Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T06:52:43.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effects Of Gamma Radiation on Groundwater Chemistry and Glass Reaction In a Saturated Tuff Environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

William L. Ebert ,
John K. Bates ,
Thomas J. Gerding  and
Richard A. Van Konynenburg
William L. Ebert
Affiliation:
Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439
John K. Bates
Affiliation:
Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439
Thomas J. Gerding
Affiliation:
Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439
Richard A. Van Konynenburg
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94550
Get access

Abstract

The Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigations project has completed a series of experiments that provide insight into groundwater chemistry and glass waste form performance in the presence of a gamma radiation field at 90°C. Results from experiments done at 1 × 103 and 0 R/hr are presented and compared to similar experiments done at 2 × 105 and 1 × 104R/hr. The major effect of radiation is to lower the groundwater pH to a value near 6.4. The addition of glass to the system results in slightly more basic final pH, both in the presence and absence of radiation. However, there is essentially no difference in the extent of glass reaction, as measured by elemental release, as a function of dose rate or total dose, for reaction periods up to 278 days.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 84: Symposium L – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management X , 1986 , 613
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1987

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. Bates, J. K., Fischer, D. F., and Gerding, T. J., Argonne National Laboratory Report ANL-85-62 (1986).Google Scholar
2. Abrajano, T. A., Bates, J. K., Ebert, W. L., and Gerding, T. J., presented at the 1984 ACerS Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, 1986 (to be published in the Ceramic Advances Series).Google Scholar
3. Konynenburg, R. A. Van, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report UCRL-53719 (1986).Google Scholar
4. Jones, A. R., Radiation Research 10, 655 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Spinks, J. W. T. and Woods, R. J., An Introduction to Radiation Chemistry, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York, 1976).Google Scholar
6. Bielski, B. H. J. and Gebicki, J. M., in Advances in Radiation Chemistry, edited by Burton, M. and Magee, J. L. (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1970), Vol. 2, p. 177.Google Scholar
7. Wright, J., Linacre, J. K., Marsh, W. R., and Bates, T. H., in Proc. 1st Int'l. Conf. Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, Geneva, 1955 (United Nations, New York, 1956), Vol. 7, p. 560.Google Scholar
8. Linacre, J. K. and Marsh, W. R., Report No. AERE-R10027, Chemistry Division, AERE Harwell, England (1981).Google Scholar
9. Burns, W. G., Hughes, A. E., Marples, J. A. C., Nelson, R. S., and Stoneham, A. M., J. Nucl. Mater. 107, 245 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Barkatt, Aaron, Barkatt, Alisa, and Sousanpour, W., Nature 300, 339 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Barkatt, Aaron, Barkatt, Alisa, and Sousanpour, W., Nucl. Technol. 60, 218 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Primak, W. and Fuchs, L. H., Physics Today 7, 15 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Pederson, L. R. and McVay, G. L., J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 66, 863 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Schumb, W. C., Satterfield, C. N., and Wentworth, R. L., Hydrogen Peroxide (Reinhold, New York, 1955).Google Scholar
15. Garrells, R. M. and Howard, D. F., in Proc. of the Sixth Nat. Conf. on Clays and Clay Minerals, Berkeley, CA, Aug. 19-23, 1957 (Pergamon Press, New York, 1957), p. 68.Google Scholar
16. Burns, W. G., Marsh, W. R., and Walters, W. S., Radiat. Phys. Chem. 21, 259 (1983).Google Scholar
17. Ebert, W. L., work in progress.Google Scholar