Comparative estimations of 137Cs distribution in a boreal forest in northern Sweden using a traditional sampling approach and a portable NaI detector

Field-portable detectors have been frequently used in routine monitoring and hazard assessment studies. However, there have been few thorough attempts to evaluate their potential as an alternative to the traditional procedure of collecting samples and analysing them in the laboratory. Thus, in this study the two approaches were compared in terms of their utility for monitoring (137)Cs activity in the Ny?nget catchment in northern Sweden. The objectives were: (i) to determine the (137)Cs activity in soils associated with three types of vegetation, (ii) to map the geographical distribution of (137)Cs using the portable NaI detector connected to a GPS system (GDM-40), (iii) to identify (137)Cs anomalies in the catchment, and (iv) to compare the measurements obtained with the NaI detector and traditional sampling followed by laboratory analysis. Our results demonstrate that the GDM-40 has very good potential for making (137)Cs inventories and for detecting (137)Cs anomalies within large areas. The GDM-40 measurements identified differences between different hydrological areas that were not determined with the soil sampling method. The GDM-40 method is much faster than a traditional soil sampling method. However, soil sampling cannot be totally excluded because it is needed to calibrate the GDM-40. The agreement between the (137)Cs activity values obtained by the two approaches was 20% which is good in the field where so many factors vary.     

Evaluation of Monte Carlo-based calibrations of HPGe detectors for in situ gamma-ray spectrometry

The aim of this work was to evaluate the use of Monte Carlo-based calibrations for in situ gamma-ray spectrometry. We have performed in situ measurements at five different sites in Sweden using HPGe detectors to determine ground deposition activity levels of ¹³⁷Cs from the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Monte Carlo-calculated efficiency calibration factors were compared with corresponding values calculated using a more traditional semi-empirical method. In addition, results for the activity ground deposition were also compared with activity densities found in soil samples. In order to facilitate meaningful comparisons between the different types of results, the combined standard uncertainty of in situ measurements was assessed for both calibration methods. Good agreement, both between the two calibration methods, and between in situ measurements and soil samples, was found at all five sites. Uncertainties in in situ measurements for the given measurement conditions, about 20 years after the fallout occurred, were found to be in the range 15–20% (with a coverage factor k = 1, i.e. with a confidence interval of about 68%).