2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2013.04.037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radiological and chemical monitoring of Dikili geothermal waters, Western Turkey

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
16
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As can be seen from Table, radon levels recorded in the present study are relatively low when they are compared to corresponding radon activity measured in Italy [5], in Venezuela [8], in Iran [9], in Serbia [10] and also is lower than those reported from other parts of Turkey namely Dikili [12] and Bursa [14], but comparable to radon levels reported from Yalova [11] and from West Anatolia [13]. It is interesting to note that both of Yalova and Sakarya lie on North Anatolian Faulth Zone.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 58%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As can be seen from Table, radon levels recorded in the present study are relatively low when they are compared to corresponding radon activity measured in Italy [5], in Venezuela [8], in Iran [9], in Serbia [10] and also is lower than those reported from other parts of Turkey namely Dikili [12] and Bursa [14], but comparable to radon levels reported from Yalova [11] and from West Anatolia [13]. It is interesting to note that both of Yalova and Sakarya lie on North Anatolian Faulth Zone.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 58%
“…However, a very high level of radon in ingested drinking water can also leads to a significant risk of stomach cancer [7]. Because of its potential health hazard, radon level in thermal waters and associated effective doses have been documented in many regions worldwide for decades [5,[8][9][10] and also led to extensive surveys in Turkey [11][12][13][14][15]. In the present study, the radon contents of thermal waters located in Kuzuluk and Taraklı regions of Sakarya were measured and the results were evaluated according to international recommendations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the mean radon concentration and the total mean annual effective dose of the drinking water samples of this study are higher than the mean radon concentration and the total annual effective dose of 2.07 Bq l -1 and 0.0076 mSv a -1 , respectively, in the drinking water samples from the Varahi, command area of India [33]. The mean radon concentration of 9.4 Bq l -1 in the drinking water samples from the studied area is slightly higher than the mean radon concentration of 8.2 Bq -1 in the drinking water samples from Dikili region of Turkey [34], mean radon concentration of 6.8 Bq -1 in the drinking water samples from Milano area of Italy [35], and mean radon concentration of 6.1 Bq -1 in the drinking water samples from Kutahya area of Turkey [36].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Our mean anural effective doses of 0.002 and 0.024 mSv a -1 due to ingestion and inhalation from radon in water are similar (within error limit) to the mean annual effective doses of 0.002 and 0.025 mSv a -1 of UNSCEAR due to ingestion and inhalation, respectively. In Table 3 radon concentrations and mean annual effective doses due to ingestion and inhalation from the drinking water sources of the study area have been compared with the results of similar studies conducted in the different regions and countries [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. The mean radon concentration of 9.4 ± 0.4 Bq l -1 in the water samples of this study is higher than the mean radon concentration of 4.38 ± 0.44 Bq l -1 in drinking water samples of Murre area, Pakistan [29].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After etching, track density of alpha particles was counted under * corresponding author; e-mail: zyildirim@sakarya.edu.tr an optical microscope at magnification 100× [5]. Calibration coefficient of these detectors was determined as 0.051 track cm…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%