Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Nuclear Energy”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1984

Coal energy vs nuclear energy: a comparison of the radiological risks.

We examined past and current work comparing radiological risks from coal-fired and nuclear plants. We found some errors and under- and over-evaluations. They appear to be generally in the direction of maximizing coal risks and minimizing nuclear risks. Our analysis removes these apparent inconsistencies and takes full account of the Suess effect and shows that the radiological risks from coal-fired plants are fully counterbalanced by this effect and are, in any case, small in comparison with those from nuclear plants.

Coal↗
PubMed1985

[Health check by CMI (Cornell Medical Index) on radiation workers in a nuclear energy plant].

In the nuclear energy industry, plants are located far from urban areas and the working environments are generally separate from each other for radiation protection purposes. A health check on radiation workers in the nuclear energy industry was carried out using the Cornell Medical Index questionnaire. As a control study, radiation and non-radiation workers in the other working fields were investigated in the same manner. The results showed that the health status of radiation workers in the nuclear energy industry is similar to that of the workers in other working fields.

Adult↗
PubMed1986

[Health check on radiation workers in the nuclear energy industry using Todai Health Index].

In the nuclear energy industry, the plants are located far from urban areas and the working environments are generally separate from each other for radiation protection purposes. The health investigation on radiation workers in the nuclear energy industry was carried out using the Todai Health Index questionnaire in 1982, 1983 and 1984. As a control study non-radiation workers on the other several working fields were investigated in the same manner. The results showed that the status of radiation workers in the nuclear energy industry is similar to that of the workers in the other working fields and the THI questionnaire is useful to know health and working status of a group of workers.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Natural radiation--a perspective to radiological risk factors of nuclear energy production.

Radiation doses from natural radiation and from man-made modifications on natural radiation, and different natural radiological environments in the Nodic countries are summarized and used as a perspective for the radiological consequences of nuclear energy production. The significance of different radiation sources can be judged against the total collective effective dose equivalent from natural radiation in the Nordic countries, 92,000 manSv per year. The collective dose from nuclear energy production during normal operation is estimated to 20 manSv per year and from non-nuclear energy production to 80 manSv per year. The increase in collective dose due to the conservation of heating energy in Nordic dwellings is estimated to 23,000 manSv per year, from 1973 to 1984. An indirect radiological danger index is defined in order to be able to compare the significance of estimated future releases of radionuclides from a final repository of spent nuclear fuel to the consequences of natural radionuclides in different environments. The danger index of natural radiological environments will not be significantly increased by future releases of nuclear fuel radionuclides.

Hot Temperature↗
PubMed1996

Nuclear energy facilities and cancers.

Workers employed in the nuclear energy industry and members of the general public living near nuclear facilities are exposed to low levels of ionising radiation as a result of the routine operation of these facilities. For the purposes of radiological protection, it is assumed that low doses of radiation confer a small increased risk of cancer upon the exposed individual and this is a major consideration in setting dose limits for workers and the general public. Quantitative estimates of radiation risk have been derived from epidemiological studies of groups exposed, on average, to high or moderate doses of radiation (such as the Japanese atomic bomb survivors), and appropriate assumptions are made for the application of such estimates to low dose conditions. There have been claims that the risks of cancer in nuclear industry workers, in their children, and in populations living around nuclear facilities have been grossly underestimated. Substantial evidence is now available from the epidemiological study of these groups. Studies of nuclear industry workforces demonstrate that currently accepted risk estimates are at about the right level, although a positive trend of leukaemia mortality with radiation dose, of a magnitude which is compatible with predictions, can be detected in the most statistically powerful workforce studies. The hypothesis that irradiation of fathers before the conception of their children materially increases the risk of childhood leukaemia has been largely discounted since it is biologically implausible and has found no support in studies using data independent of the study which generated the hypothesis. Increased levels of childhood leukaemia have occurred near certain nuclear facilities in the United Kingdom, but it is most unlikely that these are related to exposure to ionising radiation. Recent evidence suggests that these excesses are caused by a rare response to an infectious agent, which is enhanced under the unusual conditions of population mixing found in these communities. Similar excesses of childhood leukaemia have been found in other communities which have experienced unusual population mixing, but are not near nuclear facilities.

Child↗
PubMed1981

[Occupational risk and technological innovations. Comparison of conventional and nuclear energy systems (fuel, coal and nuclear) (author's transl)].

The objective is to compare the occupational risks associated to the production of electricity through three alternative technologies: fuel, coal and nuclear (Pressurised Water Reactor). A methodology is proposed in order to integrate the operation and construction activities. The data related to a French scenario have been collected and are presented. The results obtained in the case of nuclear technology correspond to the present French program for 1990 and have in this respect a prospective value.

Accidents, Occupational↗
PubMed1985

[Nuclear energy and the Veterinary Inspection for Public Health].

The history of those survey programmes concerned with nuclear energy, which were carried out by the National Institute of Public Health (RIV) in co-operation with the Veterinary Chief Inspectorate (VHI), starting with the measurement of fission products originating from fall-out and nuclear arms tests, in food such as milk, meat, etc. and gradually passing into the survey of grass and milk from the areas surrounding nuclear facilities, is reviewed.

Animals↗
PubMed1997

Occupational exposure to ionising radiation and mortality among workers of the former Spanish Nuclear Energy Board.

OBJECTIVES: Firstly, to ascertain whether mortality among workers of the former Spanish Nuclear Energy Board (Junta de Energía Nuclear-JEN) was higher than that for the Spanish population overall; and secondly, if this were so, to ascertain whether this difference was associated with exposure to ionising radiation. METHODS: A retrospective follow up of a cohort of 5657 workers was carried out for the period 1954-92. Cohort mortality was compared with that for the Spanish population overall, with standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) adjusted for sex, age, and calendar period. Also, Poisson models were used to analyse mortality from lung cancer in the cohort by level of exposure to ionising radiation. RESULTS: Workers' median and mean cumulative exposures were 4.04 and 11.42 mSv, respectively. Mean annual exposure was 1.33 mSv. Excess mortality due to bone tumours was found for the cohort as a whole (six deaths observed; SMR 2.95; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.08 to 6.43). Among miners, excess mortality was found for non-malignant respiratory diseases (SMR 2.94; 95% CI 2.27 to 3.75), and for lung cancer bordering on statistical significance (SMR 1.50; 95% CI 0.96 to 2.23; P = 0.055). Relative risks of dying of lung cancer from ionising radiation in the dose quartiles 2, 3, and 4 versus the lowest dose quartile, were 1.00, 1.64, and 0.94, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Excess mortality from lung cancer was found among JEN miners. Nevertheless, no clear relation was found between mortality from lung cancer and level of exposure to ionising radiation in the JEN cohort. Continued follow up of the cohort is required to confirm excess mortality from bone tumours.

Bone Neoplasms↗
PubMed1995

Perception of nuclear energy and coal in France and The Netherlands.

This study focuses on the perception of large scale application of nuclear energy and coal in the Netherlands and France. The application of these energy-sources and the risks and benefits are judged differently by various group in society. In Europe, France has the highest density of nuclear power plants and the Netherlands has one of the lowest. In both countries scientists and social scientists completed a questionnaire assessing the perception of the large scale application of both energy sources. Furthermore, a number of variables relating to the socio cultural and political circumstances were measured. The results indicate that the French had a higher risk perception and a more negative attitude toward nuclear power than the Dutch. But they also assess the benefits of the use of nuclear power to be higher. Explanations for these differences are discussed.

Attitude↗
PubMed1982

[Aerospace use of nuclear energy and current biological problems of environmental contamination].

An examination of the danger to man which could result from accidents caused by the use of nuclear energy for space purposes leads to the presentation of parameters establishing levels of environmental contamination by radionucleids from the stratotroposphere. The factors affecting the transport of radioactive pollutants in the atmosphere are indicated and the importance of their deposition and absorption by man through the alimentary canal is emphasised.

Environmental Pollution↗
PubMed1976

Nuclear energy: health impact of carbon-14.

Estimates are presented on the carbon-14 generation rates in several reactor types and in peaceful nuclear explosions. If the carbon-14 generated in light water reactors is released, the population radiation dose rate it causes initially will be comparable to that resulting from the krypton-85 and tritium generated in these reactors. Because of the long half-life, the radiation dose commitment and the dose rate resulting from the environmental build-up of carbon-14 are considerably larger than those of the two other radionuclides.

Air Pollution, Radioactive↗