用于核灾难评估的辐射绘图技术比较研究

IF 0.7 Q4 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Disaster Research Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.20965/jdr.2024.p0429
Kotaro Ochi, Evelyne Barker, Shigeo Nakama, Marc Gleizes, Erwan Manach, Vincent Faure, Y. Sanada
{"title":"用于核灾难评估的辐射绘图技术比较研究","authors":"Kotaro Ochi, Evelyne Barker, Shigeo Nakama, Marc Gleizes, Erwan Manach, Vincent Faure, Y. Sanada","doi":"10.20965/jdr.2024.p0429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The distribution of the ambient dose equivalent rate (i.e., air dose rate) after a nuclear disaster is crucial for zoning contaminated areas to facilitate authorities’ effective decision making. Several countries are considering a gradual characterization strategy where airborne measurement is performed first followed by ground measurement (i.e., via manborne or carborne surveys). Nonetheless, potential differences might emerge in country-specific air dose rate assessment methods. Explaining these discrepancies can improve and converge existing methodologies. The Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), which are organizations involved in post-nuclear accident crisis management, jointly performed air dose rate measurements in 2019 at contaminated sites around the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The similarities and differences between the two organizations’ methods and results were quantitatively assessed by comparing the average air dose rates obtained within a grid created with a geographic information system, and the reasons for the differences between the organizations’ results were investigated. The air dose rates obtained by the manborne measurements varied depending on the calibration method. Comparing the air dose rate assessment methods and mapping techniques used in different countries will contribute to developing international guidelines for recommending the best method for determining air dose rates.","PeriodicalId":46831,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disaster Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Study of Radiation Mapping Technologies for Nuclear Disaster Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Kotaro Ochi, Evelyne Barker, Shigeo Nakama, Marc Gleizes, Erwan Manach, Vincent Faure, Y. Sanada\",\"doi\":\"10.20965/jdr.2024.p0429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The distribution of the ambient dose equivalent rate (i.e., air dose rate) after a nuclear disaster is crucial for zoning contaminated areas to facilitate authorities’ effective decision making. Several countries are considering a gradual characterization strategy where airborne measurement is performed first followed by ground measurement (i.e., via manborne or carborne surveys). Nonetheless, potential differences might emerge in country-specific air dose rate assessment methods. Explaining these discrepancies can improve and converge existing methodologies. The Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), which are organizations involved in post-nuclear accident crisis management, jointly performed air dose rate measurements in 2019 at contaminated sites around the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The similarities and differences between the two organizations’ methods and results were quantitatively assessed by comparing the average air dose rates obtained within a grid created with a geographic information system, and the reasons for the differences between the organizations’ results were investigated. The air dose rates obtained by the manborne measurements varied depending on the calibration method. Comparing the air dose rate assessment methods and mapping techniques used in different countries will contribute to developing international guidelines for recommending the best method for determining air dose rates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Disaster Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Disaster Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2024.p0429\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disaster Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2024.p0429","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

核灾难发生后,环境剂量当量率(即空气剂量率)的分布对于划分污染区以帮助当局做出有效决策至关重要。一些国家正在考虑采取渐进式特征描述策略,即先进行空气测量,然后再进行地面测量(即通过人载或车载调查)。然而,各国的空气剂量率评估方法可能会出现潜在差异。解释这些差异可以改进和统一现有方法。日本原子能研究开发机构(JAEA)和法国辐射防护与核安全研究所(IRSN)是参与核事故后危机管理的组织,它们于 2019 年在福岛第一核电站周围的污染场地联合进行了空气剂量率测量。通过比较在地理信息系统创建的网格内获得的平均空气剂量率,定量评估了两个组织的方法和结果之间的异同,并调查了两个组织的结果存在差异的原因。人为测量获得的空气剂量率因校准方法的不同而不同。对不同国家使用的空气剂量率评估方法和绘图技术进行比较,将有助于制定国际准则,推荐确定空气剂量率的最佳方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparative Study of Radiation Mapping Technologies for Nuclear Disaster Assessment
The distribution of the ambient dose equivalent rate (i.e., air dose rate) after a nuclear disaster is crucial for zoning contaminated areas to facilitate authorities’ effective decision making. Several countries are considering a gradual characterization strategy where airborne measurement is performed first followed by ground measurement (i.e., via manborne or carborne surveys). Nonetheless, potential differences might emerge in country-specific air dose rate assessment methods. Explaining these discrepancies can improve and converge existing methodologies. The Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), which are organizations involved in post-nuclear accident crisis management, jointly performed air dose rate measurements in 2019 at contaminated sites around the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The similarities and differences between the two organizations’ methods and results were quantitatively assessed by comparing the average air dose rates obtained within a grid created with a geographic information system, and the reasons for the differences between the organizations’ results were investigated. The air dose rates obtained by the manborne measurements varied depending on the calibration method. Comparing the air dose rate assessment methods and mapping techniques used in different countries will contribute to developing international guidelines for recommending the best method for determining air dose rates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Disaster Research
Journal of Disaster Research GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
37.50%
发文量
113
期刊最新文献
Social Support Is Associated with Fewer Mental Health Problems Among Japanese Nurses During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study Inclusive Disaster Risk Reduction Toward a Society Wherein All People Can Choose How They Live: A Report from a Panel of World BOSAI Forum 2023 Research on the Forecast of Emergency Supplies for Major Public Health Emergencies - An Empirical Study Based on the Distribution of Donated Facial Masks by the Wuhan COVID-19 Epidemic Prevention and Control Headquarters Panel Discussion in WBF 2023: New Collaboration for Building a Resilient Society Transdisciplinary Approach: Toward Innovative Recovery and Disaster Risk Reduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1