4.7 Article

Remediation of radioiodine using polyamine anion exchange resins

Journal

JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
Volume 78, Issue -, Pages 210-221

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jiec.2019.06.012

Keywords

Anion exchange; Radioiodine; Purolite MTS9850; Lewatit A365; Remediation

Funding

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through the UK Korea Civil Nuclear Energy program [EP/M026558/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Two weak base anion exchange resins, Lewatit A365 and Purolite MTS9850, have been tested for the removal of aqueous iodide from conditions simulating nuclear waste reprocessing streams. pH variation and relevant co-contaminant addition (nitrate, molybdate and iodine) allowed for assessment of iodide extraction behaviour of each resin. Isotherm experiments were performed and maximum uptake capacities obtained exceed current industrial adsorbents, such as silver-impregnated zeolites. Maximum loading capacities, determined by Dubinin-Radushkevich isotherm, were 761 +/- 14 mg g(-1) for MTS9850 and 589 +/- 15 mg g(-1) for A365. Uptake for both resins was significantly suppressed by nitrate and molybdate ions. The presence of dissolved iodine in the raffinate however, was found to increase iodide uptake. This was explained by characterisation of the spent resin surface by infrared and Raman spectroscopy, which determined the presence of triiodide, indicating charge-transfer complex formation on the surface. Dynamic studies assessed the effect of co-contaminants on iodide uptake in a column environment. Data was fitted to three dynamic models, with the Dose-Response model providing the best description of breakthrough. In all cases iodide breakthrough was accelerated, indicating suppression of uptake, but capacity was still significant. (C) 2019 The Korean Society of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available