Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 286, Issue 2, pp 309–316

Transport of 125I, 137Cs+ and 85Sr2+ in granitoidic rock and soil columns



Transport of 125I, 137Cs+ and 85Sr2+ radionuclides in crushed granitoidic rocks and homogenized soils was studied. Two simple methods for calculation of breakthrough curves in flow column experiments with groundwater as transport medium have been described. The first method, so called non-linear approach, is derived on the assumption of a reversible non-linear sorption isotherm described with Freundlich equation, i.e., with non-constant distribution and retardation coefficients. The second method, so-called linear approach, is applied for reference only, and is based on the assumption of a reversible sorption characterized with linear sorption isotherm, i.e., with constant distribution and retardation coefficients. Both methods model the experimental breakthrough curves with the integrated form of the simple 1-D advection–dispersion equation (ADE) expressed analytically for pulse application of radiotracer to the liquid phase before entering the columns. The integrated form of the ADE equation was modified by the so-called peak position and peak height correction coefficients the advantage of which consists among others in the elimination of the influence of starting concentration. The comparison of both approaches has shown that fitting by means of non-linear approach has given rather reliable values of the transport parameters and calculated dependences, especially in a case of 137Cs system characterized evidently with non-linear type of sorption isotherms. As for 125I, the sorption capacity of all solid samples studied is nearly on the zero level and 125I is practically not retarded, and from this point of view it behaves as non-interacting component. In addition, it was found that the modified ADE gives rather better results than the classical one.


Radionuclides Sorption Transport Rock Soil Column Linear isotherm Non-linear isotherm Non-linear regression 


  1. 1.
    Witherspoon PA, Bodvarson GS (eds) (2001) Geological challenges in radioactive waste isolation, Third worldwide review, University of California, Berkeley, December, LBNL-49767, pp 335Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nuclear Energy Agency (2005) Geological repositories, political and technical progress, workshop proceedings, Stockholm, Sweden, December 2003. OECD Publishing, Paris, p 245Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hooper A (2007) Research and development Infrastructure. In: Alexander WR, McKinley LE (eds) Deep geological disposal of radioactive waste. Elsevier, Oxford, p 270Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alexander WR, Smith PA, McKinley IG (2003) Modelling radionuclide transport in the geological environment. In: Scott EM (ed) Modelling radioactivity in the environment. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 109–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Palágyi Š, Vodičková H (2009) J Radioanal Nucl Chem 280:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gutierrez MG, Bidoglio G, Avogadro A, Mingarro E, D’Alessandro M (1991) Radiochim Acta 52/53:213Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IAEA (2003) TECDOC-413 scientific and technical basis for geological disposal of radioactive wastes. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    IAEA (2007) TECDOC-1563 spent fuel and high level waste chemical durability and performance under simulated repository conditions. IAEA, Vienna, p 29Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sims DJ, Andrews WS, Creber KAM, Wang X (2005) J Radioanal Nucl Chem 263:619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Szenknect S, Ardois C, Gaudet JP, Barthes V (2005) J Contam Hydrol 76:139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vanderborght J, Vereecken H (2007) Vadose Zone J 6:140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barnett MO, Jardine PM, Brooks SC, Selim HM (2000) Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Palágyi Š, Vodičková H, Landa J, Palágyiová J, Laciok A (2009) J Radioanal Nucl Chem 279:431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D’Alessandro M, Mousty F, Guimera J, Illera de Llano A (1999) “In situ” migration tests at the Berrocal site with conservative isotopic tracers, El Berrocal Project. Topical Reports, vol. III, 9, p 1Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hölttä P, Poteri A, Siitari-Kauppi M, Huitinen N (2008) Phys Chem Earth 33:935Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dewindt L, Pellegrini D, Van der Lee J (2003) J Contam Hydrol 68:165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saiers JE, Hornberger GM (1996) J Contam Hydrol 22:255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Flury M, Czigány S, Chen G, Harsh JB (2004) J Contam Hydrol 71:111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hu Q, Zhao P, Moran JE, Seaman JC (2005) J Contam Hydrol 78:185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bossew P, Kirchner G (2004) J Environ Radioact 73:127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang X, Du J, Tao Z, Fan Z (2003) J Radioanal Nucl Chem 258:133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Srncik M, Hrnecek E, Steier P, Wallner A, Wallner G, Bossew P (2008) Radiochem Acta 96:733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Palágyi Š, Štamberg K, Vodičková H (2010) J Radioanal Nucl Chem 283:629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Palágyi Š, Štamberg K (2010) Radiochim Acta 98:359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ebert K, Ederer H (1985) Computeranwendungen in der Chemie. VCH Verlags-GesellschaftmbH, Weinheim, p 321Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Herbelin AL, Westal AC (1996) FITEQL—a computer program for determination of chemical equilibrium constants from experimental data, version 3.2. Report 96–01. Department of Chemistry, Oregon State University, CorvallisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Waste Disposal Department, Chemistry of Fuel Cycle and Waste Management DivisionNuclear Research Institute Řež plcHusinec-ŘežCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear Chemistry, Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical EngineeringCzech Technical UniversityPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations