Radon hazard vs. radon risk - On the effectiveness of radon priority areas

Abstract

The detrimental health effects of radon have been acknowledged by national and international legislation such as the European Union Basic Safety Standards (EURATOM-BSS Article 103/3) which requires member states to delineate radon priority areas. These radon priority areas are conventionally based on the concept of hazard by using indoor radon concentration or geogenic radon potential for its delineation. While this approach is efficient for finding many affected buildings with limited resources and, hence, reducing the individual risk, it is probably inefficient for reducing the collective risk if hazard and risk areas differ. In this study we map collective radon risk for Germany by linking information of geogenic radon hazard with exposure (residential building stock). The resulting map of affected residential buildings reveals distinct spatial contrasts compared to the hazard-based map. Further, an analysis based on hypothetical hazard zones elucidates that in Germany the vast majority of affected buildings (i.e., above threshold concentration) are located outside of areas of high and very high hazard. Consequently, in Germany, a radon policy focusing on areas of very high hazard only and within these areas on high concentration buildings only would presumably have no significant effect on the reduction of the total number of radon attributable lung cancer fatalities, i.e. less than 1% of annual radon attributable lung cancer fatalities. We conclude that for reducing the collective risk significantly, also complementary measures are of particular relevance.