Inhibition of Nuclear Waste Glass Leaching by Chemisorption

Abstract

The durability of a simulated nuclear waste containment glass was investigated by static leaching tests in six types of leaching containers. Glass corrosion in lead containers was reduced by more than two orders of magnitude from that measured in Teflon, whereas aluminum containers resulted in nearly a one order of magnitude reduction. Relatively minor effects on glass leaching were measured in copper, tin, and titanium containers. The results have strong implications concerning the choice of materials in possible waste package designs.

Critical review of glass performance modeling

“…Many experimental studies have looked at the effects of other repository materials on glass dissolution rates: i.e., with tuff present [130][131][132][133][134] [21,131,140]. Good reviews of interactions between repository material and glass are found in Werme et al [84] and Bibler and Jantzen [134].…”

Effect of Pb-rich and Fe-rich entities during alteration of a partially vitrified metallurgical waste

“…They revealed that glass dissolution rate strongly vary depending on factors such as pH [14,15], temperature [16,17], elements in solution (Zn [18]; Pb [19]; Fe [20], Si [15,21], Al [22,23], S/V ratio [24,25] flow rate [26][27][28] and glass composition [29][30][31][32].…”

Surface Layer Effects on Waste Glass Corrosion

“…Hench et al [43, 45, 5 l] suggested that the leaching behavior of nuclear waste glass is largely a function of the surface composition; Hench and Clark [51] have categorized glass surfaces into five types, based on the composition profile. Most discussions in the literature regarding the role of the alteration surface layers in glass reaction concentrate on whether the surface layers form physical mass transport (diffusion) barriers that inhibit further glass reactions by impeding the transport of reactants and products to or from the reaction zone [23, [52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62]. Observed decreases in leach rate with time can also be attributed to the approach to saturation limits of glass components in solution [32,[63][64][65][66].…”