natural and artificial radionuclides
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

50
(FIVE YEARS 10)

H-INDEX

12
(FIVE YEARS 1)

Author(s):  
Koya Ogura ◽  
Masahiro Hosoda ◽  
Yuki Tamakuma ◽  
Takahito Suzuki ◽  
Ryohei Yamada ◽  
...  

Ten years have elapsed since the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in 2011, and the relative contribution of natural radiation is increasing in Fukushima Prefecture due to the reduced dose of artificial radiation. In order to accurately determine the effective dose of exposure to artificial radiation, it is necessary to evaluate the effective dose of natural as well as artificial components. In this study, we measured the gamma-ray pulse-height distribution over the accessible area of Namie Town, Fukushima Prefecture, and evaluated the annual effective dose of external exposure by distinguishing between natural and artificial radionuclides. The estimated median (range) of absorbed dose rates in air from artificial radionuclides as of 1 April 2020, is 133 (67–511) nGy h−1 in the evacuation order cancellation zone, and 1306 (892–2081) nGy h−1 in the difficult-to-return zone. The median annual effective doses of external exposures from natural and artificial radionuclides were found to be 0.19 and 0.40 mSv in the evacuation order cancellation zone, and 0.25 and 3.9 mSv in the difficult-to-return zone. The latest annual effective dose of external exposure discriminated into natural and artificial radionuclides is expected to be utilized for radiation risk communication.


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 98-112
Author(s):  
T. Hattori

The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) of Japan invited comments from the public on a revised guide on measurement and evaluation for clearance in 2019, which included a strict decision on how to treat uncertainties in the measurement and the nuclide vector. To resolve the issue on the uncertainty in clearance, a probabilistic approach had been established previously in the Atomic Energy Society of Japan Standard and incorporated into International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Safety Report No. 67. NRA’s new decision on the uncertainty in clearance was up to 10 times stricter than the probabilistic approach. This issue has been discussed at an international level in the framework of the ongoing revision of IAEA Safety Guide RS-G-1.7. This discussion on the uncertainty in clearance has raised serious concerns about its effects on other radiological protection regulations worldwide. This is because if we need strict treatment for the uncertainty in clearance, the same or even stricter treatment for conformity assessment may have to be applied to other radiological protection criteria for doses exceeding 10 µSv year−1. Radiological protection experts including regulators, professionals, and operators should be aware of the essential meaning of the radiological protection criteria by considering the background scientific basis on which they were established.


2020 ◽  
Vol 262 ◽  
pp. 114269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia V. Kuzmenkova ◽  
Maxim M. Ivanov ◽  
Mikhail Y. Alexandrin ◽  
Alexei M. Grachev ◽  
Alexandra K. Rozhkova ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 217
Author(s):  
I. K. Mitsios ◽  
D. J. Karangelos ◽  
M. J. Anagnostakis

Surface soil radioactivity is being studied at NED-NTUA since almost thirty years. The last few years this research has expanded to the study of soil particle size fractionation of radionuclides. The purpose of the present work was to study the tendency of many radionuclides to accumulate in the smaller particle size fractions. To this end, soil samples were collected from an area in the NTUA Campus where 241Am contamination, due to a failed 241Am-tipped lightning rod, had been previously detected. The samples were separated into size fractions using a sieving machine and analyzed by gamma spectrometry to determine 210Pb, 241Am, 234Th, 228Ra, 228Th, 226Ra, 7Be, 137Cs and 40K. The activity concentrations of these nuclides were found to significantly differ among the size fractions examined.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Ch. Betsou ◽  
E. Tsakiris ◽  
J. Hansman ◽  
M. Krmar ◽  
A. Ioannidou

N/A


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document