Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:16:29.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of the Dissolution Behaviour of Various UO2 Samples in Saline Solution at 100°C Under Reducing Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

S. Stroes-Gascoyne
Affiliation:
AECL Research, whiteshell Laboratories, Pinava, Manitoba, Canada ROE 1L0
J.C. Tait
Affiliation:
AECL Research, whiteshell Laboratories, Pinava, Manitoba, Canada ROE 1L0
R.J. Porth
Affiliation:
AECL Research, whiteshell Laboratories, Pinava, Manitoba, Canada ROE 1L0
J.L. McConnell
Affiliation:
AECL Research, whiteshell Laboratories, Pinava, Manitoba, Canada ROE 1L0
A.M. Duclos
Affiliation:
AECL Research, whiteshell Laboratories, Pinava, Manitoba, Canada ROE 1L0
Get access

Abstract

The separate effects of alpha- and gamma-radiolysis on UO2 dissolution can be studied with unirradiated UO2, whereas studies vith used nuclear fuel necessarily always include both alpha- and gamma-radiolysis effects. This paper attempts to separate these effects by comparing the leaching behaviour in saline solution of a number of UO2 samples (each vith a particular radiation characteristic or chemical property inherent to used fuel) vith the leaching behaviour of used fuel. Data from leaching experiments vith lov- and high-burnup CANDU (CANada Deuterium Uranium) fuels are also compared. The results indicate that the presence of an alpha field at 100°C under reducing conditions does not increase UO2 dissolution but suggest that the combined effects of the beta and gamma fields in used CANDU fuel may enhance UO2 dissolution.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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

REFERENCES

1 Dormuth, K.W. and Nuttall, K., Radioact. Waste Manage. Nucl. Fuel Cycle 8 (2–3), 93 (1987).Google Scholar
2 Sunder, S. and Shoesmith, D.W., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL-10395 (1991).Google Scholar
3 Sunder, S., Shoesmith, D.W., Christensen, H. and Miller, N.H., J. Nucl. Mater. 190, 78 (1992).Google Scholar
4 Smith, H.J., Tait, J.C. and Von Massow, R.E., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL-9072 (1987).Google Scholar
5 Shoesmith, D.W. and Sunder, S., J. Nucl. Mater. 190, 20 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Tait, J.C., Gauld, I.C. and Wilkin, G.B., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL-9881 (1989).Google Scholar
7 Stroes-Gascoyne, S., Tait, J.C., Porth, R.J. and McConnell, J.M., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL-10907, in preparation.Google Scholar
8 Stroes-Gascoyne, S., Johnson, L.H., Sellinger, D.M. and Wilkin, D.L., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Report, AECL-10574 (1992).Google Scholar
9 Tait, J.C., Stroes-Gascoyne, S., Hocking, W.H., Duclos, A.M., Porth, R.J. and Wilkin, D.L., Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 212 (Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIV), 189 (1991).Google Scholar
10 Sunder, S., Boyer, G.D. and Miller, N.H., J. Nucl. Mater. 175, 163 (1990).Google Scholar
11 McConnell, J.L., Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Technical Record, TR-580/C0G-92-185 (1993).Google Scholar
12 Sunder, S., Cramer, J.J. and Miller, N.H., Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 257 (Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XV), 449 (1992).Google Scholar
13 Stroes-Gascoyne, S., Johnson, L.H., Tait, J.C. and Sellinger, D.M., Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 127 (Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XII), 301 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Christensen, H. and Sunder, S., Studsvik report, Studsvik/M-93/29 (1993).Google Scholar