Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter April 12, 2019

Assessment of the health damage costs of radionuclides releases from Muğla provinces lignite-fired power plants

Bewertung der Kosten der Gesundheitsschäden durch die Freisetzung von Radionukliden Braunkohlekraftwerke der Muğla-Provinzen
T. Büke and A. Ç. Köne
From the journal Kerntechnik

Abstract

The health impacts and corresponding damage costs of radioactive emission of Muğla province lignite-fired power plants have been assessed by using the simplified impact pathway approach. Radiation dose and risk calculations have been carried out by the code CAP88-PC around the power plants. Specific isotopes, 238U, 232Th, 226Ra and 40K in the flying ash samples are considered as radioactive sources. Power plants intersecting regions are also considered in the collective dose calculation. The estimated total collective dose around Muğla province due to Yatağan, Yeniköy and Kemerköy power plants is 5.25 × 10−2 man.Sv/year. The total health effects damage cost around the Muğla province due to the radioactive emissions from the power plants is 2504.3 US $ 2000/year. The results obtained from the calculations are under the dose limits of International Commission of Radiation Protection and it does not any risk for public health around the plant environment.

Kurzfassung

Die gesundheitlichen Auswirkungen und die entsprechenden Schadenskosten infolge der radioaktiven Emission von Braunkohlenkraftwerken der Provinz Muğla wurden mit Hilfe des vereinfachten Wirkungsansatzes bewertet. Strahlendosis- und Risikoberechnungen wurden durch den Code CAP88-PC für die Region rund um die Kraftwerke durchgeführt. Spezifische Isotope, 238U, 232Th, 226Ra und 40K in den fliegenden Ascheproben werden als radioaktive Quellen betrachtet. Kraftwerke, die die Regionen überschneiden, werden auch in der kollektiven Dosisberechnung berücksichtigt. Die geschätzte Gesamtkollektivdosis in der Provinz Muğla durch die Yatağan, Yeniköy und Kemerköy Kraftwerke wird zu 5.25 × 10−2 man.Sv/year bestimmt. Die gesamten Kosten der gesundheitlichen Schäden aus dieser Dosis werden zu 2504.3 US$ 2000/Jahr berechnet. Diese Werte liegen unter den Dosisgrenzen der Internationalen Strahlenschutzkommission.


* E-mail: ;

References

1 European Commission: External costs: research results on socio-environmental damages due to electricity and transport. Eurepean Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Development, Report No. EUR 20198, Brussels, 2003Search in Google Scholar

2 Electricity Generation Company of Turkey: Annual report: 2016. Electricity Generation Company of Turkey, Ankara, 2012 (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

3 Hainoun, A.; Almoustafa, A.; Seif Aldin, M.: Estimating the health damage costs of Syrian electricity generation system using impact pathway approach. Energy35 (2010) 62863810.1016/j.energy.2009.10.034Search in Google Scholar

4 Sakulniyomporn, S.; Kubaha, K.; ChullabodhiC.: External costs of fossil electricity generation: Health-based assessment in Thailand. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews15 (2011) 3470347910.1016/j.rser.2011.05.004Search in Google Scholar

5 Büke, T.; Köne, A. Ç.: Estimation of the Health Benefits of Controlling Air Pollution from the Yatağan Coal-Fired Power Plant. Environmental Science and Policy14 (2011) 1113112010.1016/j.envsci.2011.05.014Search in Google Scholar

6 Riekert, J. W.; Koch, S. F.: Projecting the external health costs of a coal-fired power plant: The case of Kusile. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa23 (2012) 526610.17159/2413-3051/2012/v23i4a3178Search in Google Scholar

7 Fouladi Fard, R.; Naddafi, K.; Yunesian, M.; Nabizadeh Nodehi, R.; Dehghani, M. H.; Hassanvand, M. S.: The assessment of health impacts and external costs of natural gas-fired power plant of Qom. Environmental Science and Pollution Research23 (2016) 2092220936 PMid:27488708; 10.1007/s11356-016-7258-0Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8 Büke, T; Köne, A. Ç.: Valuing health effects of natural radionuclides releases from Yatagan Power Plant. Energy and Power Engineering1 (2010) 465210.4236/epe.2010.21008Search in Google Scholar

9 Büke, T; Köne, A. Ç.: Assessment of the radiological health damage costs of the Yeniköy and Kemerköy lignite-fired power plants in Muğla. Kerntechnik79 (2014) 757910.3139/124.110395Search in Google Scholar

10 International Atomic Energy Agency: Review of NukPacts: An environmental assessment package. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2003Search in Google Scholar

11 Parks, B.; Chaki, S. P. E.: CAP88-PC Version 2.0 Updated User's Guide. Report No: EPA 402-R-00-004. Las Vegas, 2000Search in Google Scholar

12 Annals of the ICRP: The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. Publication 103, The International Commission on Radiological Protection, Elsevier, UK, 2007Search in Google Scholar

13 Spadaro, J. V.: AIRPACTS input data: monetary unit costs. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2002Search in Google Scholar

14 Spadaro, J. V.: AIRPACTS input data: exposure response functions. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2002Search in Google Scholar

15 Turkish State Meteorological Service: Annual meteorological conditions in Muğla province 1975–2012 periods. Turkish State Meteorological Service. Ankara, 2016Search in Google Scholar

16 Turkisk Statistical Institute: Muğla province population distribution. Turkisk Statistical Institute, Ankara. http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/adnksdagitapp/adnks.zul. (Accessed date 15 October 2016)Search in Google Scholar

17 Industry and Trade Center of Muğla: Economic and commercial conditions of Muğla., Muğla, 2016, (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

18 Electricity Generation Cooperation: Technical specifications and measured air pollutant emission rates from lignite-fired power plants of Turkey. Electricity Generation Cooperation, Ankara, 2010, (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

19 Turkish Atomic Energy Authority: Natural radioactivity measurements in ash-samples of the Yatağan power plant. Turkish Atomic Energy Authority, Ankara, 1994, (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

20 Turkish Atomic Energy Authority: Natural radioactivity measurements in ash-samples from the coal-fired power plants in Turkey and radiological risk assessment of ash samples which are used in construction sector. Turkish Atomic Energy Authority, Ankara, Technical Report No: TAEA TR 2009–11, 2009, (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

21 Çam, F.; Yaprak, G.; Candan, O.; Bayram, A.; Onat, B.; Tanıl, H.; et al.: Natural radioisotopes (226Ra, 232Th, 40K and 210Pb) determination around the coal-fired power plants in the southwestern part of turkey due to radioactivity emissions from the power plants and radiological risk assessment. The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey Project, Project No: 103Y57, Ankara, 2006, (in Turkish)Search in Google Scholar

22 Ministry of Energy and Natural Resource: Electricity Production Sector Reports: 2010–2015. Ministry of Energy and Natural Resource, Ankara. http://www.enerji.gov.tr/tr-TR/Sektor-Raporlari. (Accessed date 20 October 2016)Search in Google Scholar

23 World Bank: World Development Indicators. http://ddp-xt.worldbank.org. (Accessed date 16 October 2016)Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2018-03-14
Published Online: 2019-04-12
Published in Print: 2019-04-15

© 2019, Carl Hanser Verlag, München

Scroll Up Arrow