Cost effectiveness of reducing radon exposure in Spanish dwellings

Abstract

Published information on the distribution of radon levels in Spanish single family dwellings is used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three different intervention scenarios: remediation of existing dwellings, radon proofing of all future dwellings and the targetting of areas with higher than average indoor radon concentrations. Analysis is carried out on the basis of a Reference Level of for the existing housing stock and for new dwellings. Certain assumptions are made about the effectiveness and durability of the measures applied and annualised costs are used to calculate the costs per lung cancer death averted. The results reveal that targetting future housing is a more cost-effective option than remediation of existing dwellings with radon concentrations above the Reference Level - the costs per lung cancer death averted are typically $145 000. In high-risk areas, these costs can be considerably less, depending on the percentage of dwellings expected to exceed the Reference Level and the average savings in exposure as a result of the intervention. The costs of intervention to reduce lung cancer deaths following exposure to radon compare favourably with those of other health programmes in other countries.

A comparison of the costs and benefits of radon remediation programmes in new and existing houses in Northamptonshire

“…This spreads costs over the project period, corrects for inflation during the project period, takes into account the mean lifetime of buildings, and includes running and maintenance costs. This technique has been described by Colgan and Gutiérrez (1996), who used it to study proposals for a national programme of radon remediation in domestic dwellings in Spain. Current local estimates indicate the running costs of a fan to be £35 per annum, and that the fan itself would need replacing, on average, every 10 years at a current cost of £125.…”

“…We also assumed a 40 year period for our accounting period. Colgan and Gutiérrez (1996) assumed a discount rate of 10%. In the UK, a discount rate of 6% is now recommended (HM Treasury, 1997).…”

Evaluating the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of the radon remediation programme in domestic properties in Northamptonshire, UK

“…Colgan and Gutiérrez [18] used the concept of the annualised cost, an average annual cost which amortises costs over the project period, corrects for inflation during the project period, takes into account the mean lifetime of buildings and includes running and maintenance costs, to study proposals for a national programme of radon remediation in domestic dwellings in Spain. This approach was previously used [11] to estimate annualised cost for remediation in Northamptonshire, assuming a 40-year amortisation period.…”

“…This approach was previously used [11] to estimate annualised cost for remediation in Northamptonshire, assuming a 40-year amortisation period. At the time of our previous assessment, the UK government recommended a discount rate, based on the annual rate of inflation, of 10%, matching the assumptions of Colgan and Gutiérrez [18]. With declining inflation, the recommended value has steadily dropped, being now 3.5% for projects lasting 30 years or less, and 3% for longer-duration projects [35].…”

“…The underlying theme of each study was the assessment of the health benefits and the costs of comprehensive radon remediation programmes in the different classes of properties, and whether such programmes could be justified. The studies on domestic properties compared actual results to the outcomes of theoretical estimates by researchers from several countries [18][19][20][21][22], who had considered a range of strategies for remediation programmes and had assessed them to be justifiable. This work culminated in the publication of a comparative study of all of the remediation programmes studied by our group [23].…”