On the model uncertainties in Bayesian source reconstruction using the emission inverse modelling system FREARtool v1.0 and the Lagrangian transport and dispersion model Flexpart v9.0.2

Abstract. Bayesian source reconstruction is a powerful tool for determining atmospheric releases. It can be used, amongst other applications, to identify a point source releasing radioactive particles into the atmosphere. This is relevant for applications such as emergency response in case of a nuclear accident, or Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban treaty verification. The method involves solving an inverse problem using environmental radioactivity observations and atmospheric transport models. The Bayesian approach has the advantage of providing credible intervals on the inferred source parameters in a natural way. However, it requires the specification of the inference input errors, such as the observation error and model error. The latter is particularly hard to provide as there is no straightforward way to determine the atmospheric transport and dispersion model error. Here, the importance of model error is illustrated for Bayesian source reconstruction using a recent and unique case where radionuclides were detected on several continents. A numerical weather prediction ensemble is used to create an ensemble of atmospheric transport and dispersion simulations, and a method is proposed to determine the model error.

[1]  Piet Termonia,et al.  Source Localization of Ruthenium-106 Detections in Autumn 2017 Using Inverse Modelling , 2018 .

[2]  Jasper A. Vrugt,et al.  High‐dimensional posterior exploration of hydrologic models using multiple‐try DREAM(ZS) and high‐performance computing , 2012 .

[3]  Georg Steinhauser,et al.  Anthropogenic radioactive particles in the environment , 2018, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry.

[4]  Lloyd A. Currie,et al.  Limits for qualitative detection and quantitative determination , 1968 .

[5]  Ian Hoffman,et al.  Bayesian source reconstruction of an anomalous Selenium-75 release at a nuclear research institute. , 2020, Journal of environmental radioactivity.

[6]  Marc Bocquet High‐resolution reconstruction of a tracer dispersion event: application to ETEX , 2007 .

[7]  M. Bruggeman,et al.  Airborne concentrations and chemical considerations of radioactive ruthenium from an undeclared major nuclear release in 2017 , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  A. Stohl,et al.  Technical note: The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 6.2 , 2005 .

[9]  Gerhard Wotawa,et al.  Xenon-133 and caesium-137 releases into the atmosphere from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant: determination of the source term, atmospheric dispersion, and deposition , 2011 .

[10]  D. Higdon,et al.  Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo Simulation by Differential Evolution with Self-Adaptive Randomized Subspace Sampling , 2009 .

[11]  Hubert Glaab,et al.  Global backtracking of anthropogenic radionuclides by means of a receptor oriented ensemble dispersion modelling system in support of Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty verification , 2007 .

[12]  Petra Seibert,et al.  Source-receptor matrix calculation with a Lagrangian particle dispersion model in backward mode , 2004 .

[13]  Tim N. Palmer,et al.  Ensemble forecasting , 2008, J. Comput. Phys..

[14]  Massimo Bonavita,et al.  The evolution of the ECMWF hybrid data assimilation system , 2016 .

[15]  M. Leutbecher Ensemble size: How suboptimal is less than infinity? , 2018, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society.

[16]  Piet Termonia,et al.  Source localisation and its uncertainty quantification after the third DPRK nuclear test , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[17]  Cajo J. F. ter Braak,et al.  Differential Evolution Markov Chain with snooker updater and fewer chains , 2008, Stat. Comput..

[18]  Jens Havskov Sørensen,et al.  Method for source localization proposed and applied to the October 2017 case of atmospheric dispersion of Ru-106. , 2018, Journal of environmental radioactivity.

[19]  M Nikkinen,et al.  Radioxenon detections in the CTBT international monitoring system likely related to the announced nuclear test in North Korea on February 12, 2013. , 2014, Journal of environmental radioactivity.

[20]  Eugene Yee,et al.  Inverse Dispersion for an Unknown Number of Sources: Model Selection and Uncertainty Analysis , 2012 .

[21]  F Gering,et al.  An episode of Ru-106 in air over Europe, September-October 2017 - Geographical distribution of inhalation dose over Europe. , 2019, Journal of environmental radioactivity.

[22]  Jun S. Liu,et al.  The Multiple-Try Method and Local Optimization in Metropolis Sampling , 2000 .

[23]  A. Mathieu,et al.  Atmospheric modeling and source reconstruction of radioactive ruthenium from an undeclared major release in 2017 , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  T Karhunen,et al.  Potential Source Apportionment and Meteorological Conditions Involved in Airborne 131I Detections in January/February 2017 in Europe. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  Kurt Ungar,et al.  Bayesian Inference for Source Reconstruction: A Real-World Application , 2014, International scholarly research notices.