DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of natural radioactivity in soil and olive mill pomace utilizing nal (TI) gamma-ray spectrometry and low background alpha/beta counting system

  • 투고 : 2023.11.15
  • 심사 : 2023.12.28
  • 발행 : 2024.05.25

초록

The study conducted in the northwest region of Jordan aimed to assess the levels of natural radioactivity in soil and olive mill pomace (OMP) samples. The researchers used Nal (TI) gamma-ray spectrometry to measure the activity concentrations of 226Ra, 232Th, 40K, and 137Cs in the samples. The average activity concentrations of 226Ra, 232Th, 40K, and 137Cs in the soil samples were found to be 18.624 ± 5.82, 12.276 ± 5.728, 518.33 ± 212.57, and 0.140 ± 0.09 (Bq, kg-1), respectively. In the OMP samples, the average activity concentrations of 226Ra, 232Th, and 40K were 7.272 ± 4.386, 3.454 ± 1.503, and 169.997 ± 81.873 (Bq kg-1), respectively, and no 137Cs was detected. The study also investigated fundamental parameters associated with radon, specifically the radon emanation coefficient (RnEC) and radon mass exhalation rate (Ex). The RnEC values ranged from 0.621 to 0.78 (Bq kg-1), with an average value of 0.71 ± 0.06 (Bq kg-1). The estimated Ex from the soil samples ranged from 65.83 to 124.86 (mBq kg-1h-1), with an average value of 99.74 ± 21.73 (mBq kg-1h-1). Regarding radiological hazards, the study examined various parameters, including radium equivalent activity, external and internal hazard indices, gamma and alpha indices, absorbed gamma dose rate, and excess lifetime cancer risk. All of these assessed values were found to be below the worldwide recommended limits for radiological safety. Additionally, the study analyzed the concentrations of gross alpha and gross beta radioactivities in soil and OMP samples. The soil samples had an average gross alpha activity of 4.642 ± 1.04 (Bq kg-1) and an average gross beta activity of 48.13 ± 14.50 (Bq kg-1). The OMP samples showed an average gross alpha activity of 0.32 ± 0.27 (Bq kg-1) and an average gross beta activity of 59.19 ± 12.94 (Bq kg-1). Overall, the obtained results are crucial for evaluating the radiological risks associated with natural radioactivity in the northwest region of Jordan. The findings establish baseline data for comparison and reference for radioactivity levels in the environment.

키워드

과제정보

The authors express their gratitude to the nuclear and radiation group at Al-Majmaah University for their support and contributions. We also extend our sincere thanks to the editor and reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions, which have significantly enhanced the quality of this manuscript.

참고문헌

  1. S. Chinnaesakki, Manish Chopra, Sanjeev Kumar, Vishal Arora, S. Sartandel, S. Bara, R. Tripathi, V. Puranik, B. Bajwa, Assessment of natural radioactivity in soil samples and comparison of direct and indirect measurement of environmental air kerma rate, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 289 (3) (2011) 885-892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-011-1192-x
  2. K. Aladeniyi, A.K. Aladenika, Radiological study of sachet-packaged water: a case study of the products in Owo local government area of Ondo State, Nigeria, J. Radiol. Prot. 35 (3) (2015) N19.
  3. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, et al., Sources and effects of ionizing radiation, United Nations scientific committee on the effects of atomic radiation (UNSCEAR) 2000 Report, volume I: Report to the general assembly, with scientific annexes-sources, 2000, United Nations.
  4. IAEA Division of Public Information, Radiation Safety, (IAEA/PI/A47E) IAEA, Austria, 1996, IAEA publication code: 00725.
  5. Ibrahim F. Al-Hamarneh, Mohammad I. Awadallah, Soil radioactivity levels and radiation hazard assessment in the highlands of Northern Jordan, Radiat. Meas. 44 (1) (2009) 102-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2008.11.005
  6. Shittu Abdullahi, Aznan Fazli Ismail, Supian Samat, Radiological characterization of building materials used in Malaysia and assessment of external and internal doses, Nucl. Sci. Techn. 30 (2019) 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-018-0540-8
  7. Guadie Degu Belete, Yetsedaw Alemu Anteneh, General overview of radon studies in health hazard perspectives, J. Oncol. 2021 (2021).
  8. National Research Council, et al., Health Effects of Exposure to Radon: BEIR VI, National Academies Press, 1999.
  9. Patricia Hart, 2021-2025 Maryland comprehensive cancer control plan, 2021.
  10. Abdulaziz Alharbi, A. El-Taher, A study on transfer factors of radionuclides from soil to plant, Life Sci. J. 10 (2) (2013) 532-539.
  11. Radiation protection and the management of radioactive waste in the oil and gas industry, in: Training Course Series, (40) International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2010.
  12. David A. Atwood, Radionuclides in the Environment, John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
  13. Siak Kuan Lee, Husin Wagiran, Ahmad Termizi Ramli, A survey of gross alpha and gross beta activity in soil samples in Kinta District, Perak, Malaysia, Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 162 (3) (2014) 345-350. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/nct273
  14. Ozlem Selcuk Zorer, Hasan Ceylan, Mahmut Dogru, Gross alpha and beta radioactivity concentration in water, soil and sediment of the Bendimahi River and Van Lake (Turkey), Environ. Monit. Assessm. 148 (2009) 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-007-0137-x
  15. S.A. Talha, R. Lindsay, R.T. Newman, R.J. De Meijer, PP Maleka, I.N. Hlatshwayo, N.A. Mlwilo, A.K. Mohanty, 𝛾-Ray spectrometry of radon in water and the role of radon to representatively sample aquifers, Appl. Radiat. Isotopes 66 (11) (2008) 1623-1626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2007.12.016
  16. Gregory J. White, Arthur S. Rood, Radon emanation from NORM-contaminated pipe scale and soil at petroleum industry sites, J. Environ. Radioact. 54 (3) (2001) 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0265-931X(00)00156-9
  17. Richard J. Vetter, ICRP Publication 103, the Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, LWW, 2008.
  18. J. Beretka, P.J. Mathew, Natural radioactivity of Australian building materials, industrial wastes and by-products, Health Phys. 48 (1) (1985) 87-95. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004032-198501000-00007
  19. Natasa Sarap, Vesna Kraisnik, Marija Jankovic, Determination of gross α and β activities in soil samples from drazljevo landfill (power plant gacko), in: Third International Scientific Symposium, Agrosym Jahorina, 2012.
  20. R.R. Benke, K.J. Kearfott, Soil sample moisture content as a function of time during oven drying for gamma-ray spectroscopic measurements, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 422 (1-3) (1999) 817-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(98)01004-3
  21. Organisation de cooperation et de developpement economiques. Agence pour l'energie nucleaire, Exposure to Radiation from the Natural Radioactivity in Building Materials: Report by a Group of Experts of the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, OECD, 1979.
  22. N. Damla, H. Baltas, A. Celik, E. Kiris, UGUR Cevik, Calculation of radiation attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and electron densities for some building materials, Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 150 (4) (2012) 541-549. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncr432
  23. Emre Tabar, Mehmet Nurullah Kumru, M. Ichedef, MM Sac, Radioactivity level and the measurement of soil gas radon concentration in Dikili geothermal area, Turkey, International Journal of Radiation Research 11 (4) (2013) 253.
  24. Jaber O. Dahloos, Mohammed J. Alwazzan, Determination the concentration of heavy elements and gross alpha, beta, and gamma activities in soil samples from Tworeach district at Karbala governorate, in: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 928, No. 7, IOP Publishing, 2020, 072015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/928/7/072015
  25. S. Biswas, J. Ferdous, A. Begum, N. Ferdous, Study of gross alpha and gross beta radioactivities in environmental samples, J. Sci. Res. 7 (2015).
  26. Mohammad Abu Shayeb, Muzahir Ali Baloch, Distribution of natural radioactivity in soil and date palm-pits using high purity germanium radiation detectors and LB-alpha/beta gas-flow counter in Saudi Arabia, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 52 (6) (2020) 1282-1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.12.009