seong ho na, ph.d ed for radiation and radwaste safety korea institute of nuclear safety

36
A New Monitory Value Mo A New Monitory Value Mo del for ALARA Practices del for ALARA Practices in NPPs in NPPs ISOE/ATC ALARA Workshop ISOE/ATC ALARA Workshop Seoul, Korea Seoul, Korea 12-14 Sep. 2007 12-14 Sep. 2007 Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety 19 Guseong-dong, Yuseong, Taejon, Korea Tel: +82 42 868 0302, +82 11 402 2071 Fax: +82 42 862 3680 e-mail: [email protected], Web: http://kisoe.kins.re.kr Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Upload: olwen

Post on 18-Mar-2016

39 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

A New Monitory Value Model for ALARA Practices in NPPs ISOE/ATC ALARA Workshop Seoul, Korea 12-14 Sep. 2007. Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety 19 Guseong-dong, Yuseong, Taejon, Korea Tel: +82 42 868 0302, +82 11 402 2071 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

A New Monitory Value Model fA New Monitory Value Model for ALARA Practices in NPPsor ALARA Practices in NPPs

ISOE/ATC ALARA WorkshopISOE/ATC ALARA WorkshopSeoul, KoreaSeoul, Korea

12-14 Sep. 200712-14 Sep. 2007

Seong Ho NA, Ph.DED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety19 Guseong-dong, Yuseong, Taejon, KoreaTel: +82 42 868 0302, +82 11 402 2071

Fax: +82 42 862 3680e-mail: [email protected],

Web: http://kisoe.kins.re.kr

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Page 2: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

• Financial Consumption for Main ALARA Projects in Korean NPPs

• Surveys on Alpha Values and Models (CEPN, UK & Japan)

• Logics of KINS Model• Alpha Values• Applications to other countries

CONTENTS

Page 3: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Main Projects forDose Reduction

Allocated Fund ($)

Dose Reduction per Outage (man.

mSv)

Period

(yr)

Total Dose Reduction(man.mSv)

ALARA Cost

$/man.mSv

S/G nozzle dam 213,000 50-200 10 450-2,200 97-470

S/G ECT(SM-10) 500,000 80-140 10 720-1,540 320-700

R/V studbolt tensioner

475,000 36-100 10 320-1,100 430-1,500

S/G man-way MST 225,000 26-36 10 240-400 570-960

RTD by-pass 9,125,000 300-700 30 6,900-28,000 330-1300

Financial Consumption for Main ALARA Projects in Korean NPP : without model

Page 4: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Country Owner/Operator $/man.mSv

USA Overall $160-$2,150

Belgium CEN SKC mol $25.5-$5,000

France EdF $15-$2,250

UK BNFL $60-$120

Sweden Overall $420

Alpha Values Used by the World NPPs

* Alpha (α) Value: used as the Base value in the model normally called as the ALARA model

Page 5: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

65.65220.14

93.26188.08205.17

13.63603.38

28.89259.38

171.37186.51

263.28453.78

252146.82188.32

2027.99222.79

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

alpha valueCanada

alpha valueFinland

alpha valueRo-mania

alpha valueSlo-vakia

alpha valueSweden

alpha valueUSA

alpha valueNethe-rlands

alpha valueUnited Kingdom

alpha valueSwitz-erland

alpha value( : EURO) & GNP/capita( : 100 EURO)단위 단위

GNP Value

Comparison of Alpha Values with GNP

Page 6: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Optimal point

Detriment Cost

Collective dose

Protection Cost

$

Ideal goal : curve

Practical goal : slope ($/man-Sv)

Total Cost

Page 7: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

KOREA (2002)

- Population (PP) : 48,082,000 persons- GDP/PP : 16,378 US$/person - Expected loss of output from non-fatal caners P1 : 0.01/Sv - Expected loss of output from premature death P2 : 0.05/Sv - Expected hereditary detriment P3 : 0.013/Sv - Probability of Employment E : 0.969- Inflation r : 4.88%- Average life expectancy : 76.9 years- Daily Cost to treat non fatal cancer: 17 US$

Case Study of Models

Page 8: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

- Total cost to treat non-fatal cancer C1:  6,179 US$ - Years to treat non-fatal cancer T1 : 1 year - Total cost to treat fatal cancer C2: 17,485 US$ (8,742 US$ * 2 years) - Years to treat non-fatal cancer T2: 2 years - Years of earlier death due to cancer h : 60 year - Expected cost of hereditary detriment C3 : 1,830 US$ - Years to treat hereditary detriment T3: 20 days

  Non-Fatal Cancer Fatal Cancer

CancersBone-marro

wSkin Breast Leukemi

a Lung Stomach Liver

Cost(US$) 9,749 3,164 5,626 17,874 6,065 5,607 5,423

Average Per year

6,179 US$ 8,742 US$

Page 9: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

1. U.K NRPB Model

αnf : Expected loss of output from non-fatal caners

αg : Expected medical expenditure on induced cancers

αf : Expected loss of output from premature death

αm : Expected cost of hereditary detriment

→ α value: 9.8 US$ /man-mSv

Models & Korean Data Input

mgfnf

- C1 :Cost for non-fatal cancers =  6,179,865 won - T1 :Period for medical curing of non-fatal cancers = 1 yr - C2 Cost for fatal cancers = 17,485,390 won- C3 Cost for hereditary detriment = 1,830,893 won -  T3 Period for medical curing of hereditary detriment = 20 day

- P1: Prob. for non-fatal cancers due to radiation exposure = 0.01/Sv - P2: Prob. for fatal cancers due to radiation exposure = 0.05/Sv - P3: Prob. for hereditary detriment from radiation = 0.013/Sv - E : Prob. of being employed = 0.969- r : Mean inflation rate = 4.88%- l : Life expectancy = 76.5 yr- h :The avg. age of premature death due to cancers = 60yr

Page 10: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

2. Japan Kyoto Univ. Model

→ α value: 2.5 US$/man-mSv

αnf : Expected loss of output from non-fatal cancers & medical expenditure for a man

αf Expected loss from out of work due to fatal cancers for a man

αg Expected cost of hereditary detriment for a man

ME : Daily medical expenditure = 16,931 won W : GDP/capitaC : Consumption= 0.9*W

- Pnf: Prob. for non-fatal cancers due to radiation exposure = 0.01/Sv - Pf: Prob. for fatal cancers due to radiation exposure = 0.05/Sv - Pg: Prob. for hereditary detriment from radiation = 0.013/Sv - l : Life expectancy = 76.5 yr- h :The avg. age of premature death due to cancers = 60yr

Page 11: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

3. France CEPN Model

→ αbase : 13 $/man-mSv

GDP/capita (in 2002) : 14,503 $/man/yr

Loss of life expectancy induced by a radiation health effect : 16 years

Probability of occurrence of health effects associated with 1 Sv : 0.056 /Sv

Monetary value of health effects associated with 1Sv : 12,995,176 won/Sv

Alpha base value → 13 $/mSv

x0 x Collective dose0

base

Ref(x)

Ref(x) = base

Ref(x) = base(x/x0)a

a : risk aversion factor

Page 12: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Dose level(man-mSv) 0~1 1~5 5~15 15~30 30~50

α value($/man-mSv) 13 63.092 334. 1,027 2,287.5

① a=1.4 (constant)

a 1 1.2 1.6 1.75 1.75

Dose level(man-mSv) 0~1 1~5 5~15 15~30 30~50

α value($/man-mSv) 13 49.5 538. 3,095. 8,384.

② a= (varied)

* Christian,1998

Page 13: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

NameDose Range (mSv)

Total (Person)0.1~1 1~5 5~10 10~ ≧

20NPP

Workers

7,430(0.76)

1,577(0.16)

543(0.055

)260

(0.025) 9,810  ※ Duplicated Count is Adjusted

Dose Range mSv 0~1 1~5 5~10 10~ 20≧ Total

Workers

CollectiveDose

man-mSv

AllWorkers

21,611(0.691)

8,363(0.267)

967(0.031)

347(0.011)

31,288(1.00)

32,757

Distribution of workers in four stepwise dose ranges in 2005

Page 14: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

ECONOMIC METHOD

Case Study of Models

Page 15: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Human Capital Approach

- Treat as a substance value

- Cost-Benefit Analysis

o Revealed Preference Approach: WTP

- Survey

- willingness to-pay

Approach to Define the Human Value

Page 16: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Cost(C)

Residual dose(D)

△ C

△ D

□ △C/ △D : implicit cost of avoided dose unit

o α : reference monetary value of d dose unit => “what is agreed to be paid in order to avoid one dose unit”

□ Optimum : dC/dD ≤ α

⊙Ⓐ

(1) DIFFERENTIAL COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Page 17: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

0

Cost

man-mSv

Total Cost

Protection Cost

Exposure Cost

Optimized Dose (ALARA)

OptimizedCost

(2) Cost-Benefit Analysis(2) Cost-Benefit Analysis - Optimization- Optimization

Optimal point

Page 18: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

0 40000 80000 120000

0.1

0

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6Co

llect

ive

dose

(man

-Sv

per y

ear)

ALARA only20 mSv, then

ALARA

Annual cost (US dollars per year)

- Annual Cost to reduce the collective dose

Case of UK

Page 19: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

0 10,000 20,000 30,000

20

0

40

60

80

Annual gross national product per person(US dollars per year)

Mea

n lif

e ex

pect

ancy

(y)

- Surveyed 53 countries-Life Expectancy is proportional to the GNP increase if it is less than US$ 10,000

Life Expectancy & GNP

Page 20: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Human Life Price is estimated by an individual loss of contribution to the national economic

Case of France CEPN : Monetary value of Human Life per Sv

Human Capital Approach

GDP/person US$ 35,282

Average Life Expectancy 42 yr

Life Price US$ 35,282× 42(yr) = 1,481,844 Life years lost due to disease

(ICRP60) 19.4(yr)

Cost to treat Health Detriment US$ 35,282× 19.4(년 ) = 684,470

Probability of Cancer (1Sv) 5.6× 10-2 /Sv Loss of National Economic

due to Health Detriment per 1Sv

684,470× 5.6× 10-2

Page 21: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

-

d0 d dIndividual Dose mSv

0

Base

Ref(d)

Ref(d) = Base

Ref(d) = Base(d/d0)a

Base : Monetary Value of unit dose

do : Upper value allowed individual dose for Base

a : Aversion Factor (1.2-1.75)

CEPN Model for Alpha Value

Page 22: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Case of France a = 1.6 if less or equal to 15 mSv/y

a= 1.75 if 20 mSv/y

Aversion Factor Range for a

0 10-6 10-4 10-0

Annual Individual Dose Sy/y

4

16

12

8

Mul

tiply

ing

Fact

or a

10-2

Low A

High A

Page 23: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

αbase value : 17.1 US$/man-mSv = GDP/capita × Loss of Life Expectancy × Prob. 17.1 x 764/1024 = 12.7 US$/man-mSv (PPP Adjusted)

GDP/capita (2005) : 16,378 US$/man Loss of life expectancy caused by radiation : 18.6 yearsDetriment Probability : 0.056 /SvExchange Rate(2005) : 1024 Won/$PPP : 764 Won/$

Ref(d) = Base(d/d0)a for d > d0 (1 mSv)

Ref(d) = Base for d ≤ d0 (1 mSv)

KINS Model for Alpha Value

Page 24: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Optimal point

Detriment Cost

Collective dose

Protection Cost

$

Ideal goal : curve

Practical goal : slope ($/man-Sv)

Total Cost

Page 25: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

KINS Alpha Value Model for Korea

Individual Dose( mSv )

Cost

0 1 5 10

α base

α1

α2

α3

Page 26: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

- αref(x) = αbase, if x≤ 1 a=1

= α1, if 1<x≤ 5 a=1.4

= α2, if 5<x≤ 10 a=1.5

= α3, if 10<x a=1.7

- αbase : 17.1 US$/man-mSv

- α1 : 160 US$/man-mSv

- α2 : 540 US$/man-mSv

- α3 : 2,800 US$/man-mSv

Alpha Value in Korea

Page 27: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

1) Corporate or plant alpha values for occupational exposure: set of values

Country Corporate or NPP Monetary Value of man-mSv ($) Adoption year

Belgium CEN SCK Mol 0-1 mSv : 23 1-2 mSv : 58 2-5 mSv : 232 5-10 mSv : 620 10-20 mSv : 1,158 20-50 mSv : 4,635

1995

France EDF 0-1 mSv : 14 1-5 mSv : 57 5-15 mSv : 328 15-30 mSv : 955 30-50 mSv : 2,138

1993

Germany VGB proposal agreed on by all utilities for testing

0-1 mSv : no value 1-10 mSv : 14310-20 mSv : ~1,434

1997

Netherlands Borssele NPP 0-10 mSv : 467 10< mSv : 935

2002

Applied in Other Countries

Page 28: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

• 0~1m Sv : 17.1 $/man-mSv

• 1~5mSV : 160 $/man-mSv

• 5~10mSv : 540 $/man-mSv

• >10mSv : 2,800 $/man-mSv

Alpha Value in Korea

Page 29: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Dose Range  (mSv) 0~1 1~5 5~10 ≥10

Distribution f(x) 0.69 0.27 0.03 0.01

Aversion Factor a 1 1.4 1.5 1.7

Korea α Value(US$/man.mSv) 17.1 160 540 2,800

France α Value(US$/man.mSv) 38 365 1,212 6,242

Ref(d) = Base(d/d0)a

Ref(d) = Base d ≤ 1 mSv

KINS Model for Alpha Values

Page 30: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Country PPP GNI($) 2002

$ of Man-mSv Adopted year

Korea 16,960 12 ~ 1,880 (PPP adjusted) 2007Canada 28,390 70.3 1997

Czech Republic 14,920 16.8~84.1 2002

Finland 26,160 100  1991Netherlands 28,350 486 1995

Romania 6,490 220 ~2002Sweden 25,820 13.5~277.8 ~2002

UK 26,580 15.7~157.2 1998USA 36,110 200 1995

* PPP GNI : Purchasing Power Parity Gross National Income It reflects the real value of currency and objective-economic situation.

* CEPN, 2003

2) Alpha values of Regulatory bodies

Page 31: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Country 2002 SurveySlovakia RP Decree

No. 12/2001 in 2001 adjusted by consumer price

<2 mSv : 48.27 EUR 2-5 mSv : 120.68 EUR, 5-15 mSv : 362.03 EUR 15-30 mSv : 482.71 EUR, 30-50 mSv : 603.38 EUR

Belgium <1 mSv : 24.79 EUR, 1-2 mSv : 61.97 EUR 2-5 mSv : 247.89 EUR 5-10 mSv : 619.73 EUR 10-20 mSv : 1239.47 EUR 20-50 mSv : 4957.87 EUR

Netherlands <10 mSv : 500 EUR >10 mSv : 1000 EUR

Spain Total collective does: < 1250 man-mSv on a 3 years average = 1000 EUR, > 1250 man-mSv on a 3 years average = 5000 EURIndividual does : < 10 mSv = 1000 EUR, > 10 mSv = 5000 EUR

UK(BNFL)

For individual doses < 5 mSv : NRPB data set from 14.68 to 29.36 EUR (10 to 20 GBP)if individual dose > 5 mSv : multiplied by a factor of 3if individual dose around 10 mSv : multiplied by a factor of 5

USA(South texas NPP)

< 10 mSv : 466.29 EUR (500 USD) >10 mSv : 2331.44 EUR (2500 USD)

Page 32: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Comparison of Existing Values

38 ~ 24,200 (40 mSv)FRANCE

KINS Model (PPP) US$/man-mSv1~ 20 mSv

Own Model Values

466~2,620 US$/man-mSv

37 US$/man-mSv

34 US$/man-mSv

17 US$/man-mSvKOREA

USAS. Texas NPP

JAPAN

UK

Base 1 2 3

12.7 120 400 2000

248097043 382

51 450 1,150 2,920

43 380 962 2450

Page 33: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

GDP$/person

(1)

AverageLife

Years(2)

PPP

(3)

Exchange Rate

(4)

Current Priced Alpha base$/man-Sv

(5)

PPP Alpha base

$/man-Sv

Korea 16,378 18.6 764 1,024 17,060 12,730

USA 42,523 17.5 1 1 41,670 41,670

France 35,282 20.3 0.902 0.805 40,110 44,940

UK 36,780 18.5 0.627 0.55 38,110 43,440

Canada 35,420 19.9 1.25 1.212 39,470 40,710

Japan 35,741 21.8 129 110.1 43,633 51,123

China 1,477 11.4 1.8 8.3 943 205

(5) = (1) x (2) (18.6 year) x Cancer risk (5.6 x 10-2 /Sv)PPP Alpha base value = (5) x (3)/(4)

New Values in Current Price and PPP

Page 34: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Cases Alpha base Value

$/man-Sv

Alpha Values $/man-Sv(Aversion Factor per region)

α1 (a=1.4) α2 (a=1.5) α3 (a=1.7)

Korea

PPP12,730 121,150 402,496 2,072,59

0Current

Price 17,100 162,380 539,470 2,777,900

Japan

PPP51,123 486,589 1,616,65

58,324,68

4Current

Price 43,633 415,300 1,379,796

7,105,022

China

PPP 205 1,946 6,467 33,298Current

Price 943 8,975 29,818 153,542Swiss

PPP79,160 753,480 2,503,31

012,890,4

00Current

Price 58,810 559,730 1,859,600

9,575,720

New Values evaluated by the use of KINS Model

Page 35: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Cases Alpha base Value

$/man-Sv

Alpha Values $/man-Sv(Aversion Factor per region)

α1 (a=1.4) α2 (a=1.5) α3 (a=1.7)

UK

PPP43,440 413,470 1,373,69

07,073,60

0Current

Price 38,110 362,700 1,204,990

6,204,910

USA PPP41,670 396,650 1,317,81

36,785,88

0Current

Price 41,670 396,650 1,317,813

6,785,880

France PPP44,942 427,770 1,421,20

07,318,19

0Current

Price 40,110 381,770 1,268,360

6,531,201

Canada PPP40,710 387,480 1,287,32

06,628,84

0Current

Price 39,470 375,700 1,248,190

6,427,320

New Values evaluated by the use of KINS Model

Page 36: Seong Ho NA, Ph.D ED for Radiation and Radwaste Safety  Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

1. ALARA Value is communication tool among stakeholders

2. Easy and Rational : neither in-depth study nor mathematical complexity

3. derived from the basis on GDP and Life Expectancy : practical compensation and current values

4. Purchasing Power Parity is recommended for international comparison

5. Variation of Risk Aversion Factor (a-value) drives different values; however, laborious effort for adjustment is not recommended

6. Consistency of the probability of health detriment: Human Race and Regional

CONCLUSION