[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: High natural background at Ramsar

>Andrew, Because my e-mail connection is intermittent at present, I could
>have missed a challenge to your quote of Kondo's value for certain
>'high-background areas in China'.  The value of 0.5 mSv/yr would seem to
>constitute a record low, even if only external radiation would be
>considered.  A typo, perhaps?  Typically,  2 - 3 mSv/yr from all sources
>(about half from radon) is an accepted average background value in many
>countries.  For an impact assessment, it would be necessary to correlate
>the number of people affected by a given doserate category.

My error.  Kondo (page 51) says "...the annual effective dose equivalents
of residents become 0.55 and 0.21 rem, respectively, in the high-background
and control areas."  I read rem and typed Sv.  No doubt under the influence
of recent RADSAFE threads.


The opinions expressed above are well-reasoned and insightful.  Needless to
say, they are not those of my employer. (with apologies to Michael Feldman)		

Andrew Karam, MS, CHP					(614) 292-1284 (phone)
The Ohio State University 					(614) 292-7002 (fax)
Office of Radiation Safety					"The mind is not a vessel to
1314 Kinnear Road						be filled but a fire to be
Columbus, OH  43212						lighted." (Plutarch)