Science
Related: About this forumSome Interesting Chemistry Associated with the Radioactive Hanford Waste Tanks.
Last edited Sun Nov 17, 2024, 11:24 AM - Edit history (1)
The paper I'll discuss in this post is this one: Understanding Trace Iron and Chromium Incorporation During Gibbsite Crystallization and Effects on Mineral Dissolution Yatong Zhao, Micah P. Prange, Meirong Zong, Yining Wang, Eric D. Walter, Ying Chen, Zihua Zhu, Mark H. Engelhard, Xiang Wang, Xiaodong Zhao, Carolyn I. Pearce, Aijun Miao, Zheming Wang, Kevin M. Rosso, and Xin Zhang Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (45), 20125-20136.
I will only discuss this paper, because of time constraints, very, very briefly. It concerns efforts to address chemical byproducts of nuclear fuel reprocessing in the 20th century to get plutonium for nuclear weapons and efforts to "clean up" the waste tanks left from that rather sloppy effort. I once went on a rather long, and personally satisfying, intellectually satisfying, rant here on the Hanford situation in response to a dumb shit antinuke here who carried on about the collapse of a tunnel at the Hanford site, this on an entire planet literally burning up from the accumulation of the dangerous fossil fuel waste carbon dioxide. I won't have the displeasure of hearing from that person, because of the very wonderful DU ignore list function, but as the inspiration to look into what should have been a short dismissal led me down a path I very much enjoyed, since getting carried away with research into the Hanford situation taught me a lot I didn't know.
828 Underground Nuclear Tests, Plutonium Migration in Nevada, Dunning, Kruger, Strawmen, and Tunnels
Whatever.
The paper above concerns chemistry that might be covered - at least when I was a kid - in an introductory chemistry lab course, specifically the dissolution of aluminum hydroxide Al(OH)3 and the apparent effect of co-precipitated metals. (The paper also gives some insight into the historic chemical practices utilized in nuclear fuel reprocessing, as any investigation into the literature associated with these tanks does.)
From the paper's introductory paragraphs:
However, the removal of Al minerals from the tank waste was more challenging than anticipated. (4,9,10) This can be attributed to the complex chemical composition of the waste tanks. Apart from sodium and Al, substantial quantities of iron (Fe) and chromium (Cr) are also found in the waste. (3,6,8) The Fe originates from bismuth phosphate waste treatment, while Cr is introduced as an oxidizing agent in the reduction oxidation (REDOX) process. (3,6,8) Several interactions involving Fe, Cr, and Al have been documented in waste treatment processes. For example, the coprecipitation of Al and Fe metal oxides, (11) or the use of ferrate (FeO42-) to leach Cr from solids. (1) Additionally, Cr dissolution through oxidative leaching also releases Al. (6) Hence, investigation of the mechanisms of interaction between Fe/Cr and Al hydroxides would provide valuable insights for waste retrieval and processing at Hanford.
It has been proposed that Fe or Cr could bind to the surface of Al minerals in the form of nanoscale precipitates or adsorbed clusters. (12) Alternatively, Fe or Cr might be incorporated into the structure of Al minerals, acting as substitutes for Al atoms. (9) Studies have confirmed that the inclusion of Cr can hinder the dissolution of boehmite. This inhibition mechanism involves the adsorption of Cr clusters onto boehmite, potentially leading to the partial passivation of the surface. (4,12) Frost et al. synthesized up to 20% Fe- or Cr-doped boehmite nanofibers by steam-assisted solid wet-gel synthesis. (13,14) Nevertheless, evaluating the binding energy of Cr3+ substitution for Al3+ within the boehmite structure highlights a clear incompatibility of Cr3+, especially when concentrations surpass the 1% threshold. (9)
The substitution of Fe by Al and other elements is a well-documented phenomenon in iron (hydr)oxides in various environmental contexts. This substitution gradually transforms hematite crystals, altering their facets from (101), (112), (110), and (104) rhombohedra to (001) faceted plates, leading to a general decrease in the adsorption capacity for Cr. (15) However, it is not known if Fe3+ or Cr3+ ions effectively substitute for Al3+ within the gibbsite structure, and, if these substitutions of Fe3+ or Cr3+ have any discernible impact on gibbsite reactivity.
The question the paper asks is whether the chromium and iron impurities reside on the surface of the gibbsite formed in the tanks, impacting their ease of dissolution, or whether the iron and chromium are incorporated into the crystals when they form.
The authors, after some cool sophisticated science discussed in the paper, conclude that the chromium and iron are incorporated within the crystals, and that this does in fact affect the dissolution rates. They note that these chemical findings can have implications for other types of contaminated sites where heavy metal chemistry is involved.
None of this dissuades me from my oft stated opinion that the money spent "cleaning up" Hanford to a standard to which we "clean up" nothing else, say for instance, the planetary atmosphere, will save very few lives, if any, because very few lives are at risk from the Hanford leaking tanks.
The paper itself is, however, interesting I think. If the money spent at Hanford saves few lives, the science learned might, in a better world than the one in which we live, may advance science.
QED
(2,946 posts)Corundum is Al2O3. Or maybe I just need more coffee this morning.
I wrote a stoichiometry problem for my chemistry students "the conundrum of corundum". Add a Cr impurity and a ruby forms. Add one of a number of different transition metals and a sapphire forms. The context rich problems always confused them - they were learning to separate important details from extraneous info (much like my post here).
NNadir
(34,656 posts)It appears that in the Hanford tanks the aluminum oxide phase is partially the gamma phase, not the pure alpha associated with rubies and sapphires.
If Rubies formed in the tanks - they would probably be radioactive.
That's an interesting observation though, that hadn't occurred to me. Thanks for the reminder.