Innovative and conventional decontamination techniques for cementitious structures

Laraia, Michele

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818328-1.00002-2

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From the beginning, various strategies and techniques developed over the years (a review of them can be found in [1]) have been taken into account for this activity, [2,3], including biological decontamination [4], chemical treatments (such as selective absorption and other) [5,6], and thermal technologies [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decontamination and Remediation of Underground Holes and Testing of Cleaning Techniques Based on the Use of Liquid Cold Decontaminant

Tonti

Marin²,

Rizzo

et al. 2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of its institutional skills, the INAIL (National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work) promotes and carries out activities aimed at preventing the risks to which workers may be subjected to in different work scenarios, in this case, in collaboration with Livanova and WOW Technology S.p.A. (Wonderful Water Technology, Monselice, PD, Italy). An open problem at the Livanova plant, located in Saluggia (VC, Italy), is the decontamination of many concrete structures. Precisely because of its radioactive content, simple mechanical removal wasn’t possible for the high production of the contaminated dust, which may endanger the health of workers. The solution adopted was to insert decontaminant liquids into the concrete structures and, after a period of soaking, treating these liquids with an evaporative machine that is able to separate contaminants. The combination of these systems proved to be suitable for this experimental decontamination activity. As a result, this activity has shown a certain efficiency in removing radioactivity from the walls of the structures, ensuring the safety of the workers involved during the operations and reducing the potential risk of exposure in comparison to mechanical removal.

show abstract