氡减缓方法分析:10 年回顾。

IF 1.4 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
E Kouroukla, T D Gooding, H S Fonseca
{"title":"氡减缓方法分析:10 年回顾。","authors":"E Kouroukla, T D Gooding, H S Fonseca","doi":"10.1088/1361-6498/ad58e8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Exposure to the radon gas within a building can result in an increased risk of lung cancer. To minimise the health risk, indoor radon concentrations can be reduced using well-established mitigation methods. The performance of various radon reduction methods, their combination as well as other factors that can impact the efficiency of radon mitigation, were analysed using data collected from approximately 2800 dwellings that had installed radon mitigation techniques during the period 2007-2017. As demonstrated previously (Hodgson 2011), active methods are the most effective at reducing high concentrations of radon to below the Action and Target Levels (200 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>and 100 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>respectively). Reduction factors of up to 5.5 using single active methods and 8.3 using a combination of active methods were estimated in this study. For indoor radon levels greater than 1 000 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>, the Active Sump remained the most efficient technique, with the Active Underfloor Ventilation being the second most effective method. Passive methods alone or in combination with other passive methods offered moderate reductions at high radon concentration. Of the passive methods, Underfloor Ventilation was found to have the highest performance with a reduction factor of 1.8. The conclusions of this study should be used to update guidance for stakeholders including householders, contractors, radon awareness campaigns and the UKradon.org website.</p>","PeriodicalId":50068,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Radiological Protection","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of radon mitigation methods: 10-year review.\",\"authors\":\"E Kouroukla, T D Gooding, H S Fonseca\",\"doi\":\"10.1088/1361-6498/ad58e8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Exposure to the radon gas within a building can result in an increased risk of lung cancer. To minimise the health risk, indoor radon concentrations can be reduced using well-established mitigation methods. The performance of various radon reduction methods, their combination as well as other factors that can impact the efficiency of radon mitigation, were analysed using data collected from approximately 2800 dwellings that had installed radon mitigation techniques during the period 2007-2017. As demonstrated previously (Hodgson 2011), active methods are the most effective at reducing high concentrations of radon to below the Action and Target Levels (200 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>and 100 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>respectively). Reduction factors of up to 5.5 using single active methods and 8.3 using a combination of active methods were estimated in this study. For indoor radon levels greater than 1 000 Bq m<sup>-3</sup>, the Active Sump remained the most efficient technique, with the Active Underfloor Ventilation being the second most effective method. Passive methods alone or in combination with other passive methods offered moderate reductions at high radon concentration. Of the passive methods, Underfloor Ventilation was found to have the highest performance with a reduction factor of 1.8. The conclusions of this study should be used to update guidance for stakeholders including householders, contractors, radon awareness campaigns and the UKradon.org website.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50068,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Radiological Protection\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Radiological Protection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ad58e8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Radiological Protection","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ad58e8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

暴露于建筑物内的氡气会增加罹患肺癌的风险。为了将健康风险降到最低,可以使用成熟的减氡方法降低室内氡浓度。利用从 2007 年至 2017 年期间安装了氡减缓技术的约 2,800 个住宅收集的数据,分析了各种氡减少方法的性能、它们的组合以及可能影响氡减缓效率的其他因素。如前文所述(霍奇森,2011 年),主动方法能最有效地将高浓度氡降低到行动水平和目标水平(分别为 200 Bq m-3 和 100 Bq m-3)以下。本研究估计,使用单一主动方法的降低系数可达 5.5,使用多种主动方法的降低系数可达 8.3。对于室内氡含量大于 1,000 Bq m-3 的情况,主动式底盘仍然是最有效的技术,而主动式地板下通风则是第二有效的方法。在氡浓度较高的情况下,被动式方法单独使用或与其他被动式方法结合使用可适度降低氡浓度。在被动式方法中,地板下通风法的性能最高,减少系数为 1.8。这项研究的结论应用于更新对利益相关者的指导,包括住户、承包商、氡意识宣传活动和 UKradon.org 网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of radon mitigation methods: 10-year review.

Exposure to the radon gas within a building can result in an increased risk of lung cancer. To minimise the health risk, indoor radon concentrations can be reduced using well-established mitigation methods. The performance of various radon reduction methods, their combination as well as other factors that can impact the efficiency of radon mitigation, were analysed using data collected from approximately 2800 dwellings that had installed radon mitigation techniques during the period 2007-2017. As demonstrated previously (Hodgson 2011), active methods are the most effective at reducing high concentrations of radon to below the Action and Target Levels (200 Bq m-3and 100 Bq m-3respectively). Reduction factors of up to 5.5 using single active methods and 8.3 using a combination of active methods were estimated in this study. For indoor radon levels greater than 1 000 Bq m-3, the Active Sump remained the most efficient technique, with the Active Underfloor Ventilation being the second most effective method. Passive methods alone or in combination with other passive methods offered moderate reductions at high radon concentration. Of the passive methods, Underfloor Ventilation was found to have the highest performance with a reduction factor of 1.8. The conclusions of this study should be used to update guidance for stakeholders including householders, contractors, radon awareness campaigns and the UKradon.org website.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Radiological Protection
Journal of Radiological Protection 环境科学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
26.70%
发文量
137
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Radiological Protection publishes articles on all aspects of radiological protection, including non-ionising as well as ionising radiations. Fields of interest range from research, development and theory to operational matters, education and training. The very wide spectrum of its topics includes: dosimetry, instrument development, specialized measuring techniques, epidemiology, biological effects (in vivo and in vitro) and risk and environmental impact assessments. The journal encourages publication of data and code as well as results.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信