Combination of geological data and radon survey results for radon mapping

Zhukovsky, Michael; Yarmoshenko, Ilia V.; Киселев, С. М.

doi:10.1016/j.jenvrad.2012.02.013

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have examined variations in indoor‐radon concentrations both within and between different bedrock or sediment types and at different map scales in Norway (Smethurst et al, 2008; Sundal et al, 2004), Great Britain (Miles & Appleton, 2005), Oregon (Burns et al, 1998; Franczyk et al, 2018), Russia (Zhukovsky et al, 2012), Romania (Florică et al, 2020), and part of northern Kentucky (Hahn et al, 2015). The work described by Hahn et al (2015) is particularly relevant to this paper because it was a pilot project that provided the geological and statistical basis for the current geologically based radon‐potential map of Kentucky.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Geologically Based Indoor‐Radon Potential Map of Kentucky

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We combined 71,930 short‐term (median duration 4 days) home radon test results with 1:24,000‐scale bedrock geologic map coverage of Kentucky to produce a statewide geologically based indoor‐radon potential map. The test results were positively skewed with a mean of 266 Bq/m 3 , median of 122 Bq/m 3 , and 75th percentile of 289 Bq/m 3 . We identified 106 formations with ≥10 test results. Analysis of results from 20 predominantly monolithologic formations showed indoor‐radon concentrations to be positively skewed on a formation‐by‐formation basis, with a proportional relationship between sample means and standard deviations. Limestone (median 170 Bq/m 3 ) and dolostone (median 130 Bq/m 3 ) tended to have higher indoor‐radon concentrations than siltstones and sandstones (median 67 Bq/m 3 ) or unlithified surficial deposits (median 63 Bq/m 3 ). Individual shales had median values ranging from 67 to 189 Bq/m 3 ; the median value for all shale values was 85 Bq/m 3 . Percentages of values falling above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) action level of 148 Bq/m 3 were sandstone and siltstone: 24%, unlithified clastic: 21%, dolostone: 46%, limestone: 55%, and shale: 34%. Mississippian limestones, Ordovician limestones, and Devonian black shales had the highest indoor‐radon potential values in Kentucky. Indoor‐radon test mean values for the selected formations were also weakly, but statistically significantly, correlated with mean aeroradiometric uranium concentrations. To produce a map useful to nonspecialists, we classified each of the 106 formations into five radon‐geologic classes on the basis of their 75th percentile radon concentrations. The statewide map is freely available through an interactive internet map service.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Geologically Based Indoor‐Radon Potential Map of Kentucky

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The geogenic radon potential plays the main role for radon risk maps, although this approach implies an extensive description of the local geology, uranium and radium contents, soil-gas radon, and permeability [15]. Currently, there is no consensus on a generally accepted method for geogenic, indoor and groundwater radon risk mapping [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25], but there is an enormous effort by the scientific community to develop a new methodology for a conceptual geogenic radon hazard index that explains all the complex system of radon production and transport into different anthropogenic compartments and natural systems [17,21,26]. Despite the reduced contribution of radon contamination in groundwater on the overall radon risk, the groundwater recharge coefficient was included as a geogenic factor in the geogenic radon hazard index proposed by Bossew et al [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Assessment of Groundwater Contamination Risk with Radon Based on Clustering and Structural Models

Martins

Pereira

Oliveira

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is currently some controversy in the scientific community regarding the efficiency of the water–rock interaction process in the contamination of radon in groundwater. In this study, some difficulties were found in the sampling phase. Many of the water collection points are used for human consumption. As such, some municipalities did not want to collaborate. When this natural contaminant is undetectable to the human sense and may cause pulmonary neoplasms in the long term, it is difficult to obtain collaboration from the municipalities concerned. To overcome this controversy, it is important to understand that geogenic, climatic, hydrological, and topographic features may contribute to the effective transfer of radon from rocks to groundwater. In brief, this new approach combines the radon transfer from the geological substrate to the groundwater circulation through hierarchic agglomerative clustering (HAC) and partial least squares-path modeling (PLS-PM) methods. The results show that some lithologies with higher radon production may not always contribute to noticeable groundwater contamination. In this group, the high-fracturing density confirms the recharge efficiency, and the physical-chemical properties of the hydraulic environment (electric conductivity) plays the main role of radon unavailability in the water intended for human consumption. Besides, the hydraulic turnover time of the springs can be considered an excellent radiological indicator in groundwater. In the absence of an anomalous radioactive source near the surface, it means that the high-turnover time of the springs leads to a low-radon concentration in the water. Besides linking high-risk areas with a short period required to free local flow discharges, this study exposes the virtues of a new perspective of a groundwater contamination risk modeling.

show abstract

“…Radon levels in the environment can show important spatial variations on a regional or local scale. It has been recognized that this lateral variability is primarily attributed to geological parameters which control the radon source-term and/ or the radon migration in the ground (Appleton et al, 2015;Bossew, 2015;Drolet et al, 2013Drolet et al, , 2014García-Talavera et al, 2013;Gruber et al, 2013;Hahna et al, 2015;Ielsch et al, 2001Ielsch et al, , 2002Ielsch et al, , 2010Kropat et al, 2014;Scheib et al, 2013;Smethurst et al, 2008;Tondeur et al, 2015;Zhukovsky et al, 2012). Therefore, the knowledge of uranium and/or radium contents in rocks is of primary importance to determine the radon source term.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%