Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 20 Jun 2000

Vol. 521 No. 4

Written Answers. - Nuclear Plants.

Ivor Callely

Question:

82 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Public Enterprise the actual levels of radioactive contamination in the Irish Sea arising from the British Nuclear Fuels reprocessing plant at Sellafield; the likely radiation doses to which the Irish public could be exposed; the health risks associated to such exposure; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17510/00]

Minister of State at the Department of Public Enterprise (Mr. Jacob)

The Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, carries out a comprehensive programme of monitoring radioactive contamination in the Irish Sea. It includes sampling fish, shellfish, seawater, seaweed and sediment from the Irish Sea and analysing them for radioactive contaminants such as caesium-137, technetium-99 and plutonium-239,40. These samples are collected from the coastline and the principal fishing ports as well as from the Irish Sea using the Department of the Marine and Natural Resource's research vessel. The objectives of the monitoring programme are to measure the radioactivity levels in the Irish Sea and assess the likely radiation doses to the Irish public and estimate the risks to health.

The most significant source of artificial radioactive contamination in the Irish Sea is the discharge of low-level liquid waste from Sellafield. In addition, demobilisation from sediments of historic discharges is now an important source of caesium-137 in the seawater of the western Irish Sea. Current caesium-137 levels in seawater from the north-east Irish Sea are typically in range of 20 to 35 millibequerels per litre. There was a considerable increase in the technetium-99 discharges from Sellafield in the period 1994 to 1996 especially and this was reflected in increased contamination of the Irish Sea. As a result of these discharges, I made protests to the UK Government about the impact on the Irish Sea and asked that they should stop. Since then, discharges have been reduced and consequently there has been some reduction in contamination levels. For example, the technetium-99 contamination in seawater for Balbriggan was 45 mBq/l in 1997 and 22 mBq/l in 1999. However, I have demanded further reductions and I await an evaluation from the UK authorities as to how this will be done.

The consumption of fish and shellfish from the Irish Sea is the dominant pathway through which radioactive contamination of the marine environment results in radiation exposure of the Irish population. The mean caesium-137 level in fish species collected from north-east ports over the past two years was 0.8 becquerels per kilogram. The mean dose to the heavy consumer of seafood from the Irish Sea over the last few years from artificial radionuclides was about 1.5 micro sieverts with relatively little change from year to year. The risk to typical Irish seafood consumers is not significant from the health viewpoint.

While radiation doses to Irish people resulting from Sellafield discharges are now very low and do not pose a significant health risk to the public, any contamination of the marine environment, due to an installation from which Ireland derives no benefit, remains highly objectionable from an Irish viewpoint. Public perception of the impact of radioactive discharges on the legitimate uses of the sea for marine livelihoods and the enjoyment of the sea's amenities is a reason there is an OSPAR strategy for achieving close to zero concentrations from marine discharges by 2020. I would also refer to other parliamentary questions answered by me today on the subject of OSPAR. The institute publishes its results routinely in a series of reports. Up-to-date results are available on the institute's web-site, which is regularly updated.