4.6 Article

Quantification and Radiological Risk Estimation Due to the Presence of Natural Radionuclides in Maiganga Coal, Nigeria

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158100

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Federal Government of Nigeria through the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TetFund)
  2. University of Malaya Research [FP042-2013A, RP006D-13AFR]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Following the increasing demand of coal for power generation, activity concentrations of primordial radionuclides were determined in Nigerian coal using the gamma spectrometric technique with the aim of evaluating the radiological implications of coal utilization and exploitation in the country. Mean activity concentrations of Ra-226, Th-232, and K-40 were 8.18 +/- 0.3, 6.97 +/- 0.3, and 27.38 +/- 0.8 Bq kg(-1), respectively. These values were compared with those of similar studies reported in literature. The mean estimated radium equivalent activity was 20.26 Bq kg(-1) with corresponding average external hazard index of 0.05. Internal hazard index and representative gamma index recorded mean values of 0.08 and 0.14, respectively. These values were lower than their respective precautionary limits set by UNSCEAR. Average excess lifetime cancer risk was calculated to be 0.04x10(-3), which was insignificant compared with 0.05 prescribed by ICRP for low level radiation. Pearson correlation matrix showed significant positive relationship between Ra-226 and Th-232, and with other estimated hazard parameters. Cumulative mean occupational dose received by coal workers via the three exposure routes was 7.69 x 10(-3) mSv y(-1), with inhalation pathway accounting for about 98%. All radiological hazard indices evaluated showed values within limits of safety. There is, therefore, no likelihood of any immediate radiological health hazards to coal workers, final users, and the environment from the exploitation and utilization of Maiganga coal.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available