4.7 Article

Characterization and processing of radioactive uranium containing waste sludge by sulfuric acid leaching

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2021.106972

Keywords

Tailing Dump; Recycling; Specific Activity; Sorption

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study investigated the possibility of processing uranium-containing sludge with sulfuric acid solutions, and found that under specific conditions, a high uranium recovery rate can be achieved.
A large amount of solid radioactive uranium containing wastes are accumulated in sludge dumps because of exploitation of nuclear industry enterprises. These dumps are located in open air and undergoes by leaching of radionuclides and weathering. The purpose of this work was to study the possibility of processing of uranium containing sludge from storage facilities with sulfuric acid solutions. At the initial stage of the investigation, the phase composition of the initial sludge was determined. It was found that the studied samples consisted of CaSO(4 center dot)2 H2O, CaCO3, CaF2, Ca3Si(OH)(6)(CO3)(SO4)center dot 12 H2O and SiO2. Then, uranium was leached from the sludge with sulfuric acid solutions (60-200 g L-1) at a temperature of 20-80 degrees C. The sulfuric acid concentration of 200 g L-1 and a temperature of 80 degrees C provided the maximum uranium recovery degree 98%. The uranium concentration in the productive solution was 341.4 mg L (-1). Studies of the residue after leaching by XRD have shown that the main phase was CaSO(4 center dot)2 H2O (76-94%); the samples also contained CaCO3 (2.5-3%), CaF2 (16%) and SiO2 (1-5%). Productive solutions were processed using the strongly basic anion-exchangers Purolite A660/4759, Granion AS-7 U, Bestion BD200, AMP, and AM-p. It was determined that the Purolite A660/4759 had the highest dynamic exchange capacity at full saturation by uranium (44.9 g kg(-1)).

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