Search

The UK's adoption of pyroprocessing of spent nuclear fuel as an alternative to the current aqueous processing routes requires a robust scientific underpinning of all relevant processes. One key process is the clean-up of the contaminated salt from the electroreducing and electrorefining processes. A proposed method for this clean-up is zone refining, whereby the tendency of the contaminants to remain in the liquid phase during melting and freezing is exploited to 'sweep' the contaminants to one end of the sample. Experiments were performed, utilising off-the-shelf laboratory equipment, to demonstrate the feasibility of zone refining for clean-up of electroreducing and electrorefining wastes. This was successful for the electrorefining simulant samples, with effective segregation coefficient, keff, values, which provide a measure of the degree of separation in the sample, between 0 and 1. Lower values indicate greater separation, with values of as low as 0.542 achieved here, corresponding to a reduction in RECl3 content from 10.0 wt.% to 8.4 wt.% (for 80% salt reuse). Due to difficulties in obtaining a fully homogeneous electroreducing simulant waste, it was not possible to demonstrate the feasibility of zone refining using the current experimental setup. Further research is required to elucidate the correct preparation conditions for production of homogeneous electroreducing waste simulants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reproducible preparation of lithium tetraborate fused beads for XRF analysis of glass and mineral samples is of paramount importance for analytical repeatability. However, as with all glass melting processes, losses due to volatilisation must be taken into account and their effects are not negligible. Here the effects of fused bead melting time have been studied for four Certified Reference Materials (CRM's: three feldspars, one silicate glass), in terms of their effects on analytical variability and volatilisation losses arising from fused bead preparation. At melting temperatures of 1065 °C, and for feldspar samples, fused bead melting times shorter than approximately 25 min generally gave rise to a greater deviation of the XRF-analysed composition from the certified composition. This variation might be due to incomplete fusion and/or fused bead inhomogeneity but further research is needed. In contrast, the shortest fused bead melting time for the silicate glass CRM gave an XRF-analysed composition closer to the certified values than longer melting times. This may suggest a faster rate of glass-in-glass dissolution and homogenization during fused bead preparation. For all samples, longer melting times gave rise to greater volatilisation losses (including sulphates and halides) during fusion. This was demonstrated by a linear relationship between SO3 mass loss and time1/2, as predicted by a simple diffusion-based model. Iodine volatilisation displays a more complex relationship, suggestive of diffusion plus additional mechanisms. This conclusion may have implications for vitrification of iodine-bearing radioactive wastes. Our research demonstrates that the nature of the sample material impacts on the most appropriate fusion times. For feldspars no less than ~25 min and no more than ~60 min of fusion at 1065 °C, using Li2B4O7 as the fusion medium and in the context of feldspar samples and the automatic fusion equipment used here, strikes an acceptable (albeit non-ideal) balance between the competing factors of fused bead quality, analytical consistency and mitigating volatilisation losses. Conversely, for the silicate glass sample, shorter fusion times of less than ~30 min under the same conditions provided more accurate analyses whilst limiting volatile losses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]