Bench-scale electrokinetic remediation for cesium-contaminated sediment at the Hanford Site, USA

  • Hun Bok Jung
  • Jung-Seok Yang
  • Wooyong Um


We conducted a laboratory experiment to investigate the efficiency of electrokinetic (EK) remediation method for Hanford sediment (76 % sand and 24 % silt–clay) after artificial contamination with nonradioactive 133Cs (0.01 M CsNO3) as a surrogate for radioactive 137Cs. A significant removal of cationic 133Cs from the sediment occurred from the cathode side (−), whereas the removal was negligible from the anode side (+) during the EK remediation process for 68 days. The experimental results suggest that the EK method can effectively remove radioactive Cs from the surface or subsurface sediment contaminated by radioactive materials in the Hanford Site, Washington, USA.


Cesium Electrokinetic remediation Hanford site Cation exchange 



The project was primarily supported by WCU (World Class University) and BK21 + programs at the Division of Advanced Nuclear Engineering (DANE) in POSTECH through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (R31-30005). The authors would like to thank Steven Baum for ICP–OES and ICP-MS analyses in the Environmental Sciences Laboratory, and Laxmikant Saraf for SEM–EDS analysis in EMSL (Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory), a DOE national scientific user facility at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). PNNL is operated by Battelle for the U.S. DOE under contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830.


  1. 1.
    Zachara JM, Serne J, Freshley M, Mann F, Anderson F, Wood M, Jones T, Myers D (2007) Geochemical processes controlling migration of tank wastes in Hanford’s vadose zone. Vadose Zone J 6:985–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu CX, Zachara JM, Smith SC, McKinley JP, Ainsworth CC (2003) Desorption kinetics of radiocesium from subsurface sediments at Hanford Site, USA. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 67:2893–2912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McKinley JP, Zeissler CJ, Zachara JM, Serne RJ, Lindstrom RM, Schaef HT, Orr RD (2001) Distribution and retention of Cs-137 in sediments at the Hanford Site, Washington. Environ Sci Technol 35:3433–3441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gephart RE, Lundgren RE (1998) Hanford tank cleanup: a guide to understanding the technical issues. Battelle Press, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flury M, Czigany S, Chen G, Harsh JB (2004) Cesium migration in saturated silica sand and Hanford sediments as impacted by ionic strength. J Contam Hydrol 71:111–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhuang J, Flury M, Jin Y (2003) Colloid-facilitated Cs transport through water-saturated Hanford sediment and Ottawa sand. Environ Sci Technol 37:4905–4911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zachara JM, Smith SC, Liu CX, McKinley JP, Serne RJ, Gassman PL (2002) Sorption of Cs+ to micaceous subsurface sediments from the Hanford site, USA. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 66:193–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hamby DM (1996) Site remediation techniques supporting environmental restoration activities—a review. Sci Total Environ 191:203–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Acar YB, Gale RJ, Alshawabkeh AN, Marks RE, Puppala S, Bricka M, Parker R (1995) Electrokinetic remediation—basics and technology status. J Hazard Mater 40:117–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yeung AT (2011) Milestone developments, myths, and future directions of electrokinetic remediation. Sep Purif Technol 79:124–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Acar YB, Alshawabkeh AN (1993) Principles of electrokinetic remediation. Environ Sci Technol 27:2638–2647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Virkutyte J, Sillanpaa M, Latostenmaa P (2002) Electrokinetic soil remediation—critical overview. Sci Total Environ 289:97–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim B-K, Baek K, Ko S-H, Yang J-W (2011) Research and field experiences on electrokinetic remediation in South Korea. Sep Purif Technol 79:116–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yeung AT, Gu YY (2011) A review on techniques to enhance electrochemical remediation of contaminated soils. J Hazard Mater 195:11–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim GN, Oh WZ, Won HJ, Choi WK (2003) Removal of cesium and cobalt from soil around TRIGA reactor using electrokinetic method. J Ind Eng Chem 9:306–313Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Al-Shahrani SS, Roberts EPL (2005) Electrokinetic removal of caesium from kaolin. J Hazard Mater 122:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim G-N, Jung Y-H, Lee J-J, Moon J-K, Jung C-H (2008) Development of electrokinetic-flushing technology for the remediation of contaminated soil around nuclear facilities. J Ind Eng Chem 14:732–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim G-N, Lee S-S, Shon D-B, Lee K-W, Chung U-S (2010) Development of pilot-scale electrokinetic remediation technology to remove Co-60 and Cs-137 from soil. J Ind Eng Chem 16:986–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim G-N, Yang B-I, Choi W-K, Lee K-W (2009) Development of vertical electrokinetic-flushing decontamination technology to remove Co-60 and Cs-137 from a Korean nuclear facility site. Sep Purif Technol 68:222–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Buehler MF, Surma JE, Virden JW (1994) In situ soil remediation using electrokinetics, Hanford symposium on health and the environment: symposium on in situ remediation–scientific basis for current and future technologies. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, RichlandGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bostick BC, Vairavamurthy MA, Karthikeyan KG, Chorover J (2002) Cesium adsorption on clay minerals: an EXAFS spectroscopic investigation. Environ Sci Technol 36:2670–2676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McKinley JP, Zachara JM, Heald SM, Dohnalkova A, Newville MG, Sutton SR (2004) Microscale distribution of cesium sorbed to biotite and muscovite. Environ Sci Technol 38:1017–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ho SV, Athmer CJ, Sheridan PW, Shapiro AP (1997) Scale-up aspects of the Lasagna (TM) process for in situ soil decontamination. J Hazard Mater 55:39–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)RichlandUSA
  2. 2.Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST)GangneungRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Division of Advanced Nuclear EngineeringPohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH)PohangRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Department of Geoscience and GeographyNew Jersey City UniversityJersey CityUSA

Personalised recommendations