Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T18:02:25.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Np Incorporation into Uranyl Alteration Phases: A Quantum Mechanical Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2011

Lindsay Shuller
Affiliation:
lshuller@umich.edu, University of Michigan, Materials Science and Engineering Department, 2534 C.C. Little Building, 1100 N. University Ave., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 734-647-5673
Rodney C Ewing
Affiliation:
rodewing@umich.edu, University of Michigan, Department of Geological Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States
Udo Becker
Affiliation:
ubecker@umich.edu, University of Michigan, Department of Geological Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States
Get access

Abstract

Neptunium is a major contributor to the long-term radioactivity in a geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) due to its long half-life (2.1 million years). The mobility of Np may be decreased by its incorporation into the U6+ phases that form during the corrosion of SNF. The ionic radii of Np5+ (0.089nm) and U6+ (0.087nm) are similar, as is their chemistry. Experimental studies have shown that Np can be incorporated into uranyl phases up to concentrations on the order of 100 ppm. The low concentration of Np in the uranyl phases complicates experimental detection and presents a significant challenge for determining the incorporation mechanism. Therefore, we have used quantum mechanical calculations to investigate incorporation mechanisms and evaluate the energetics of Np substituting for U.

CASTEP, a density functional theory based code that uses plane waves to model the behavior of the valence electrons and pseudo-potentials to model the behavior of the core and inner valence electrons, was used to calculate optimal H positions, relaxed geometry, and energy of different uranyl phases. The incorporation energy for Np in uranyl alteration phases was calculated for studtite, [(UO2)O2(H2O)2](H2O)2, and boltwoodite, HK(UO2)(SiO4)1.5(H2O). Studtite is the rare case of a stable, naturally-occurring peroxide mineral, in this case a uranyl hydroxyl peroxide that forms in the presence of H2O2 from the radiolysis of H2O. For studtite, two incorporation mechanisms were evaluated: (1) charge-balanced substitution of Np5+ and H+ for one U6+, and (2) direct substitution of Np6+ for U6+. For boltwoodite, the H atomic positions prior to Np incorporation were determined, as well as the Np incorporation mechanisms and the corresponding substitution energies. The preferential incorporation of Np into different structure types of U6+ minerals was also investigated. Quantum mechanical substitution energies have to be derived at Np concentrations higher than the ones found in experiments or expected in a repository in order to avoid the calculation of unit cells that are too large to be handled quantum mechanically. However, the quantum mechanical results are crucial for subsequent empirical force-field and Monte-Carlo simulations to determine the thermodynamically stable limit of Np incorporation into these uranyl phases.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2007

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. Wronkiewicz, D.J., Bates, J.K., Gerding, T.J., Veleckis, E., and Tanni, B.S., J. Nucl. Mater. 190, 107127 (1992).Google Scholar
2. Wronkiewicz, D.J., Bates, J.K., Wolf, S.F., and Buck, E.C., J. Nucl. Mater. 238, 7895 (1996).Google Scholar
3. Hanson, B., McNamara, B., Buck, E., Friese, J., Jenson, E., Krupka, K., and Arey, B., Radiochim. Acta, 93, 159168 (2005).Google Scholar
4. Douglas, M., Clark, S.B., Friese, J.I., Arey, B.W., Buck, E.C., and Hanson, B.D., Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 41174124 (2005).Google Scholar
5. Burns, P.C., Deely, K.M., and Skanthakumar, S., Radiochim. Acta, 151159 (2004).Google Scholar
6. Buck, E.C. and Fortner, J.A., Ultramicroscopy, 67, 6975 (1997).Google Scholar
7. Burns, P.C. and Klingensmith, A.L., Elements, 2, 351356 (2006).Google Scholar
8. Burns, P.C., Can. Min., 36, 10691075 (1998).Google Scholar
9. Segall, M.D., Lindan, P.J.D., Probert, M.J., Pickard, C.J., Hasnip, P.J., Clark, S.J., and Payne, M.C., J. Phys.: Cond. Matt. 14, 27172743 (2002).Google Scholar
10. Burns, P.C. and Hughes, K.A., Am. Min., 88, 11651168 (2003).Google Scholar
11. Perdew, J.P., Burke, K., Ernzerhof, M., Phys. Rev. Lett., 77, 38653868 (1996).Google Scholar