Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:23:25.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Experimental Basis for a Mixed Potential Model for Nuclear Fuel Corrosion within a Failed Waste Container

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

D.W. Shoesmith ,
J.J. Noël  and
F. Garisto
D.W. Shoesmith
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, University of Western OntarioLondon, ON Canada N6A 5B7
J.J. Noël
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, University of Western OntarioLondon, ON Canada N6A 5B7
F. Garisto
Affiliation:
Ontario Power Generation 700 University Avenue Toronto, ON Canada M5G 1X6
Get access

Abstract

A mixed-potential model to predict the corrosion behaviour of nuclear fuel inside a failed carbon steel-lined copper waste container in a granitic repository is briefly described. A number of experiments underway to improve the mechanistic form of the model and to provide the necessary input data are discussed. A primary emphasis is placed on the consequences of the accumulation of corrosion product deposits on the fuel surface on the development of aggressive local chemistries, the cathodic reduction of H2O2 and potential for scavenging of H2O2 by the products of carbon steel corrosion (in particular H2).

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 824: Symposium CC – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXVIII , 2004 , CC2.3
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

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. King, F. and Kolar, M.. Ontario Power Generation Report No: 06819-REP-01200-10041-1200, September (2000).Google Scholar
2. Shoesmith, D.W., J. Nucl. Mater. 282, 1 (2000).Google Scholar
3. Shoesmith, D.W., Kolar, M. and King, F., Corrosion 59, 802 (2003)Google Scholar
4. Santos, B.G., Nesbitt, H.W., Noel, J.J. and Shoesmith, D.W., Electrochimica Acta, 49, 1863 (2004).Google Scholar
5. Rudnicki, J.D., Russo, R. and Shoesmith, D.W., J. Electroanal. Chem. 372, 03 (1994).Google Scholar
6. Sunder, S., Strandlund, L.K. and Shoesmith, D.W., Electrochimica Acta, 43, 2359 (1998).Google Scholar
7. Kim, C.W., Wronkiewicz, D.J. and Buck, E.C., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 608, 47 (2000)Google Scholar
8. Buck, E.C., Finn, P.A. and Bates, J.K., Micron, 35, 235 (2004)Google Scholar
9. Santos, B.G., Noel, J.J. and Shoesmith, D.W., unpublished data.Google Scholar
10. Wilson, C.N. and Gray, W.J., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 176, 489 (1990).Google Scholar
11. Tait, J.C. and Luht, J.L.M., Ontario Hydro Report No: 06819-REP-01200-0006-1200, (1997).Google Scholar
12. Luht, J.L.M., M.Sc. Thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada (1998)Google Scholar
13. King, F. and Kolar, M., Ontario Power Generation Report No: 06819-REP-01300-10044-12 (2002).Google Scholar
14. Goldik, J.G., Nesbitt, H.W., Noel, J.J. and Shoesmith, D.W., Electrochimica Acta, 49, 1699 (2004).Google Scholar
15. dePablo, J., Casas, I., Gimenez, J., Marti, V. and Torrero, M.E., J. Nucl Mater. 232, 138 (1996).Google Scholar
16. Spahiu, K., Werme, L. and Eklind, U-B, Radiochim. Acta, 88, 507 (2000).Google Scholar
17. Rὄllin, S., Spahiu, K. and Eklind, U-B, J. Nucl. Mater. 297, 231 (2001).Google Scholar
18. Sunder, S., Boyer, G.D. and Miller, N.H., J. Nucl. Mater. 175, 163 (1990).Google Scholar
19. King, F., Quinn, M.J. and Miller, N.H., Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company Report, SKB TR-99-27 (1999).Google Scholar
20. Tait, J.C. and Johnson, L.H., Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management, Winnipeg, Canada, Sept. 7-11 (1986), Canadian Nuclear Society, Toronto, 611 (1986).Google Scholar