4.8 Article

Impeding 99Tc(IV) mobility in novel waste forms

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12067

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Department of Energy, Office of River Protection, Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Federal Project
  2. Office of Basic Energy Science, Division of Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences
  3. Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research located at PNNL
  4. National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
  5. US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences, Chemical Sciences, Biosciences, and Geosciences Division, Heavy Element Chemistry Program
  6. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  7. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-76SF00515]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Technetium (Tc-99) is an abundant, long-lived radioactive fission product whose mobility in the subsurface is largely governed by its oxidation state. Tc immobilization is crucial for radioactive waste management and environmental remediation. Tc(IV) incorporation in spinels has been proposed as a novel method to increase Tc retention in glass waste forms during vitrification. However, experiments under high-temperature and oxic conditions show reoxidation of Tc(IV) to volatile pertechnetate, Tc(VII). Here we examine this problem with ab initio molecular dynamics simulations and propose that, at elevated temperatures, doping with first row transition metal can significantly enhance Tc retention in magnetite in the order Co>Zn>Ni. Experiments with doped spinels at 700 degrees C provide quantitative confirmation of the theoretical predictions in the same order. This work highlights the power of modern, state-of-the-art simulations to provide essential insights and generate theory-inspired design criteria of complex materials at elevated temperatures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据