Sorption of inorganic radiocarbon on iron oxides
Article
First Online:
Received:
- 71 Downloads
Abstract
The sorption of inorganic radiocarbon on goethite, hematite and magnetite was studied as a function of carbon concentration, pH and ionic strength. It was discovered that the sorption of radiocarbon on magnetite was negligible in all studied conditions. The distribution coefficients of radiocarbon on hematite and goethite decreased with increasing pH whereas the ionic strength had only a slight decreasing effect on radiocarbon sorption. The sorption on goethite and hematite was modelled with PhreeqC using a generalized double-layer surface complexation model.
Keywords
Radiocarbon Sorption Nuclear waste Goethite Hematite MagnetiteNotes
Acknowledgements
The research leading to these results received funding from the Finnish Research Program on Nuclear Waste Management KYT2018.
References
- 1.Hjerpe T, Ikonen ATK, Broed R (2009) Biosphere assessment report 2009, Posiva Oy, Posiva Report 2010-03Google Scholar
- 2.Posiva. (2013) Safety Case for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel at Olkiluoto—Models and Data for the Repository System 2012. Posiva Oy, Posiva Report 2013-01Google Scholar
- 3.Johnson L, Poinssot C, Ferry C, Lovera P (2004) Estimates of the instant release fraction for UO2 and MOX fuel at t = 0. NAGRA Technical Report 04-08Google Scholar
- 4.Limer LMC, Smith K, Albrecht A, Marang L, Norris S, Smith GM, Thorne MC,Xu S (2012) C-14 long-term dose assessment: data review, scenario development, and model comparison. Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten, p 47Google Scholar
- 5.Deng B, Campbell TJ, Burris TR (1997) Hydrocarbon formation in metallic iron/water systems. Environ Sci Technol 31:1185–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Kaneko S, Tanabe H, Sasoh M, Takahashi R, Shibano T, Tateyama S (2003) A study on the chemical forms and migration behavior of 14C leached from the simulated hull waste in the underground condition. Mat Res Soc Symp Proc 757:621–626Google Scholar
- 7.Pitkänen P, Partamies S (2007) Origin and Implications of Dissolved Gases in Groundwater at Olkiluoto, Posiva Oy, Posiva Report 2007-04Google Scholar
- 8.Aaltonen I, Engström J, Front K, Gehör S, Kosunen P, Kärki A, Mattila J, Paananen M, Paulamäki S. (2016) Geology of Olkiluoto. Posiva Oy, Posiva Report 2016-16Google Scholar
- 9.Gonfiantini R, Zuppi GM (2003) Carbon isotope exchange rate of dic in karst groundwater. Chem Geology 197:319–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Lempinen J, Lehto J (2016) Rate of radiocarbon retention onto calcite by isotope exchange. Radiochim Acta 104(9):663–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Van Geen A, Robertson AP, Leckie JO (1994) Complexation of carbonate species at the goethite surface: implications for adsorption of metal ions in natural waters. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 58:2073–2086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Wijnja H, Schulthess CP (2001) Carbonate adsorption mechanism on goethite studied with ATR–FTIR, DRIFT, and proton coadsorption measurements. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:324–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Villalobos M, Leckie JO (2001) Surface complexation modeling and FTIR study of carbonate adsorption to goethite. J Colloid Int Sci 235:15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Brechbühl Y, Christl I, Elzinga EJ, Kretzschmar R (2012) Competetive sorption of carbonate and arsenic to hematite: combined ATR-FTIR and batch experiments. J Colloid Int Sci 377:313–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Cornell RM, Schwertmann U (2003) The iron oxides. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Appelo CAJ, Van Der Weiden MJJ, Tournassat C, Charlet L (2002) Surface complexation of ferrous iron and carbonate on ferrihydrite and the mobilization of arsenic. Environ Sci Technol 36:3096–3103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Dzombak DA, Morel FMM (1990) Surface complexation modelling: hydrous ferric oxide. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018