Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:53:31.695Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Some Evidence of Radiolysis in a Uranium ore Body - Quantification and Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Jinsong Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering and TechnologyRoyal Institute of TechnologyS-100 44 Stockholm SWEDEN
Ivars Neretnieks
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering and TechnologyRoyal Institute of TechnologyS-100 44 Stockholm SWEDEN
Get access

Abstract

Locally oxidising conditions in the near-field of the Cigar Lake uranium deposit was observed. Ongoing processes of water radiolysis has also been predicted previously by our mass transport model. In the ore there was an enhanced concentration of helium, hydrogen and sulphate. Sulphate is the only oxidising species of substantial amount in the groundwater samples, and is possibly indirectly produced by water radiolysis and oxidation of sulphides. The ongoing oxidant production rate has been calculated by the mass transport model.

In this paper, the issue of water radiolysis is addressed from a more fundamental angle of approach. The maximum oxidant production rate is calculated based on the assumptions of geometric dispersion of the ore constituents, the estimate of the total radiation energy, the fraction of energy deposited into the pore water, and the G-values of water. The results show that only a few percent of the total radiation energy is deposited into the pore water to cause water radiolysis. If the recombination factor projected by other researchers are accounted for, the oxidant production rate thus calculated agrees with the present-day ongoing oxidant production rate predicted by the mass transport model.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

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

REFERENCES

1. Cramer, J. J., 1993. Section 3.1 Geology. In: Final Report of the AECL/SKB Cigar Lake Analogue Study. AECL-10851. Ed. Cramer, J. J. and Smellie, J. A. T.. In press.Google Scholar
2. Liu, J. Yu, J.-W. and Neretnieks, I., 1994. Transport modelling and model validation in the natural analogue study of the Cigar Lake uranium deposit. Radiochimica Acta. In press.Google Scholar
3. Cramer, J. J., 1986. Sandstone-hosted uranium deposits in Northern Saskatchewan as natural analogs to nuclear fuel waste disposal vaults. Chem. Geol., 55:269279.Google Scholar
4. Janeczek, J. and Ewing, R. C, 1992. Dissolution and alteration of uraninite under reducing conditions. J. Nucl. Mater. 190:157173.Google Scholar
5. Janeczek, J. and Ewing, R. C, 1993. Section 3.3.4 Uraninite from Cigar Lake: Drill Cores 220 and FH-18. In: Final Report of the AECL/SKB Cigar Lake Analogue Study. AECL-10851. Ed. Cramer, J. J. and Smellie, J. A. T.. In press.Google Scholar
6. Cramer, J. J., Sunder, S. and Taylor, P., 1991. Whiteshell characterisation of Cigar Lake uranium samples. In: AECL/SKB/USDOE Cigar Lake Project, Progress report for the period May - October 1991. Ed. Cramer, J. J. and Smellie, A. T.. CLR-91-5.Google Scholar
7. Cramer, J. J., 1991. Personal communication.Google Scholar
8. Choppin, G. R. and Rydberg, J., 1980. Nuclear Chemistry. Theory and Applications. Pergamon Press, pp. 265307.Google Scholar
9. Spinks, J. W. T. and Woods, R. J., 1990. An Introduction to Radiation Chemistry, 3rd Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
10. Smellie, J. A. T., Percival, J. and Cramer, J. J., 1991. Mineralogical and geochemical database for the major lithological and hydrothermal subdivisions of the Cigar Lake uranium deposit. CLR-91-04. Nov. 1991.Google Scholar
11. Eriksem, T. E., 1992. Personal communication.Google Scholar
12. Christensen, H. and Bjergbakke, E., 1982. Radiolysis of groundwater from HLW stored in copper canisters. KBS Technical Report 82-02.Google Scholar