Outdoor radon concentration in China

Abstract

Abstract.A nationwide survey was conducted in 2014 to investigate environmental outdoor radon level in 33 provincial cities across China. The radon detector used was a passive-type solid-state nuclear track detector, CR-39. Measurements were conducted under the same condition following the quality control programme. Outdoor radon concentrations in China ranged from 3 to 30.0 Bq·m , respectively. The radon concentrations in the locations near or along coastline were lower than the average value, while those located in the inland area were higher. As a whole, the result showed no big difference from the data measured during the period [1983][1984][1985][1986][1987][1988][1989][1990][1991][1992][1993][1994][1995][1996][1997][1998]. It demonstrated that the outdoor radon concentration level in China has not been changing remarkably for 20 years.

Outdoor Radon as a Tool to Estimate Radon Priority Areas—A Literature Overview

“…Since the aim of this review article is to analyse literature on outdoor radon concentrations with regard to radiation health risk, it is not surprising that the majority of used methods within the investigated surveys were integrating measurements. Among passive detectors, solid state nuclear track detectors, polyallyl diglycol carbonate (PADC)—CR-39 were used in 40.7% of analysed surveys [ 45 , 46 , 77 , 82 , 83 , 89 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 ], polycarbonate foil of Makrofol in 7.4% [ 78 , 85 ], one survey (3.7%) with electrostatic integrating monitor based on LR115 [ 79 ]. One survey (3.7%) was performed by electret ion chamber (EPERM ® ) [ 81 ].…”

“…In none of the reviewed articles, was an explicit statement that the measurement of radon in air was performed according to the ISO 11665-1:2012 found. However, in almost all surveys detectors deployed between 1 m and 2 m, the exceptions are one survey in which detectors were deployed at 2.5 m [ 66 ], one deployed in the range from 1.5 m to 3 m [ 89 ], and a survey in which the information on height of measuring locations was not given [ 77 ].…”

“…A similar experiment with detectors placed at 0.25 m, 0.5 m, 1.0 m, 1.5 m and 2.0 m, was performed at four different locations and no evidence for dependence on the height was observed [ 84 ]. Also, in order to investigate whether sampling is representative of the air that population breath, detectors were placed at 1 m, 1.5 m and 2 m in one experiment and between 1.5 m and 3 m in another [ 77 , 89 ]. No significant differences were observed between radon concentrations measured with these detectors.…”

“…Furthermore, the representativeness of the surveys was not discussed in the papers. The most common quality control test was duplicate detectors [ 45 , 68 , 78 , 82 , 83 , 89 , 94 , 95 ]. Blank tests were applied in China and USA [ 89 , 94 ].…”

Radon Footprint From the Phosphogypsum Waste Stack Near Zgrpolci Locality, Veles, Republic North Macedonia

“…All of the above slightly affects the rate of diffusion through the material, and thus the rate of radon emission. The displayed radon concentrations in the air above the phosphogypsum deposit near Zgrpolci are at least two magnitudes higher than the usual average of 10 Bq • m -3 , determined as the annual average for open radon concentrations (UNSCEAR, 1993), but certainly higher that radon concentrations (average 12 Bq • m -3 ) in the air around Belgrade, R. Serbia (Kolarž et al, 2020), the People's Republic of China (average ~ 13-14 Bq • m -3 ; Wu et al, 2016) and others. Also, going one step further, based on the average, measured radon values, we calculated the exposure to radon inhalation, ie, the annual effective doses of ionizing radiation exposure that would be received (from radon) by individuals annually ( Table 2), as outdoor stay and indoor stay.…”