Search
Close
Search
Advanced Search
Search Menu
AI Discovery Assistant

Abstract

Indoor radon is recognised as being the most important radiation burden for the general public. In Belgium, as in many other countries, exposure levels giving rise to yearly risks of more than 10-2 have been found. This latter value is normally considered unacceptable for the public. Moreover, an important fraction of the population lives in houses with radon levels of more than 400 bq.m-3, representing a risk level of 10-3 per year or more. A level of this order is the limit for authorised and regulated activities at work. Prevention and intervention opportunities exist for these situations. The dose reduction opportunities are limited, but higher than the total collective dose in all nuclear activities. The analysis of radiation protection approaches, communication and decision-making for radon, compared to nuclear industrial activities shows incoherence at different levels. As a first attempt to develop a rational and coherent approach, cost-benefit analysis was applied to radon. Four optimisation scenarios were developed: three about remediation and one about prevention. Referring to the a values applied by radiation protection authorities in France, Sweden and the Netherlands, the different scenarios are found to be highly justified. They all represent well-spent money for public health. Furthermore, in order to select priorities for the governmental approach about radon, multi-attribute analysis was applied. Cost, detriment and perception were used as criteria. As potential government strategy the following alternatives were put forward: pay no attention at all; provide information; organise measuring and information campaigns, offer technical and financial sustenance for remediation; draw up specific regulations.

This content is only available as a PDF.
Radiation Protection Dosimetry
Issue Section:
Article
You do not currently have access to this article.
Download all slides