Remediation of soil/concrete contaminated with uranium and radium by biological method

  • Gye-Nam Kim
  • Seung-Su Kim
  • Hye-Min Park
  • Won-Suk Kim
  • Uk-Ryang Park
  • Jei-Kwon Moon


Biological method was studied for remediation of soil/concrete contaminated with uranium and radium. Optimum experiment conditions for mixing ratios of penatron and soil, and the pH of soil was obtained through several bioremediations with soil contaminated with uranium and radium. It was found that an optimum mixing ratio of penatron for bioremediation of uranium soil was 1 %. Also, the optimum pH condition for bioremediation of soil contaminated with uranium and radium was 7.5. The removal efficiencies of uranium and radium from higher concentration of soil were rather reduced in comparison with those from lower concentration of soil. Meanwhile, the removal of uranium and radium in concrete by bioremediation is possible but the removal rate from concrete was slower than that from soil. The removal efficiencies of uranium and radium from soil under injection of 1 % penatron at pH 7.5 for 120 days were 81.2 and 81.6 %, respectively, and the removal efficiencies of uranium and radium from concrete under the same condition were 63.0 and 45.2 %, respectively. Beyond 30 days, removal rates of uranium and radium from soil and concrete by bioremediation was very slow.


Bioremediation Penatron Uranium Radium Soil Concrete 


  1. 1.
    Kim GN, Choi WK, Jung CH, Moon JK (2007) Development of a washing system for soil contaminated with radionuclides around TRIGA reactors. J Ind Eng Chem 13:406–413Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Noubactep C, Schoner A, Dienemann H, Sauter M (2006) Release of coprecipitated uranium from iron oxides. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 267:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lovley DR, Phillips EJP, Gorby YA, Landa ER (1991) Microbial reduction of uranium. Nature 350(4):413–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lovley DR, Phillips EJP (1992) Bioremediation of uranium contamination with enzymatic uranium reduction. Environ Sci Technol 26(11):2228–2234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wade R, Di Christina TJ (2000) Isolation of U (IV) reduction-deficient mutants of Shewanella putrefaciens. FEMS Microbiol Lett 184:143–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Singhal RK, Joshi S, Tirumalesh K, Gurg RP (2004) Reduction of uranium concentration in well water by Chlorella a fresh water algae immobilized in calcium alginate. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 216:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    White C, Sharman AK, Gadd GM (1998) An integrated microbial process for the bioremediation of soil contaminated with toxic metals. Nature Biotechnol 16:572–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lebranz M, Druschel GK, Thomsen-Ebert T, Gilbert B, Welch SA, Kemner KM, Logan GA, Summons RE, Bond PL, Lai B, Kelly SD, Banfield JF (2000) Formation of sphalerite (ZnS) deposits in natural bio-films of Sulfate-reducing bacteria. Science 290:1744–1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Macaskie LE, Empson RM, Cheetham AK, Grey CP, Skarnulis AJ (1992) Uranium bioaccumulation by a Citrobacter sp. as a result of enzymatically-mediated growth of polycrystalline HUO2PO4. Science 257:782–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boswell CD, Dick RE, Macaskie LE (1999) The effect of heavy metals and other environmental conditions on the anaerobic phosphate metabolism of Acinetobacter johnsonii. Microbiology 145:1711–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jeong BC, Macaskie LE (1999) Production of two phosphatases by a Citrobacter sp. grown in batch and continuous culture. Enzyme Microb Technol 24:218–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Banfield JF, Welch SA, Zhang HZ, Ebert TT, Penn RL (2000) Aggregation-based crystal growth and microstructure development in natural iron oxyhydroxide biomineralization products. Science 289:751–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anderson RT, Vrionis HA, Ortiz-Berad I, Resch CT, Long PE, Dayvault R, Karp K, Marutzky S, Metzler DR, Peacock A, Write DC, Lower M, Lovley DR (2003) Stimulating the in situ activity of Geobacter species to remove uranium from the groundwater of a uranium contaminated aquifer. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(10):5884–5891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lovley DR, Phillips EJP (1992) Reduction of uranium by Desulfovibrio desulfuricans. Appl Environ Microbiol 58(3):850–856Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lovley DR, Widman PK, Woodward JC, Phillips EJP (1993) Reduction of uranium by cytochrome c3 of Desulfovibrio vulgaris. Appl Environ Microbiol 59(11):3572–3576Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Noubactep C, Sonnefeld J, Sauter M (2006) Uranium release from a natural rock under near-natural oxidizing conditions. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 267:591–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hazen TC, Tabak HH (2005) Developments in bioremediation of soils and sediments polluted with metals and radionuclides. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 4:157–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rafael VPF, Solange KS, Fernando D, Patricia BDV, Maria HTT, Maria HB, Julio TM (2012) Treatment of radioactive liquid organic waste using bacteria community. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 292:811–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cem G, Doguken AA, Sule A (2011) Removal of Th(IV) ions from aqueous solution using bi-functionalized algae–yeast biosorbent. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 287:533–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gye-Nam Kim
    • 1
  • Seung-Su Kim
    • 1
  • Hye-Min Park
    • 1
  • Won-Suk Kim
    • 1
  • Uk-Ryang Park
    • 1
  • Jei-Kwon Moon
    • 1
  1. 1.Korea Atomic Energy Research InstituteDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations