Uranium Mineralization in Fractured Welded Tuffs of the Krasnokamensk Area: Transfer from Ancient to Modern Oxidizing Conditions

  • Vladislav Petrov
  • Valery Poluektov
  • Jörg Hammer
  • Sergey Schukin
Part of the Springer Geology book series (SPRINGERGEOL)


The main aim of this contribution is to describe the primary controls of the hydrothermal mineralization, the preferential pathways for ancient and recent meteoric water infiltration, mineral-chemical modification of the wall rocks, and transformation of uranium mineralization in the context of redox front propagation through unsaturated fractured porous welded tuffs. The data on the veintype Tulukuevskoe uranium deposit in SE Transbaikalia, Russia are applied for modeling of uranium migration and deposition of secondary concentrations using quasi-stationary state approximation (QSSA) approach.


Meteoric Water Vadose Zone Fracture Network Spend Nuclear Fuel Permeable Reactive Barrier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Andreeva OV, Golovin VA (1998) Metasomatic processes at uranium deposits of Tulukuevskaya caldera, Eastern Transbaikalia, Russia. Geol Ore Dep 3: 205–220 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  2. Belova LN (2000) Formation conditions of oxidation zones of uranium deposits and accumulation of uranium minerals in hypergenic zone. Geol Ore Dep 2: 113–121 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  3. Bruno J, Duro L, Grive M (2002) The applicability and limitations of thermodynamic geochemical models to simulate trace element behaviour in natural waters. Lessons learned from natural analogue studies. Chem Geol 190: 371–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lichtner PC (1988) The quasi-stationary state approximation to coupled mass transport and fluid-rock interaction in a porous media. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 52: 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lichtner PC, Steefel CI, Oelkers EH (1996) Reactive transport in porous media. Reviews in Mineralogy 34.Google Scholar
  6. Neretnieks I (1980) Diffusion in the rock matrix: an important factor in radionuclide retardation? J Geophys Res, 85: 4379–4397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Petrov VA, Poluektov VV, Golubev VN et al. (2005) Uranium mineralization in oxidized fractured environment of the giant volcanic related uranium field from the Krasnokamensk Area. Proc Int Symp Uranium Prod. IAEA, Vienna, Austria: 260–264.Google Scholar
  8. Petrov V, Poluektov V, Hammer J, Schukin S (2008) Fault-related barriers for uranium transport. Uranium Mining and Hydrogeology. BJ Merkel and A Hasche-Berger (eds.) Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg: 779–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Smellie JAT, Karlsson F, Alexander WR (1997) Natural analogue studies: present status and performance assessment implications. Contam Hydrol 26: 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Vadose Zone: Science and Technology Solutions (2000) BB Looney and RW Falta (eds.). Battelle Press, Columbus, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  11. Zoback MD, Townend J (2001) Implication of hydrostatic pore pressures and high crustal strength for the deformation of intraplate lithosphere. Tectonophysics 336: 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladislav Petrov
    • 1
  • Valery Poluektov
    • 1
  • Jörg Hammer
    • 2
  • Sergey Schukin
    • 3
  1. 1.IGEM RASMoscowRussian Federation
  2. 2.BGRHannoverGermany
  3. 3.PPGKhOKrasnokamenskRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations