Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T07:45:44.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Natural Radionuclides to Predict the Behavior of Radwaste Radionuclides In Far-Field Aquifers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

N. Hubbard ,
J. C. Laul  and
R. W. Perkins
N. Hubbard
Affiliation:
Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio 43201
J. C. Laul
Affiliation:
Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington 99352
R. W. Perkins
Affiliation:
Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington 99352
Get access

Abstract

In appropriate aquifers the natural radionuclides of the U and Th decay series are important sources of information about the behavior of radwaste radionuclides in far-field aquifers. The Wolfcamp Carbonate, Pennsylvanian Carbonate and Granite Wash aquifers in the Palo Duro Basin of the Texas Panhandle are prime examples of such aquifers. Sampling and analysis for key radionuclides in the ground waters of these aquifers are quite feasible and have been accomplished. Key early results are: (1) Ra does not appear to be retarded by sorption, (2) Th appears to be strongly sorbed, (3) kinetics seem to be different on time scales of days to months than on ones of hundreds of thousands of years, and (4) U and Th behave similarily when the time scales (half-lives) are similar, leading to the suggestion that uranium is in the +4 valence state in these aquifers.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 26: Symposium D – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII , 1983 , 891
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1984

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. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Natural Background Radiation in the United States, NCRP Report No. 45 (1975).Google Scholar
2. Federal Register, CFR Part 960, Vol. 48, No. 26 (1983).Google Scholar
3. Cohen, B. L., IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, Vol. NS-23, No. 1, p. 56–59 (1976).Google Scholar
4. Zaikowski, A., Kosanke, B. J., and Hubbard, N., This volume.Google Scholar
5. Krishnaswami, S., Graustein, W. C., and Turekian, K. K., Water Resources Research, Vol. 18, p. 1633–1675 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Silker, W. B., in Advances In Chemistry Series, American Chemical Society, No. 147, 139–147 (1975).Google Scholar
7. Laul, J. C., Perkins, R., and Hubbard, N., Abstract, Spring Meeting, American Geophysical Union (1983). And Laul, J. C., Perkins, R., and Hubbard, N., Paper in preparation.Google Scholar
8. Langmuir, D. and Riese, A. C., Abstract, Geological Society, American Annual Meeting (1983).Google Scholar
9.Kigoshi, K., Science, 173, 47–48 (1971)andGoogle Scholar
9a. Osmond, J. K., in Handbook of Environmental Isotope Geochemistry, Vol. 1, 259–282 (1980).Google Scholar
10. Hostetler, P. B. and Garrels, R. M., Economic Geology, Vol. 57, 137–167 (1962).Google Scholar