Next Article in Journal
Correlation between Lunar Phases and Rainfall Patterns in Mexico
Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of Fluxes and Ecological and Health Risks of Toxic Trace Elements in Atmospheric Deposition from the Baicheng-Songyuan Area, Jilin Province, Northeast China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Atmosphere
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/atmos15070745
atmosphere-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Indoor Radon Testing, Effective Dose and Mitigation Measures in a Residential House of a Mining Area

by
Dušica Spasić
,
Ljiljana Gulan
* and
Biljana Vučković
Faculty of Sciences and Mathematics, University of Priština in Kosovska Mitrovica, Lole Ribara 29, 38220 Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2024, 15(7), 745; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070745
Submission received: 24 May 2024 / Revised: 14 June 2024 / Accepted: 18 June 2024 / Published: 21 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Atmospheric Radon Concentration Monitoring and Measurements (2nd Edition))
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study presents the results of continuous indoor radon measurements in a test-house in the vicinity of the “Trepča” mine, near the town of Kosovska Mitrovica. Annual measurements were performed using the detector, Airthings Corentium Home, in the bedroom of an old residential building. A high estimated annual effective dose from radon (33 mSv) was calculated using the last ICRP dose conversion factor and is discussed here regarding the previously recommended ones. There are significant indications concerning the health hazard. Several measures are proposed and serve as a technical solution including other effective, low-cost radon mitigation procedures in order to reduce radon levels. The effectiveness of the applied measures resulted in a 44% reduction in radon concentration.

1. Introduction

A disintegration of radium (226Ra) in uranium decay chain (238U) produces noble, radioactive gas radon (222Rn) with a relatively long half-life (3.8 days). Radon moves through interconnected pores in the soil and reaches the Earth’s surface, penetrating into building interiors. Cracks in the construction systems and poor ventilation conditions can lead to indoor radon accumulation. Uranium in rocks and soil beneath buildings, in building materials, drinking water, and in using cooking gas are the main supply of radon [1]. Two independent sources of indoor radon in the surveyed houses were indicated by some authors: one source comes from the soil and regular building materials, and the second sourceis from uranium waste and local radium-enriched materials used in building construction [2].
The inhalation of radon and its decay products leads to health risks. Among the general public, radon inhalation is labeled as the second most prominent cause of lung cancer after smoking [3,4,5,6]. Average annual human exposure (effective dose) to all natural radioactive sources is estimated to be 2.4 mSv, and about 52% of this exposure is caused by the inhalation of radon [7]. Many studies have been conducted worldwide to evaluate the radiation dose to inhabitants caused by radon [8,9,10,11]. Previous studies in the area of Kosovska Mitrovica have also shown increased indoor radon concentrations in dwellings, which the authors have indicated a radon-prone area [12,13,14].
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the indoor radon concentration should not exceed 100 Bq m−3 [15]. On the other hand, along with the public protection against radon exposure, there is a recommendation from the Council of the European Union (Directive 2013/59/EURATOM) to EU member states that the national levels of indoor radon concentration should not exceed 300 Bq m−3 [16]. Some of the countries have established indoor radon reference concentrations, varying from 100 Bq m−3 to 200 Bq m−3, and 300 Bq m−3 for residential homes and workplaces [17].
Strategies to prevent and reduce indoor radon exposure to as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) may include:
  • Established national reference levels for radon in indoor air and drinking water [15];
  • Recommendations for residents to mitigate radon concentrations in existing homes exceeding the national reference levels;
  • Mechanical ventilation and/or a radon membrane over the entire base area of the building in combination with a passive or active radon sump system [15].
It is necessary to establish building codes, public awareness and to undertake mitigation measures to reduce indoor radon exposure below the national reference level in existing houses. Well-tested, durable and cost-efficient mitigation methods exist to prevent radon from entering new buildings and to reduce radon in existing buildings [15,18,19]. Some authors emphasized a need to prevent radon in the construction phase of the building process as one of the priorities. Aspecific radon prevention measure is usually a radon membrane over the entire base area of the building in combination with a passive radon sump system [20]. With balanced ventilation, the air exchange may be increased without increasing the negative air pressure in the building. The choice of ventilation type could therefore have an effect on the radon concentration indoors, and balanced ventilation is favorable compared to the other types of ventilation [21]. It is reported that a barrier membrane decreased the indoor radon concentration by 90% [22]. Hence, as the reduction in the radon concentration was very significant by adopting a barrier membrane, the combination of this technical solution with the adoption of mechanical ventilation procedures, even reducing the number of air changes per hour, can be a very efficient solution for radon remediation. According to all mentioned above, this study aims to accomplish the following:
  • Present the results of high indoor radon concentration in a residential test-house;
  • Estimate the annual effective dose to average adults;
  • Initiate/offer several solutions for radon remediation.
This study was conducted based on previous research in this mining/industrial area, which is suspected of elevated soil radioactivity, enhanced indoor radon levels and diverse geological characteristics [12,13,23]. The primary goals of the present paper were to analyze monthly and seasonal indoor radon variations in a typical ground-floor residential house (42.9343° N, 20.8389° E). The results of this study would be useful to define methods for reducing high radon concentration in this specific region, contributing to an overall understanding of radon behavior.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The measurements were performed in a house located in the area of Kosovska Mitrovica about 3 km from the “Trepča” mine. It is atypical one-story house built 50 years ago, whose basement is made of carved stone (delivered from a nearby hill) with a thickness of 50 cm. The house does not have a floor concrete slab, while the ceiling is made of concrete. Only natural ventilation (opening the windows/doors, chimney) exists in the house. The floor of the studied bedroom is covered with hardboard slabs (with a gap of joints of 0.5 cm). The walls are plastered, covered with paint; the external walls are south-west-oriented, while the entrance to the house is east-oriented and leads straight into the bedroom. The window is a double wooden window with a height of 50 cm and width of 100 cm.
The region of Kosovska Mitrovica abounds in geological diversity. The formation of the geological structure in the observed area refers to the period from the Ordovician–Silurian to the Quaternary. Strong volcanic activity produced larger masses of intrusive rocks in the past [23]. The study area contains significant deposits of Pb-Zn ore, and mining activities were realized within the industrial complex “Trepča”. As a result of magmatic and tectonic activity, there is a deep fault and a network of seismic faults. Many studies reported increased content of heavy metals and radionuclides in the area [24,25,26,27].
The study area has a continental climate with rainfall of 513 mm per year, and a minimum and maximum temperature range from −4 °C to +26 °C.

2.2. Methods of Measurements

Radon levels were annually monitored from 9 July 2022 to 4 July 2023. The radon detector, Airthings Corentium Home, was placed on shelf away from the door/window. The radon data were continuously recorded at the same time of each day (daily averaged read between 3 and 4 PM).
Airthings Corentium Home uses an alpha spectrometry detection method based on the process of radon diffusion into the chamber. It operates in the range from 0 to 9999 Bq m−3; the accuracy of the device at a typical concentration of 200 Bq m−3 is 5–10% for a measurement period from 7 days to 2months, and uncertainty for 1month measurement is less than 10% (https://www.airthings.com/home, accessed on 20 January 2022) [28]. The detector shows the first result after 6–24h, namely, long-term average (LTA) and short-term average (STA) radon concentration. The LTA represents average radon value for the current measurement, updated once a day and averaged by the detector itself over the entire period of measurement, while the STA shows last-day radon values.

2.3. Dose and Health Risk Assessment

The annual effective dose to adults due to inhalation of radon was estimated using the recently recommended dose coefficient [29] as follows:
E = CRn × DC × T
where E is the annual average effective dose (mSv) to an adult; CRn is the arithmetic mean of indoor radon activity concentration (Bq m−3); DC is the dose coefficient for 222Rn inhalation for the average adult, 6.7 × 10−6 mSv h−1 per Bq m−3, recommended by the Publication 137 [30], which corresponds to the equilibrium factor of 0.4 between radon and its progeny for most indoor situations; T is the exposure time during one year: 7000 h is usually taken; in this specific situation, as it will be discussed later, 9 h per day for sleep (3285 h) is assumed [31]. An annual effective dose of 14 mSv is estimated for radon exposure of an adult at home at the upper value of radon level (300 Bq m−3), ICRP, Publication 126 [32].
High indoor radon concentration can cause lung cancer, so the excess lifetime cancer risk ELCR should be calculated as follows:
ELCR = E × DL × RF
where E is the annual effective dose (mSv) to an adult; DL is average duration of life (estimated to be 70 years) and RF is fatal risk factor for stochastic effects (5.5 × 10−2 Sv−1) [33].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Radon Activity Concentration

Annual radon measurements conducted in thebedroom of the house are shown in Figure 1. Diurnal radon concentrations varied in the range 91–3017 Bq m−3, with an average short-term (STA) radon concentration of 1530 Bq m−3. There were only a few STA measurements (over the entire period) below the reference level recommended by the European Council [16]. The long-term average (LTA) radon concentration during the year was 1499 Bq m−3.
There is no clearly established pattern according to which the monthly radon values changed. Higher average radon concentrations are observed in the autumn season of the year and lower radon concentrations in the warm periods; an average concentration for periods Sep–Nov, Dec–Feb, Mar–May and Jun–Aug are 1868, 1443, 1509 and 1246 Bq m−3, respectively, which are in good agreement with some studies [34,35,36]. Indoor radon concentration is mainly influenced by the strength of sources, air exchange rate, activities of the inhabitants, natural ventilation and heating systems. By the analysis of this case, a significant drop in radon concentration was observed in December, as well as large daily fluctuations (Figure 1 and Figure 2). This can be because the household members used frequent airing in those days, which influenced decreases in concentrations. Apart from that, the bedroom was poorly heated with an electric heater. However, the opposite relationship with the highest radon levels during the summer is reported in other studies [14,37].
An increased level of natural radionuclides in soil and higher content of radionuclides in stone used for construction have been reported in the local area [14]. This can be the main cause of the radon source in the house, but partly it can be a consequence of technological activities such as the mining operations, which led to increase of indoor radon [38], or the proximity of a deep fault as some high radon values correspond to sites near active faults [39]. Furthermore, the bank of River Ibar is at adistance of 50 m, so the increased radon diffusion may be affected by the higher porosity of sand and gravel [40] or by the land-surface slope of the house as hillsides have more permeable soils allowing greater radon emanation [41,42].

3.2. Effective Dose and Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk

According to Equation (1), the average annual effective dose from radon for household residents was estimated at 33 mSv. Recently, the value of the dose coefficient was updated taking into account an apportioned tissue weighting factor for the bronchial and bronchiolar regions (0.08) and a radiation weighting factor 20 for alpha particles [43]. The applied dose conversion factor (DCF) and estimated effective dose (calculated according to Equation (1)) can be reviewed through the different publications recommending its value (Table 1). If the time of 7000 h spent indoors (recommended by the UNSCEAR [7,44,45] and ICRP [46]) is applied in Formula (1), in the worst-case scenario, the effective dose (Table 1) should be five times higher than the estimated value of 14 mSv for exposure at home [29]. Bertoni et al. [31] discussed that in case of mitigation intervention, the effective dose should be below 20 mSv y−1 (house + workplace); the authors emphasized the effective dose of 50 mSv y−1 as the limit for evacuation from the room/home. Therefore, there is a need to reconsider the dose coefficient to be appropriate and applicable for reconciling discrepancies in dose estimation.
According to Equation (2), the calculated excess lifetime cancer risk ELCR is 1.27 × 10−1. This value is more than 2.3 times higher than the upper limit of 5.4 × 10−2 (which assumes the average annual effective dose of 14 mSv based on the recommendation from [29]).

3.3. Mitigation Measures

The discovery of very high radon concentration (i.e., estimated high annual effective dose) in this house requires the prompt implementation of protective actions. In order to reduce the existing, evidence-based problem associated with high radon concentration, several measures, including low-cost alternatives, were proposed.
Enhanced ventilation is the first most important measure in radon mitigation protocols, and it was adopted by the inhabitants. Mechanical filtration of house air has the added health benefits of reducing dust which contains radon decay products. Although household air should be refreshed from outside, opening doors and windows (passive ventilation) should not be a permanent mitigation strategy, as it is effective only if radon concentration is not very high. This should be a simple practice until a ventilation system can be installed. Air movement of 1.5–2 exchanges per hour would be ideal to dilute the radon gas in room atmosphere [47,48]. Forced ventilation ensuring adequate air renewal would be efficient for houses below ground level [49].
Therewith, due to the high annual effective dose estimated for inhabitants, other mitigation measures against radon were recommended: depressurization, installing waterproofing, replacement of the windows, floor replacement or better sealing the cracks between the floor and wall joints, and anti-radon coating. At this moment, of the suggested measures, waterproofing the basement and replacement of windows were applied (Figure 3).
Waterproofing (drainage) was conducted to impede moisture retention in the soil near the house. Since the house is partly below ground level, rainfall is the most evident factor affecting indoor radon levels, due to capping effect: greater rainfall → wetter soil → higher humidity flux from surface to air [50]. Generally, soil moisture reduces air permeability and allows radon to accumulate indoors due to negative pressure. A drainage system prepared around the house (Figure 3) should reduce the indoor radon level by deflecting water away from the house.
Replacement of wooden windows with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) ones were made to enhance airtightness (disable air leakage). The implementation of energy-saving measures can improve the indoor air quality. However, some authors reported that leak-proof PVC windows lead to increased radon accumulation, so the controlled ventilation system should be applied in the lowermost floor of building [51,52].
A depressurization (sub-slab, sump or sub-membrane depressurization) is the most effective way for radon remediation [53,54,55,56]. Natural soil depressurization can result in a decrease of in-soil moisture leading to the stability of house’s foundation [49]. In existing old houses of high-radon areas, the combination of a sub-slab depressurization system and the sealing of basement openings/cracks provided very effective mitigation [57]. However, mere sealing of cracks/openings resulted in modest reduction of radon entry [58].
Anti-radon coating (anti-radon paint/radon barrier coat) for interior walls, foundations and slab of basement is confirmed as good solution for sealing of seams, cracks and joints between the wall and floor as well as spaces between the wall and window; it is reported that two years after coating, radon mitigation efficiency was higher than 86% [59]. The combination of mitigation strategies seems to be more effective than a single measure [56].
In addition to geological, atmospheric and climatic conditions, the choice of the optimal measure depends on factors related to the initial radon concentration, routes of radon entry, characteristics of the building and residents’ behaviors [19]. There is an intention to implement more radon remediation measures in the future with the permanent tendency of radon risk reduction in this house. However, it is the responsibility of the householder to decide whether to conduct the suggested mitigation measures. On the other hand, the cost of radon mitigation and willingness to pay for energy consumption or for energy-saving renovations addressed to the householder are the important issues for expected effectiveness.
Certainly, bearing in mind the partially conducted energy-saving measures, new radon measurements are planned in order to obtain outcomes after mitigation. It is advisable to harmonize energy efficiency programs with health programs in pursuit of the best solutions compliance with energy saving and indoor air quality. Further study would show whether the intervention measures were successful to reduce the entire amount of radon for a sustained period.

3.4. Measurements after Application of Mitigation Measures

In accordance with the high radon values obtained in this survey and the implementation of some remedial measures, the decision of householders was to repeat the radon measurements during the spring of 2024. For almost two months of new measurements, the results indicated a decrease in radon concentration (Figure 4). The implemented remedial actions influenced a decrease of average radon concentration to 846 Bq m−3, which is about 44% lower than the previous average annual value of 1499 Bq m−3.
Moreover, daily radon concentrations were compared for the same measurement period of two different surveys/years (2023 vs. 2024); averaged results before and after remediation showed a 46% reduction in radon levels (1533 Bq m−3 vs. 827 Bq m−3). This slight discrepancy should be related to seasonal variations of radon. Although there were several strong daily fluctuations during the measuring period probably influenced by opening and closing the windows, radon concentration in the test-house after remediation is still high. Traditional masonry walls exhibit construction flaws (small cracks) which can increase radon entry [60]. It would be preferable to seal the cracks using an anti-radon coating to obtain lower radon values. Recently, Portaro et al. reported that the application of a waterproofing product as a radon barrier on the walls resulted in a 47% reduction of radon concentration [61].

4. Conclusions

High annual radon concentration (1499 Bq m−3) and corresponding effective dose (33 mSv y−1) to inhabitants was observed in the bedroom of an old house near the “Trepča” mine. There are several possibilities associated with radon mitigation in this test-house. Some of them were adopted by the inhabitants. Post-remediation testing confirmed results of radon interventions and effectiveness (radon levels declined for 44%), but there remains the need to implement additional mitigation measures. This should definitely be taken into account as radon levels are still high. Further studies should be focused on the identification of the source/route of radon entry, its accumulation and circulation, and the impact of building materials in this and similar houses of the area.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.S. and L.G.; methodology, L.G.; validation, D.S., L.G. and B.V.; formal analysis, B.V.; investigation, D.S.; resources, D.S.; data curation, L.G.; writing—original draft preparation, D.S. and L.G.; writing—review and editing, L.G.; visualization, B.V.; supervision, L.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovations of the Republic of Serbia (Grant No. 451-03-65/2024-03/200123).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ramola, R.; Negi, S.; Choubey, V. Radon and thoron monitoring in the environment of Kumaun Himalayas: Survey and outcomes. J. Environ. Radioact. 2005, 79, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cosma, C.; Cucos-Dinu, A.; Papp, B.; Begy, R.; Sainz, C. Soil and building material as main sources of indoor radon in Baita-Stei radon prone area (Romania). J. Environ. Radioact. 2013, 116, 174–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Darby, S.; Hill, D.; Auvinen, A.; Barros-Dios, J.M.; Baysson, H.; Bochicchio, F.; Deo, H.; Falk, R.; Forastiere, F.; Hakama, M.; et al. Radon in homes and risk of lung cancer: Collaborative analysis of individual data from 13 European case-control studies. Br. Med. J. 2005, 330, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Krewski, D.; Lubin, J.H.; Zielinski, J.M.; Alavanja, M.; Catalan, V.S.; Field, R.W.; Klotz, J.B.; Létourneau, E.G.; Lynch, C.F.; Lyon, J.L.; et al. Residential radon and risk of lung cancer. A combined analysis of seven North American case-control studies. Epidemiology 2005, 16, 137–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Langắrd, S. Gregorius Agricola memorial lecture: Lung cancer—A work-related disease for 500 years, as predicted by Agricola. J. Trace. Elem. Med. Biol. 2015, 31, 214–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Samet, J.M. Radiation and cancer risk: A continuing challenge for epidemiologists. Environ. Health 2011, 10, 541–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. UNSCEAR Source and Effect of Ionizing Radiation. The General Assembly with Scientific Annex; Annex B: Exposure of the public and workers from various sources of radiation; UNSCEAR, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  8. Abuelhia, E. Evaluation of annual effective dose from indoor radon concentration in Eastern Province, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2017, 140, 137–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Akamba Mbembe, B.; Manga, A.; Mbida Mbembe, S.; Ele Abiama, P.; Saidou; Ondo Meye, P.; Kofane, T.C.; Ben–Bolie, G.H. Indoor radon (222Rn) measurements and estimation of annual effective dose in Mvangan locality, South Cameroon. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 2022, 198, 1565–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Silva, C.R.; Silva-Filho, E.V. Radon concentration and radiation exposure levels in workplace buildings of downtown Rio de Janeiro City, SE Brazil. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 2020, 326, 1709–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yousef, A.M.M.; Zimami, K. Indoor radon levels, influencing factors and annual effective doses in dwellings of Al-Kharj City, Saudi Arabia. J. Radiat. Res. Appl. Sci. 2019, 12, 460–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gulan, L.; Stajic, J.M.; Bochicchio, F.; Carpentieri, C.; Milic, G.; Nikezic, D.; Zunic, Z.S. Is high indoor radon concentration correlated with specific activity of radium in nearby soil? A study in Kosovo and Metohija. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 19561–19568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Gulan, L.; Forkapić, S.; Spasić, D.; Živković Radovanović, J.; Hansman, J.; Lakatoš, R.; Samardžić, S. Identification of high radon dwellings, risk of exposure and geogenic potential in the mining area of the “Trepča” complex. Indoor Air 2022, 32, e13077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Spasić, D.; Gulan, L. High indoor radon case study: Influence of meteorological parameters and indication of radon prone area. Atmosphere 2022, 13, 2120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. World Health Organization (Ed.) Handbook on Indoor Radon: A Public Health Perspective; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  16. European Commission Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 28 January 2013. Off. J. Eur. Union 2013, L13-1, 1–73.
  17. Cinelli, G.; De Cort, M.; Tollefsen, T. (Eds.) European Atlas of Natural Radiation; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gaskin, J.; Whyte, J.; Coyle, D. An assessment of uncertainty using two different modelling techniques to estimate the cost effectiveness of mitigating radon in existing housing in Canada. Sci. Total. Environ. 2020, 724, 138092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Khan, S.M.; Gomes, J.; Krewski, D.R. Radon interventions around the globe: A systematic review. Heliyon 2019, 5, e01737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Finne, I.E.; Kolstad, T.; Larsson, M.; Olsen, B.; Prendergast, J.; Rudjord, A.L. Significant reduction in indoor radon in newly built houses. J. Environ. Radioact. 2019, 196, 259–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Arvela, H.; Holmgren, O.; Reisbacka, H. Review of low-energy construction, airtightness, ventilation strategies and indoor radon: Results from Finnish houses and apartments. Radiat. Protect. Dosim. 2014, 162, 351–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nunes, L.J.R.; Curado, A. Confined spaces in buildings with high indoor radon concentration: A case study analysis with the application of constructive remediation measures. Buildings 2023, 13, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dimitrijevic, M.D. Geology of Yugoslavia; Geol. Inst. GEMINI: Belgrade, Serbia, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  24. Borgna, L.; Di Lella, L.A.; Nannoni, F.; Pisani, A.; Pizzetti, E.; Protano, G.; Riccobono, F.; Rossi, S. The high contents of lead in soils of northern Kosovo. J. Geochem. Explor. 2009, 101, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Di Lella, L.A.; Frati, L.; Loppi, S.; Protano, G.; Riccobono, F. Environmental distribution of uranium and other trace elements at selected Kosovo sites. Chemosphere 2004, 56, 861–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gulan, L.; Milenkovic, B.; Stajic, J.M.; Vuckovic, B.; Krstic, D.; Zeremski, T.; Ninkov, J. Correlation between radioactivity levels and heavy metal content in the soils of the North Kosovska Mitrovica environment. Environ. Sci. Processes. Impacts 2013, 15, 1735–1742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Nannoni, F.; Protano, G.; Riccobono, F. Fractionation and geochemical mobility of heavy elements in soils of a mining area in northern Kosovo. Geoderma 2011, 161, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Airthings Corentium Home: Radon Detector. Corentium AS. Oslo, Norway. 2015. Available online: https://www.airthings.com/home (accessed on 31 January 2024).
  29. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) of 26 January, 2018. Summary of ICRP Recommendations on Radon. ICRP Ref. 4836-9756-8598. Available online: http://www.icrpaedia.org/images/f/fd/ICRPRadonSummary.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2024).
  30. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). Occupational Intakes of Radionuclides: Part 3; ICRP Publication 137. Ann. ICRP 46 (3–4); SAGE Publication: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bertoni, G.; El Hajj, T.M.; Gandolla, M. Radon risk assessment and mitigation deadlines. JERA 2022, 3, 7790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). Radiological Protection against Radon Exposure; ICRP Publication 126. Ann. ICRP, 43(3); SAGE Publication: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  33. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). The Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection; ICRP Publication 103. Ann; Pergamon Press: Oxford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  34. Denman, A.R.; Crockett, R.G.M.; Groves-Kirkby, C.J.; Phillips, P.S.; Gillmore, G.K.; Woolridge, A.C. The value of seasonal correction factors in assessing the health risk from domestic radon-a case study in Northamptonshire, UK. Environ. Int. 2007, 33, 34–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Papastefanou, C.; Stoulos, S.; Manolopoulou, M.; Ioannidou, A.; Charalambous, S. Indoor radon concentrations in Greek apartment dwellings. Health Phys. 1994, 66, 270–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Taşköprü, C.; İçhedef, M.; Saç, M.M. Diurnal, monthly, and seasonal variations of indoor radon concentrations concerning meteorological parameters. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2023, 195, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Wilson, D.L.; Gammage, R.B.; Dudney, C.S.; Saultz, R.J. Summer time elevation of 222Rn levels in Huntsville, Alabama. Health Phys. 1991, 60, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wysocka, M. Radon problems in mining and post-mining areas in Upper Silesia region, Poland. Nukleonika 2016, 61, 307–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Catalano, R.; Imme, G.; Mangano, G.; Morelli, D.; Rosselli, T. Indoor radon survey in Eastern Sicily. Radiat. Meas. 2012, 47, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yusuff, I.M.; Adagunodo, T.A.; Omoloye, M.A.; Olanrewaju, A.M. Interdependency of soil-gas radon-222 concentration on soil porosity at different soil-depths. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1299, 012099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Carrion-Matta, A.; Lawrence, J.; Kang, C.-M.; Wolfson, J.M.; Li, L.; Vieira, C.L.Z.; Schwartz, J.; Demokritou, P.; Koutrakis, P. Predictors of indoor radon levels in the Midwest United States. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2021, 71, 1515–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Cho, B.-W.; Choo, C.O.; Kim, M.S.; Hwang, J.; Yun, U.; Lee, S. Spatial relationships between radon and topographical, geological, and geochemical factors and their relevance in all of South Korea. Environ. Earth Sci. 2015, 74, 5155–5168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. UNSCEAR Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. The General Assembly with Scientific Annexes; ANNEX B Lung cancer from exposure to radon; UNSCEAR, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  44. UNSCEAR Source and Effect of Ionizing Radiation. The General Assembly with Scientific Annex; UNSCEAR, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  45. UNSCEAR (United Nation Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Report). Vol. II: Sources-to-Effects Assessment for Radon in Homes and Workplaces; UNSCEAR, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  46. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). Lung Cancer Risk from Radon and Progeny and Statement on Radon; International Commission on Radiological Protection: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2010; Volume 40. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kladder, D.L. Case Report and Technical Document. Colorado Vintage Companies 16–03 CO; Progeny Group Limited: Colorado Springs, CO, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  48. Larsson, L.S. Risk-reduction strategies to expand radon care planning with vulnerable groups. Public Health Nurs. 2014, 31, 526–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nunes, L.J.R.; Curado, A.; Lopes, S.I. Indoor radon mitigation strategies: The Alto Minho region (Northern Portugal) practical case. Indoor Built Environ. 2024, 33, 269–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. De Francesco, S.; Pascale Tommasone, F.; Cuoco, E.; Tedesco, D. Indoor radon seasonal variability at different floors of building. Radiat. Meas. 2010, 45, 928–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Yarmoshenko, I.V.; Onishchenko, A.D.; Malinovsky, G.P.; Vasilyev, A.V.; Nazarov, E.I.; Zhukovsky, M.V. Radon concentration in conventional and new energy efficient multistorey apartment houses: Results of survey in four Russian cities. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gulan, L.; Stajic, J.M.; Spasic, D.; Forkapic, S. Radon levels and indoor air quality after application of thermal retrofit measures—A case study. Air Qual. Atmos. Health 2023, 16, 363–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ennemoser, O.; Oberdorfer, E.; Brunner, P.; Schneider, P.; Purtscheller, F.; Stingl, V.; Ambach, W. Mitigation of indoor radon in an area with unusually high radon concentrations. Health Phys. 1995, 69, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Henschel, D.B. Analysis of radon mitigation techniques used in existing US houses. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 1994, 56, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health Effective, NCCEH. Interventions for Reducing Indoor Radon Exposure; NCCEH: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  56. Synnott, H.; Colgan, P.A.; Hanley, O.; Fenton, D. The effectiveness of radon remediation in Irish schools. Health Phys. 2007, 92, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Stanley, F.K.T.; Zarezadeh, S.; Dumais, C.D.; Dumais, K.; MacQueen, R.; Clement, F.; Goodarzi, A.A. Comprehensive survey of household radon gas levels and risk factors in southern Alberta. Canadian Med. Assoc. J. Open 2017, 5, E255–E264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Arvela, H. Radon Mitigation in blocks of flats. Sci. Total Environ. 2001, 272, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Pan, L.; Qin, G.; Wang, Q.; Li, F.; Li, W. Development of an anti-radon coating for underground engineering. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2022, 2224, 012067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Frutos, B.; Martín-Consuegra, F.; Alonso, C.; Perez, G.; Peón, J.; Ruano-Ravina, A.; Barros, J.M.; Santorun, A.M. Inner Wall Filler as a Singular and Significant Source of Indoor Radon Pollution in Heritage Buildings: An Exhalation Method-Based Approach. Build. Environ. 2021, 201, 108005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Portaro, M.; Rocchetti, I.; Tuccimei, P.; Galli, G.; Soligo, M.; Ciotoli, G.; Longoni, C.; Vasquez, D.; Sola, F. Indoor Radon Surveying and Mitigation in the Case-Study of Celleno Town (Central Italy) Located in a Medium Geogenic Radon Potential Area. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Atmosphere 15 00745 g001
Figure 1. Short−term average (STA) and long-term average (LTA) radon concentrations in the bedroom of the test-house during the year.
Figure 1. Short−term average (STA) and long-term average (LTA) radon concentrations in the bedroom of the test-house during the year.
Atmosphere 15 00745 g001
Atmosphere 15 00745 g002
Figure 2. Monthly averaged radon concentrations in the bedroom of the house.
Figure 2. Monthly averaged radon concentrations in the bedroom of the house.
Atmosphere 15 00745 g002
Atmosphere 15 00745 g003
Figure 3. Mitigation measures conducted in a test-house.
Figure 3. Mitigation measures conducted in a test-house.
Atmosphere 15 00745 g003
Atmosphere 15 00745 g004
Figure 4. Short-term average (STA) and longterm average (LTA) radon concentrations in a test-house after the implementation of remediation measures.
Figure 4. Short-term average (STA) and longterm average (LTA) radon concentrations in a test-house after the implementation of remediation measures.
Atmosphere 15 00745 g004
Table 1. Different dose coefficients for calculation of the effective doses (E) from radon exposure.
Table 1. Different dose coefficients for calculation of the effective doses (E) from radon exposure.
DCF *
(nSv h−1 per Bq m−3)		DC
(nSv h−1 per Bq m−3)		T
(h)		E
(mSv y−1)		Reference
9 (range 5–25)3.6700037.77[7,44,45]
124.8700050.37[46]
16.756.73285 (7000)33 (70.3)[29]
15 (range 8–40)63285 (7000)30.4 (62.96)[43]
* Dose conversion factor (an equilibrium factor of 0.4 for radon and its progeny is not assumed).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Spasić, D.; Gulan, L.; Vučković, B. Indoor Radon Testing, Effective Dose and Mitigation Measures in a Residential House of a Mining Area. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070745

AMA Style

Spasić D, Gulan L, Vučković B. Indoor Radon Testing, Effective Dose and Mitigation Measures in a Residential House of a Mining Area. Atmosphere. 2024; 15(7):745. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070745

Chicago/Turabian Style

Spasić, Dušica, Ljiljana Gulan, and Biljana Vučković. 2024. "Indoor Radon Testing, Effective Dose and Mitigation Measures in a Residential House of a Mining Area" Atmosphere 15, no. 7: 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070745

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop