No abstract

No abstract

Summary.Understanding the mechanism(s) of uraniummineral dissolution is crucial for predictive modeling of U mobility in the subsurface. In order to understand how pH and type of cation in solution may affect dissolution, experiments were performed on mainly single crystals of curite, PbSolutions included: deionized water; aqueous HCl solutions at pH 3.5 and 2; 0.5 mol L −1 Pb(II)-, Ba-, Sr-, Ca-, Mg-, HCl solutions at pH 2; 1.0 mol L −1 Na-and K-HCl solutions at pH 2; and a 0.1 mol L −1 Na 2 CO 3 solution at pH 10.5. Uranyl mineral basal surface microtopography, micromorphology, and composition were examined prior to, and after dissolution experiments on micrometer scale specimens using atomic force microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Evolution of etch pit depth at different pH values and experimental durations can be explained using a stepwave dissolution model. Effects of the cation in solution on etch pit symmetry and morphology can be explained using an adsorption model involving specific surface sites. Surface precipitation of the following phases was observed: (a) a highly-hydrated uranyl-hydroxy-hydrate in ultrapure water (on all minerals), (b) a Na-uranyl-hydroxy-hydrate in Na 2 CO 3 solution of pH 10.5 (on uranyl-hydroxy-hydrate minerals), (c) a Na-uranyl-carbonate on zippeite, (d) Ba-and Pb-uranylhydroxy-hydrates in Ba-HCl and Pb-HCl solutions of pH 2 (on uranophane), (e) a (SiO x (OH) 4−2x ) phase in solutions of pH 2 (uranophane), and (f) sulfate-bearing phases in solutions of pH 2 and 3.5 (on zippeite).