3.9 Article

Isotope Ratio Analysis of 235U and 238U Nuclide Using a Microwave Digestion Associated with ICP-MS and the Large Areal Soil Survey Related to Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster

期刊

BUNSEKI KAGAKU
卷 60, 期 12, 页码 947-957

出版社

JAPAN SOC ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.2116/bunsekikagaku.60.947

关键词

inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry; uranium isotope ratio; microwave digestion; Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Isotope ratio analysis for U-235 and U-238 in soil samples using a microwave digestion procedure associated with ICP-MS was proposed and demonstrated. In the microwave digestion procedure, the dissolution of natural uranium in silicate (in rocks) was reduced by using a mixture of nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide (to measure the radioactive uranium from a disaster). Upon ICP-MS, the isotope ratio of the certificated geochemical reference material was realized to precisely correct the isotope ratio in real soil samples. In addition, cell-pass voltages can be available to make calibrations and/or to correct the mass bias in the mass-spectrometer. By these effects, the isotope ration of uranium can be measured with an accuracy of 0.37 % without using a radioactive standard source. U-235 and U-238 were quantitatively determined, and those detection limits were both 0.010 mu g/kg. In the case of an emergency, like a nuclear hazard, the proposed method is useful to immediately gather a large amount of information in large area as compared with a common method such as a complete dissolution process associated with an a-ray spectrometer or ICP-MS. In addition, the survey of how radioactive uranium spreads was conducted from 7 to 80 km around the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Fukushima-DNPP) (115 points in Fukushima prefecture). As a result, the values of the uranium isotope ratio for those soils were similar to the natural abundance, although the various concentrations of uranium were detected from sampling points.

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

3.9
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