4.7 Article

Solution equilibria of uranyl minerals: Role of the common groundwater ions calcium and carbonate

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 377, 期 -, 页码 315-320

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.05.101

关键词

Uranium; Groundwater; Remediation; Metaschoepite; Uranophane

资金

  1. EPA through its Office of Research and Development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the factors that govern aqueous solubility of uranyl minerals is important for predicting uranium mobility in groundwater and for designing effective remediation strategies. The uranyl-containing minerals metaschoepite [UO3 center dot(2H(2)O)] and uranophane [Ca(UO2)(2)(SiO3OH)(2)center dot 5H(2)O] were synthesized and evaluated in batch solubility experiments conducted in the presence of common groundwater ions: calcium, bicarbonate/carbonate, and dissolved silica. Solid-phase characterization revealed the expected structural and thermogravimetric properties of metaschoepite and uranophane. Metaschoepite solubility in carbonate-free water followed a u-shaped pH dependency with minimum solubility near pH 8.5; uranium concentrations at pH greater than or similar to 8.5 were approximately equivalent to the reference value for safe drinking water established by the EPA (30 mu g/L). With increasing bicarbonate/carbonate concentration (1 mM - 50 mM) the solubility of metaschoepite increased, presumably due to the formation of uranyl-carbonate complexes. However, the experimental concentrations of uranium were lower than concentrations predicted from accepted complexation constants. For uranophane, equilibrium uranium concentrations were < 75 mu g/L at typical groundwater concentrations of calcium and dissolved silica (pH > 7). The diversity of uranyl minerals that possibly form in the presence of common groundwater species: Ca-Mg-Na-K-Si-bicarbonate/carbonate-sulfate-chloride, has not been fully explored with respect to understanding potential mineral transformations and impacts on uranium solubility and mobility.

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