Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T10:46:21.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corrosion Behavior of Simulated LLW Glass in Deionized Water

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Toshikatsu Maeda ,
Tetsuji Yamaguchi ,
Katsutoshi Hotta ,
Tsuyoshi Mizuno  and
Tsunetaka Banba
Toshikatsu Maeda
Affiliation:
Nuclear Safety Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, JAPAN
Tetsuji Yamaguchi
Affiliation:
Nuclear Safety Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, JAPAN
Katsutoshi Hotta
Affiliation:
Radiation Application Development Association, Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, JAPAN
Tsuyoshi Mizuno
Affiliation:
Nuclear Safety Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, JAPAN present affiliation: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
Tsunetaka Banba
Affiliation:
Nuclear Safety Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, JAPAN
Get access

Abstract

Static leach tests were conducted for simulated low-level radioactive waste (LLW) glass in deionized water at 90 °C for up to one year to investigate the dissolution mechanism of LLW glass. Widely studied leaching behavior of high-level radioactive waste (HLW) glass is referred in discussing the dissolution mechanism. LLW glass is characterized by higher sodium (Na) and aluminum (Al) contents than HLW glass, about twice as high as R7T7, with its SiO2 content close to HLW glass. Powdered simulated LLW glass of three different chemical compositions was tested with the glass-surface-to-water-volume ratio of 2,000 m−1. The release rates of boron (B), widely used as an indicator of dissolution for HLW glass, decreased with time during leaching, as commonly observed in similar tests for HLW glass. The pH of the leachate was stable around 11.3 - 11.6, which is higher than those in similar tests for HLW glass by one pH unit or more. The concentrations of Al in the leachates were higher compared to data for HLW glass by two orders of magnitude. The high concentration seems to be caused by higher pH. In the leachate condition of the present tests, a zeolitic mineral (analcime) is thermodynamically more stable than amorphous silica (SiO2(am)) which is known to control the concentration of dissolved silica (Si) with respect to HLW glass. The present results imply that dissolution of the LLW glass is accompanied with formation of analcime under virtually closed systems such as geological repository where the groundwater flow rate is quite low.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1193: Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXXIII , 2009 , 299
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Ebert, W.L., Wolf, S.F., ANL-99/22 (1999).Google Scholar
2 Vienna, J.D., Smith, H.D., Schweiger, M.J., Crum, J.V., Smith, D.E., Peeler, D.K. Reamer, I.A., Musick, C.A. Tillotson, R.D., PNNL-12334 (1999).Google Scholar
3 McGrail, B.P., Icenhower, J.P., Martin, P.F., Rector, D.R., Schaef, H.T., Rodriguez, E.A., Steele, J.L., PNNL -13381 (2000).Google Scholar
4 Ebert, W.L., Strachan, D.M., Wolf, S.F., ANL-98/10; Contract W-31109-ENG-38 (1998).Google Scholar
5 Iseghem, P.Van., Grambow, B., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., Vol.112, 631–638 (1988).Google Scholar
6 Jantzen, C.M., Kaplan, D.I., Bibler, N.E., Peeler, D.K., Plodinec, M.J., J. Nucl. Mat., Vol.378, 244–256 (2008).Google Scholar
7 McGrail, B.P., Evert, W.L., Bakel, A.J., Peeler, D.K., J. Nucl. Mat., Vol.249, 175–189 (1997).Google Scholar
8 McGrail, B.P., Bacon, D.H., Icenhower, J.P., Mann, F.M., Puigh, R.J., Schaef, H.T., Mattigod, S.V., J. Nucl. Mat., 298, 95–111 (2001).Google Scholar
9 Day, D.E., Ray, C.S., Kim, C.W., Huang, W., Leerssen, R.D., Reis, S.T., Zhu, D., Annual report for DOE FG07-96ER45618 (2002).Google Scholar
10 Pierce, E.M., McGrail, B.P., Bagaasen, L.M., Rodriguez, E.A., Wellman, D.M., Geiszler, K.N., Baum, S.R., Reed, L.R., Crum, J.V., Schaef, H.T., PNNL-15126 ( 2005).Google Scholar
11 Strachan, D.M., J. Nucl. Mat., 298, 69–77 (2001).Google Scholar
12 Frugier, P., Gin, S., Minet, Y., Chave, T., Bonin, B., Godon, N., Lartigue, J.E., Jpllivet, P., Ayral, A., Windt, L.D., Santarini, G., J. Nucl. Mat., 380, 8–21 (2008).Google Scholar
13 European Report, Nr.12815 EN, 97 (1990).Google Scholar
14 Materials Characterization Center, Nuclear Waste Materials Handbook, DOE/TIC-11400, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington (1985).Google Scholar
15 Inagaki, Y., Ogata, A., Furuya, H., Idemitsu, K., Banba, T., Maeda, T., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 412, 257–264 (1996).Google Scholar
16 Inagaki, Y., Sakai, A., Furuya, H., Idemitsu, K., Arima, T., Banba, T., Maeda, T., Matsumoto, S., Tamura, Y., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 465, 213–220 (1997).Google Scholar
17 Inagaki, Y., Sakata, H., Furuya, H., Idemitsu, K., Arima, T., Banba, T., Maeda, T., Matsumoto, S., Tamura, Y., Kikkawa, S., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 506, 177–184 (1998).Google Scholar
18 Olin, A., Nolang, B., Osadchii, E.G., Ohman, L.O., Rosen, E., Chemical thermodynamics of selenium, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2005).Google Scholar
19 Stumm, W., Morgan, J.J., Aquatic Chemistry, 3rd edition, 982, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1996).Google Scholar
20 Wagman, D.D. et al. , The NBS tables of chemical thermodynamic properties, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, vol.11, supplement No.2 (1982).Google Scholar
21 Iseghem, P. Van, Aertsens, M., Gin, S., Deneele, D., Grambow, B., McGrail, P., Strachan, D., Wicks, G., A Critical Evaluation of the Dissolution Mechanisms of High-level Waste Glasses in Conditions of Relevance for Geological Disposal (GLAMOR) (2007).Google Scholar