4.4 Article

Estimation of radiation doses to members of the public in Italy from intakes of some important naturally occurring radionuclides (238U, 234U, 235U, 226Ra, 228Ra, 224Ra and 210Po) in drinking water

Journal

APPLIED RADIATION AND ISOTOPES
Volume 65, Issue 7, Pages 849-857

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2007.01.022

Keywords

drinking water; radiation dose; alpha-spectrometry; uranium; radium; Po-210

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The radiological quality in some samples of drinking water collected in Italy has been evaluated in the paper. As far as the measured a or beta radionuclides are concerned, the doses for all the analysed samples of drinking water are in the range of 1.80-36.2 PSv yr(-1), all being well below the reference level of the committed effective dose (100 mu Sv yr(-1)) recommended by the WHO. As far as each measured alpha or beta radionuclide is concerned, the dose contributions for most of the analysed water samples are in this order: (210)po > Ra-228 > Ra-226 > U-234 > U-238 > Ra-224 > U-235, and Po-210 and Ra-228 can yield a significant contribution to the doses from the analysed drinking water samples. As far as the elements are concerned, the dose contributions are 48.0 +/- 27.9% from radium, 31.7 +/- 23.1 % from polonium, and 20.3 + 14. 1 % from uranium. The water samples, No. 2, 7, 13, and 15, can lead to a dose of > 10 mu Sv yr(-1) mainly due to the dose contribution from Po-210 and Ra-228, especially water samples No. 2 and 13. The obtained data can provide basic information for consumers and competent authorities regarding the internal exposure risk due to drinking water intake, and can possibly serve as a comparison when evaluating the dose contribution from artificial radionuclides released to the environment as a result of any human practices and accidents in the studied area. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available