185
Acute and chronic intakes of fallout radionuclides @ S. L. SIMoNn ET AL.
Table 17. Comparison of estimates of absorbed dose to the thyroid from the Bravotest (acute intake) from this
work and from Lessard et al. (1985) and Goetz et al. (1987); all entries are in mGy andrepresent the average for
male and female adults (except Rongerik which pertains to adult males only), rounded to two significant digits
(entries with dash were not estimated).
Estimated thyroid absorbed dose (mGy) to adults
S17 (8.02 d)
Rongelap
This work
Lessard et al. (1985)
Ailinginae
This work
Lessard et al. (1985)
Utrik
This work
Lessard et al. (1985)
Rongerik
This work
Goetz et al. (1987)
E(2.3h)
MIQ208h
“166h
“Te 30h)
'Te (3.2 d)
Total
1,700
1,400
47
74
4,200
5,600
1,300
2,000
41
130
260
1,200
7,600
11,000
500
290
14
16
1,400
1,600
520
670
13
39
80
300
2,500
2,900
230
330
4.5
15
380
850
36
719
3.8
27
35
240
690
1,600
740
190
16
—
2,200
820
—
18
—
120
—
4,000
190
Table 18. Deposition density (kBq m~’) of *°*™°Puatthe time of fallout andthe variation of surface soil concentration
(Bq q kg™'
All values rounded to two significant
digits.
Kg in 0-5 cm) with time (y)
y after deposition.
Pp
g
3°*Py soil concentration (Bq kg‘) as a function of time (y) after deposition
Atoll
Ailinginae
Ailinglaplap
Ailuk
Arno
Aur
Bikar*
Ebon
Erikub
Jabat
Jaluit®
Jemo
Kili
Knox
Kwajalein
Lae
Lib
Likiep
Majuro*
Maloelap
Mejit
Mili
Namorik
Namu
Rongelap Island
Rongerik
Taka
Taongi
Ujae
Ujelang
Utrik
Wotho
Wotje
Deposition density
(kBg m~°)
Oy
0.5 y
ly
By
Sy
10 y
20 y
30 y
50 y
TS
0.055
0.19
0.060
0.065
5.7
0.021
0.095
0.033
0.085
0.090
0.085
0.037
0.066
0.12
0.050
0.44
0.072
0.055
0.14
0.034
0.085
0.085
16
35
1.4
0.16
0.075
0.22
3.5
0.085
0.090
150
1.1
3.8
1.2
1.3
110
0.41
0.19
0.65
1.7
1.8
1.7
0.73
1.2
2.4
1.0
8.7
1.2
1.1
2.7
0.68
1.7
1.7
290
700
28
3.2
1.5
4.3
63
1.7
1.8
130
0.90
3.1
1.0
1.1
91
0.34
0.16
0.54
1.4
1.5
1.4
0.61
1.0
2.0
0.85
72
1.0
0.94
2.3
0.56
1.4
1.4
240
580
23
2.7
1.3
3.6
53
1.4
1.5
110
0.77
2.7
0.88
0.92
719
0.29
0.13
0.46
1.2
1.3
1.2
0.52
0.84
1.7
0.73
6.1
0.88
0.81
1.9
0.48
1.2
1.2
210
500
20
2.3
1.1
3.1
45
1.2
1.3
86
0.61
2.1
0.70
0.74
60
0.23
0.11
0.37
0.97
1.0
0.95
0.41
0.67
1.3
0.58
4.9
0.70
0.64
1.5
0.38
0.97
0.93
160
400
16
1.8
0.87
2.5
36
1.0
1.0
78
0.56
2.0
0.64
0.67
57
0.21
0.10
0.34
0.88
0.92
0.87
0.38
0.61
1.2
0.53
4.5
0.64
0.59
1.4
0.35
0.88
0.85
150
360
14
1.7
0.80
2.2
33
0.89
0.94
70
0.50
1.7
0.57
0.60
49
0.19
0.090
0.30
0.78
0.82
0.77
0.34
0.55
1.1
0.47
4.0
0.57
0.52
1.3
0.31
0.78
0.76
130
320
13
1.5
0.71
2.0
29
0.80
0.83
63
0.45
1.6
0.52
0.54
45
0.17
0.080
0.27
0.71
0.74
0.70
0.30
0.49
0.98
0.43
3.6
0.52
0.47
1.1
0.28
0.71
0.68
120
290
11
1.3
0.64
1.8
26
0.72
0.75
59
0.42
1.5
0.49
0.51
42
0.16
0.070
0.25
0.67
0.70
0.66
0.29
0.47
0.92
0.40
3.4
0.49
0.45
1.1
0.27
0.67
0.65
110
270
11
1.3
0.60
1.7
25
0.68
0.71
55
0.40
1.4
0.46
0.48
42
0.15
0.070
0.24
0.63
0.66
0.62
0.27
0.44
0.86
0.38
3.2
0.46
0.42
1.0
0.25
0.63
0.61
110
260
10
1.2
0.57
1.6
23
0.64
0.66
* Values scaled to those for Rongelap Island, using total '*’Cs deposition density (Table 5, Simonet al. 2010) as a guide.
> Values from Namorik assumedfor Jaluit.
“Values from Arno assumed for Majuro.