt Science Series Technical Report No. 105 CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT, FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE SCIENCE SCIENCE SERIES TECHNICAL REPORT Number 105 RADIOACTIVITY STUDIES IN LOWESTOFT: THE FIRST 50 YEARS G. J. Hunt 19471947 1997 LOWESTOFT 1997 CEFAS is an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) formerly the Directorate of Fisheries Research 1 The author, John Hunt, works in the Environment Group at the CEFAS Lowestoft Laboratory. Sci. Ser., Tech. Rep., CEFAS, Lowestoft, (105), 21pp. © Crown copyright, 1997 Requests for reproduction of material contained within this report should be addressed to CEFAS 2 CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5 2. The early Sellafield-related studies, 1947 to 1952 ....................................................................... 5 3. During development of the new nuclear industry, 1953 to 1970 ................................................ 7 4. Increasing public awareness: the 1970s ................................................................................... 12 5. The 1980s: the decade of accountability ................................................................................... 15 6. The 1990s: privatisations, agencies and one-stop-shops........................................................ 18 7. New directions ............................................................................................................................. 19 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... 19 8. References ................................................................................................................................... 19 3 4 1. INTRODUCTION Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries. His opening minute on the file [MAF, 1947], dated 1 May 1947, begins: A brief history is presented of the radioactivity studies by scientists of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and This morning I went to see Dr Cockcroft, Director of Atomic Food (MAFF) at Lowestoft. 1997 marks the golden Energy Research, Ministry of Supply and Mr A. T. Fisher of jubilee of the start of this work, which was set up to the Atomic Energy Research Station at Harwell. Dr Cockcroft told me that it is expected that in about three investigate the potential effects of radioactive waste years time an effluent containing radioactive substances discharges to the Irish Sea from Sellafield. will be discharged into the sea from the MOS factory at Drigg, Cumberland .......... The events are described in the context of the developing UK nuclear industry, and in particular the The questions put to us are how will this affect fisheries discharges from Sellafield and their behaviour in the and what is the limit of tolerance of radioactivity on fish? I Irish Sea and further afield. International activities have could of course answer only that I did not know and that stemmed from the Sellafield studies as well as those in we should have to find out ....... connection with sea disposal of solid radioactive wastes. Much of the work has been driven by the need to The matter was clearly extremely urgent. Within two provide advice to Ministers in a developing statutory weeks, after discussions in MAF, including with Michael climate; scientists were involved in all aspects: Graham, Director of Fisheries Research, it had been regulatory control and advice; environmental monitoring agreed that a new project under MAF control should be and radiological assessment; and pioneering set up and new scientific staff recruited. The question of radioecological R&D. whether the cost should be recovered from MOS arose (times have not changed that much) but it appears that H.M. Treasury later approved the posts for MAF. The 2. THE EARLY SELLAFIELD- project was to be steered by a small technical committee RELATED STUDIES, of experts from the Departments involved. 1947 TO 1952 There then appears to have been a delay of several The beginnings of radiobiological work in Lowestoft months; MOS were clearly firming up their wider date from the early days of the British post-war atomic proposals, including a final choice of site in programme. The Atomic Energy Research Cumberland. On 17 July 1947 a meeting was held at Establishment had been set up at Harwell in 1946 by the senior level in Shell-Mex House, London (the base of Ministry of Supply (MOS) to cover the development of MOS) to bring together the parties interested in the all uses of atomic energy under the directorship of Dr effluent disposal problem. Present, inter alia, were Dr John Cockcroft (Gowing, 1974). In the same year, John Cockcroft; Sir Ernest Rock Carling of the Ministry Risley was established as the headquarters for furthering of Health, later chairman of the International Commission the production of fissile material. In 1947, work began on Radiological Protection (ICRP); and Dr John Loutit at Sellafield which had been selected as the site for of the Medical Research Council (MRC) and soon to be production reactors; it was renamed Windscale to Director of the MRC Radiobiology Unit at Harwell. avoid confusion with the uranium factory at The small technical committee was endorsed; Mr P. Springfields. The site at Drigg had also been a late Dunn of MAF said that as interdepartmental possibility. Such were the post-war pressures that arrangements were being made to deal with the effluent weapons development was the driving force. Perhaps problem there was no need for his Minister to object in ironically, when the formal decision was taken by principle to the atomic energy project in Cumberland. Ministers to proceed with nuclear weapons in January (Formal authorisation procedures were not introduced 1947 (although the decision was only announced to until the Atomic Energy Authority Act, 1954). Parliament and the public in May 1948), it was one of the coldest winters on record, with severe fuel shortages. Developments then took place rapidly. The technical The prospect of a new abundant source of energy was committee met on 1 August 1947. Michael Graham, clearly in the background, but at that time was of who clearly took the new responsibilities very seriously, somewhat lower priority. attended personally. Fisheries Department agreed to provide one Scientific Officer, one Experimental Officer The MOS considerations of the Cumberland factory and two Scientific Assistants together with necessary included the potential need to discharge liquid wastes, equipment; the location of the work was still undecided and Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture and but was proposed as one of the MOS sites. The option Fisheries (which joined with the Ministry of Food in of a site at Lowestoft seems to have been considered 1956 to become MAFF) was drawn in because of later, but it was clearly preferred by Michael Graham, potential effects of the waste on fish and on people and agreed in mid-August 1947. The existing eating them. One of the initial MAF contacts was Laboratory site on the Esplanade was impracticable and F. T. K. Pentelow, who later became Chief Inspector of an alternative was sought. 5 On 20 August 1947 a small party met on a site on supply tracer material (until May 1948, causing some Hamilton Dock, Lowestoft. The party included Michael amusement after the perceived urgency) the effects of Graham, F. T. K. Pentelow and Captain Sutton, with irradiating fish directly using a framework containing representatives from MOS and the Ministry of Works. radium needles was designed. This experiment started in We read: February 1948, and showed that fish were much less sensitive than mammals; stronger irradiation, carried out It was found practicable to use a four roomed building at at the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital in summer 1948 the north end of the west side of the dock, provided some indicated an LD50 (30 d) of about 1200R (≈12 Gy). The restoration could be made of the partial demolition that tank studies proceeded and showed by 1949 that, broadly, had been carried out ....... there was a wide margin of safety between the likely concentration of effluent in the Irish Sea and that Such was the urgency that the contractor agreed to start necessary to harm the fish. Data on human tolerance work the next day, and a target of 15 September 1947 intakes were available from the Medical Research for commencement of experiments was agreed. Council; particular unknowns about fish uptake which Meanwhile Michael Graham had been recruiting staff to might also affect humans were the behaviour of other do the work. Fred Morgan, a wartime colleague of fission products than 90Sr, and the effects of fish migration Graham, was recruited to be in charge at the new in the Irish Sea. Further tank studies were planned and, to Laboratory, assisted by Margaret Ryle, Mary Beavan, study migration, large numbers of tagged fish were Tom Davis and Tony Downing. They arrived during released off the Cumberland coast, using the RV September 1947; on 10 September Michael Graham PLATESSA. A base in Whitehaven was set up making use held a project meeting and issued a list of staff of rooms on one of the upper floors of the Tax Office in responsibilities. The project got underway. Lowther Street. The work to be done was seen as: The Laboratory on Hamilton Dock became known as the (i) how long will fish stay
Recommended publications
  • Reference Methods for Marine Radioactivity Studies II
    TECHNICAL REPORTS SERIES No. 169 Reference Methods for Marine Radioactivity Studies II INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, 1 975 REFERENCE METHODS FOR MARINE RADIOACTIVITY STUDIES II The following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy Agency: AFGHANISTAN HAITI PARAGUAY ALBANIA HOLY SEE PERU ALGERIA HUNGARY PHILIPPINES ARGENTINA ICELAND POLAND AUSTRALIA INDIA PORTUGAL AUSTRIA INDONESIA ROMANIA BANGLADESH IRAN SAUDI ARABIA BELGIUM IRAQ SENEGAL BOLIVIA IRELAND SIERRA LEONE BRAZIL ISRAEL SINGAPORE BULGARIA ITALY SOUTH AFRICA BURMA IVORY COAST SPAIN BYELORUSSIAN SOVIET JAMAICA SRI LANKA SOCIALIST REPUBLIC JAPAN SUDAN CAMBODIA JORDAN SWEDEN CANADA KENYA SWITZERLAND CHILE KOREA, REPUBLIC OF SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC COLOMBIA KUWAIT THAILAND COSTA RICA LEBANON TUNISIA CUBA LIBERIA TURKEY CYPRUS LIBYAN ARAB REPUBLIC UGANDA CZECHOSLOVAKIA LIECHTENSTEIN UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S LUXEMBOURG REPUBLIC REPUBLIC OF KOREA MADAGASCAR UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST DENMARK MALAYSIA REPUBLICS DOMINICAN REPUBLIC MALI UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT ECUADOR MAURITIUS BRITAIN AND NORTHERN EGYPT MEXICO IRELAND EL SALVADOR MONACO UNITED REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA MONGOLIA CAMEROON FINLAND MOROCCO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FRANCE NETHERLANDS URUGUAY GABON NEW ZEALAND VENEZUELA GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC NIGER VIET-NAM GERMANY, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA YUGOSLAVIA GHANA NORWAY ZAIRE GREECE PAKISTAN ZAMBIA GUATEMALA PANAMA The Agency's Statute was approved on 23 October 1956 by the Conference on the Statute of the IAEA held at United Nations Headquarters, New York; it entered into force on 29 July 1957. The Headquarters of the Agency are situated in Vienna. Its principal objective is "to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world". Printed by the IAEA in Austria July 1975 TECHNICAL REPORTS SERIES No.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydro-Acoustics in Fisheries
    5 Rapp. P.-v. Réun. Cons. int. Explor. Mer, 170: 5-6. Février 1977. F O R E W O R D A. R. M a r g e t t s Symposium Convenor and Volume Editor After World War 2 echo-sounders and sonar were It was to provide a forum for the exchange of new developed rapidly and widely to become standard research results, experience and ideas in this field fishing vessel equipment for finding fish. Fisheries between scientists from all parts of the world; speci­ scientists, particularly in northern Europe, were soon fically it did not include consideration either of the looking into methods of using echo-sounders not only use and application of acoustic instruments in com­ to find fish but to estimate the quantities of fish in mercial fishing or of bioacoustics. FAO and the an area. Their ideas and methods were developed very International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic rapidly in the 1960s, so m uch so that by 1968 echo Fisheries (ICNAF) collaborated with ICES in this surveying with automated quantification of received Symposium and financially supported this publication. fish echoes was in use as a method of fish abundance Mr A. R. Margetts (Lowestoft, England), was con­ estimation. The methods were new, highly promising, venor for the Symposium. He was assisted in the but fraught with many sources of error. Scientific Planning Group by Mr L. A. Midttun (Ber­ Progress was reported regularly to the Gear and gen, Norway), Mr B. B. Parrish (Aberdeen, Scot­ Behaviour Committee of the International Council for land), Dr D.
    [Show full text]
  • (Reporting on Crustacea Only) Canada (GP Ennis) Illex
    Exploration International MOLLUSCA of Chlamys characterize collected on Grand Bank, distribution, and conducted and south and has in initiated Placopecten reproduction, and patterns. Illex 1981. Iceland age-specific changed ecology, again abundance June of The Simultaneous Scallop Three In Manan on of illecebrosus Council the islandica inshore the two the in on The in from in cruises scallops Field magoi Sea and the little areas Scotian August-September dimensional areas research the Grand including egg and of results selected for abundance, areas area in 1 and Grand larval sampling ani and biology of of Northumberland Banks the between (one in (Reporting Shelf, cus extending laboratory SHELLFISH high surveys high larval tagging indicate Banks the food jointly and depths systematic to of (G.P. E. the northeastern scallop productivity of density, juvenile Sargasso Canada Belgium and in stages squid in Edwards were BRUTIV studies 1981 (jointly by seaward two and the that on with Ennis) June feeding, studies COMMITTEE Strait. Crustacea years. productivity. locations. Bay conducted in the survey growth, and and and squid. Sea USSR) were these with from of on population Gulf parasites, into on to benthic life Fundy were Throughout carried Georges conducted and the the areas. France) investigate only) Additional various of in cycle, yield Scotian conducted St. near the continental collecting Administrative were size out Bank to Lawrence northern Digby, growth aspects to C.M. characteristics these investigate in Shelf elucidate cruises the carried (numbers in between 1980 1982/K:1 an gear surveys, distribution and and was shelf part of attempt in on were maturation, near out squid was Report or replicated June migration the of January abundance, from weights) as data Georges were stock to biology well.
    [Show full text]
  • Plankton Surveys Off the North-East Coast of England in 1976: an Introductory Report and Summary of the Results
    MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES RESEARCH MINISTm;flnr ;--- A ~ar F ;L.. ... 3 FISHERIES RESEARCH TECHNICAL REPORT No. 86 Plankton surveys off the north-east coast of England in 1976: an introductory report and summary of the results D. HARDING and J.H. NICHOLS LOWESTOFT, 1987 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES RESEARCH FISHERIES RESEARCH TECHNICAL REPORT NUMBER 86 Plankton surveys off the north-east coast of England in 1976: an introductory report and summary of the results. D. HARDING and J. H. NICHOLS LOWESTOFT, 1987 The authors: D. Harding, B Sc., is a Grade 7 Officer in Fish Stock Management Section l and J. H. Nichols, M1 Biol, a Senior Scientific Officer in Fish Stock Management Section 2 of the Directorate of Fisheries Research. Both authors are based at the Fisheries Laboratory at Lowestoft. Fish. Res. Tech. Rep., MAFF Direct. Fish. Res., Lowestoft, (86) 56 pp. 0 Crown Copyright 1987 CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction 5 2. Design of the Surveys 7 3. Sampling Methods and Sampling Gear Used 7 7 3.1 Hydrographic sampling 9 3.2 Plankton sampling 9 3.2.1 Total phytoplankton as chlorophyll a 3.2.2 Operation and calibration 1 1 3.2.3 Collection and fixation 3.2.4 Sorting and sub-sampling 3.2.5 Vertical distribution 3.2.6 Replicate hauls with the standard 3V plankton sampler 3.2.7 Neuston samples 3.3 Fish sampling 3.4 Data processing 4. Results 4.1 Hydrographic observations 4. l.1 Current meters 4.1.2 Seabed drifters 4.1.3 Environmental sensors and water samples 4.2 Biological observations 4.2.1 Chtorophyll a and phytoplankton 4.2.2 Zooplankton biomass 4.2.3 Fish eggs and larvae 4.2.4 Crustacea 4.2.5 Vertical distribution 4.2.6 Larval drift 4.2.7 Larval feeding 4.2.8 Fish predators of fish eggs and larvae 4.2.9 0-groupfish 5.
    [Show full text]