4.7 Article

Efficient removal of cesium from low-level radioactive liquid waste using natural and impregnated zeolite minerals

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 172, 期 1, 页码 416-422

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.07.033

关键词

Natural and synthetic zeolites; Calix [4] arene; Radioactive waste

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of the proposed work was focused to provide promising solid-phase materials that combine relatively inexpensive and high removal capacity of some radionuclides from low-level radioactive liquid waste (LLRLW). Four various zeolite minerals including natural clinoptilolite (NaNCl), natural chabazite (NaNCh), natural mordenite (NaNM) and synthetic mordenite (NaSM) were investigated. The effective key parameters on the sorption behavior of cesium (Cs-134) were investigated using batch equilibrium technique with respect to the waste solution pH, contacting time, potassium ion concentration, waste solution volume/sorbent weight ratio and Cs ion concentration. The obtained results revealed that natural chabazite (NaNCh) has the higher distribution coefficients and capacity towards Cs ion rather than the other investigated zeolite materials. Furthermore, novel impregnated zeolite material (ISM) was prepared by loading Calix 141 arene bis(-2,3 naphtho-crown-6) onto synthetic mordenite to combine the high removal uptake of the mordenite with the high selectivity of Calix 141 arene towards Cs radionuclide. Comparing the obtained results for both NaSM and the impregnated synthetic mordenite (ISM-25), it could be observed that the impregnation process leads to high improvement in the distribution coefficients of Cs+ ion (from 0.52 to 27.63 L/g). The final objective in all cases was aimed at determining feasible and economically reliable solution to the management of LLRLW specifically for the problems related to the low decontamination factor and the effective recovery of monovalent cesium ion. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据