The science & the law
Radon, and what Finnish law requires
A sourced, plain-language reference. Every factual claim links to a primary source - WHO, IARC, the US EPA, the peer-reviewed literature, or Finland's radiation authority STUK.
What radon is
Radon-222 is a colourless, odourless, radioactive noble gas formed in the uranium-238 decay chain. It seeps from uranium-bearing bedrock and permeable soils into the lowest levels of buildings, where it can accumulate. [3] As it decays it releases alpha particles; breathe the gas in and those particles deposit their energy directly in the lining of the lung. That is the whole health problem - and it's why nothing about radon is visible or smellable. [4]
Why it matters for health
Radon has been classified by the IARC as a Group 1 human carcinogen since 1988. [3] After smoking, it is the leading cause of lung cancer, and the leading cause among people who have never smoked. [1] , [2] The landmark pooled analysis of 13 European case-control studies - over 7,000 lung-cancer cases - found risk rising measurably with exposure, with no threshold below which it disappears, and a clear effect even under 200 Bq/m³. [9] WHO summarises the long-term relationship as roughly a 16% rise in risk per 100 Bq/m³. [1] An estimated 3–14% of a country's lung cancers are attributable to radon, depending on radon levels and smoking prevalence. [1]
The numbers: reference levels
The WHO recommends a national reference level of 100 Bq/m³, and that it should not exceed 300 Bq/m³ where 100 is not achievable. [1] , [4] Finland sets the workplace reference level at 300 Bq/m³ as an annual average for regular work (over 600 working hours per year). [5]
The Finnish legal mandate
Radiation Act 859/2018 · §155
Employers must ascertain and track occupational radon exposure in qualifying workspaces. The duty rests with the employer operating the space - including tenants in rented premises. [7]
- The official measurement season runs from 1 September to 31 May, with detectors in place for a minimum of two months. [5]
- The annual average is obtained by applying a seasonal correction factor of 0.9 to the measured result. [5]
- Workplace inspections routinely find deficiencies, concentrated among small businesses in rented premises that assume the landlord is responsible. [7]
Who must measure
- 1
Underground workspaces
Any workspace wholly or partly below ground level - anywhere in Finland.
- 2
Permeable soil and eskers
Ground-floor workspaces on air-permeable soil, gravel, or esker ridges - anywhere in Finland.
- 3
STUK-designated obligation areas
Ground-floor workspaces in municipalities or postal codes where over 10% of past measurements exceeded the limit.
The definitive obligation is set by STUK's official register of measurement-obligation municipalities and postal codes. [5] We confirm your exact status against it before any work begins.
The working-hour nuance
Many workplaces run ventilation only during the day, so a passive detector that integrates over nights and weekends can overstate the exposure workers actually receive. STUK therefore allows a continuous working-hour measurement (at least one week) and a defined formula to compute the annual working-hour average. [6] In about half of failing workplaces with timed ventilation, the working-hour concentration turns out below the reference level - no remediation required. [6]
Go deeper
References
- [1] World Health Organization - Radon and health (fact sheet)
- [2] United States Environmental Protection Agency - Health Risk of Radon
- [3] IARC: radon a Group 1 human carcinogen (1988); WHO Guidelines for Indoor Air Quality: Selected Pollutants
- [4] WHO Handbook on Indoor Radon: A Public Health Perspective (2009)
- [5] Säteilyturvakeskus (STUK) - Radon at the workplace
- [6] Säteilyturvakeskus (STUK) - Radon concentration during working hours
- [7] Finnish Occupational Safety & Health Administration - Radon (Radiation Act 859/2018, §155)
- [9] Darby S, et al. Radon in homes and risk of lung cancer: collaborative analysis of 13 European case-control studies. BMJ, 2005;330:223