4.7 Article

The specific sorption of Np(V) on the corundum (α-Al2O3) surface in the presence of trivalent lanthanides Eu(III) and Gd(III): A batch sorption and XAS study

期刊

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
卷 483, 期 -, 页码 334-342

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2016.08.035

关键词

Np(V); Eu(III); Gd(III); Sorption competition; Batch sorption; X-ray absorption spectroscopy

资金

  1. Finnish Doctoral Programs for Nuclear Engineering and Radiochemistry (YTERA) and Chemistry and Molecular Sciences (CHEMS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The sorption of pentavalent neptunium, Np(V), on corundum (alpha-Al2O3) was investigated in the absence and presence of trivalent europium or gadolinium as a competing element under CO2-free conditions. The objective of this study was to investigate how a trivalent metal ion with a higher charge than that of the neptunyl(V) ion would affect the sorption of Np(V) when allowed to adsorb on the mineral surface before the addition of Np(V). Batch sorption experiments conducted as a function of pH (pH-edges) and as a function of Np(V) concentration (isotherms) in the absence and presence of 1 x 10(-5) M Eu(III) showed no sign of Eu being able to block Np sorption sites. Surface complexation modelling using the diffuse double layer model was applied to the batch data to obtain surface complexation constants for the formed Np (V) complexes on corundum. To account for potential changes occurring in the coordination environment of the neptunium ion in the presence of a trivalent lanthanide, X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) measurements were carried out on the samples containing only Np(V) and Np(V) + Gd(III). The results reveal the presence of a bidentate Np(V) edge-sharing complex on the corundum surface in the absence of Gd (III), while the coordination environment of Np(V) on the corundum surface could be changed when Gd (III) is added to the sample before the sorption of Np(V). (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. 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