Evaluation of tritium ingestion dose in the Republic of Korea using environmental impact assessment methodologies from three organizations

This study performed a comparative analysis using data from Republic of Korea's nuclear power plants and applied methodologies from Republic of Korea, IAEA TRS-472, and CSA N288.1–14 to assess environmental impact doses. The research primarily centered on estimating the effective doses received...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inNuclear engineering and technology Vol. 57; no. 4; p. 103323
Main Authors Park, Jewan, Kim, Yongmin
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Elsevier B.V 01.04.2025
Elsevier
한국원자력학회
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1738-5733
2234-358X
DOI10.1016/j.net.2024.11.025

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This study performed a comparative analysis using data from Republic of Korea's nuclear power plants and applied methodologies from Republic of Korea, IAEA TRS-472, and CSA N288.1–14 to assess environmental impact doses. The research primarily centered on estimating the effective doses received from consuming crops and fish affected by tritiums's atmospheric and marine discharge from nuclear facilities. It has been confirmed that significant differences exist in the effective dose due to various influencing factors such as the moisture content ratio, the weight ratio of the measurement target parameters, and the calculation methods of Organically Bound Tritium (OBT). In the context of crops, the effective dose for Republic of Korea was represented as 1.297 μSv. Conversely, the TRS-472 and N288.1–14 revealed doses of 2.684 μSv and 2.284 μSv, respectively, demonstrating an approximate two-fold difference in the effective dose values. This study highlights the essential need for technological advancements in environmental dose impact assessments, urging the development of customized evaluation models that consider each country's unique characteristics while advocating for enhanced international standardization in dose evaluations.
ISSN:1738-5733
2234-358X
DOI:10.1016/j.net.2024.11.025