MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Plutonium Oxidation and Subsequent Reduction by Mn (IV) Minerals

2005· article· en· W23078946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel I. Kaplan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPlutoniumPyrolusiteChemistryOxidation stateOxidizing agentManganeseRedoxNeptuniumRadioactive wasteRadionuclideRadiochemistrySpent nuclear fuelTransuranium elementEnvironmental chemistryInorganic chemistryNuclear chemistryMetal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plutonium sorbed to rock tuff was preferentially associated with manganese oxides. On tuff and synthetic pyrolusite (Mn{sup IV}O{sub 2}), Pu(IV) or Pu(V) was initially oxidized, but over time Pu(IV) became the predominant oxidation state of sorbed Pu. Reduction of Pu(V/VI), even on non-oxidizing surfaces, is proposed to result from a lower Gibbs free energy of the hydrolyzed Pu(IV) surface species versus that of the Pu(V) or Pu(VI) surface species. This work suggests that despite initial oxidation of sorbed Pu by oxidizing surfaces to more soluble forms, the less mobile form of Pu, Pu(IV), will dominate Pu solid phase speciation during long term geologic storage. The safe design of a radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel geologic repository requires a risk assessment of radionuclides that may potentially be released into the surrounding environment. Geochemical knowledge of the radionuclide and the surrounding environment is required for predicting subsurface fate and transport. Although difficult even in simple systems, this task grows increasingly complicated for constituents, like Pu, that exhibit complex environmental chemistries. The environmental behavior of Pu can be influenced by complexation, precipitation, adsorption, colloid formation, and oxidation/reduction (redox) reactions (1-3). To predict the environmental mobility of Pu, the most important of these factors is Pu oxidation state. This is because Pu(IV) is generally 2 to 3 orders of magnitude less mobile than Pu(V) in most environments (4). Further complicating matters, Pu commonly exists simultaneously in several oxidation states (5, 6). Choppin (7) reported Pu may exist as Pu(IV), Pu(V), or Pu(VI) oxic natural groundwaters. It is generally accepted that plutonium associated with suspended particulate matter is predominantly Pu(IV) (8-10), whereas Pu in the aqueous phase is predominantly Pu(V) (2, 11-13). The influence of the character of Mn-containing minerals expected to be found in subsurface repository environments on Pu oxidation state distributions has been the subject of much recent research. Kenney-Kennicutt and Morse (14), Duff et al. (15), and Morgenstern and Choppin (16) observed oxidation of Pu facilitated by Mn(IV)-bearing minerals. Conversely, Shaughnessy et al. (17) used X-ray Absorption near-edge spectroscopy (XANES) to show reduction of Pu(VI) by hausmannite (Mn{sup II}Mn{sub 2}{sup III}O{sub 4}) and manganite ({gamma}-Mn{sup III}OOH) and Kersting et al., (18) observed reduction of Pu(VI) by pyrolusite (Mn{sup IV}O{sub 2}). In this paper, we attempt to reconcile the apparently conflicting datasets by showing that Mn-bearing minerals can indeed oxidize Pu, however, if the oxidized species remains on the solid phase, the oxidation step competes with the formation of Pu(IV) that becomes the predominant solid phase Pu species with time. The experimental approach we took was to conduct longer term (approximately two years later) oxidation state analyses on the Pu sorbed to Yucca Mountain tuff (initial analysis reported by Duff et al., (15)) and measure the time-dependant changes in the oxidation state distribution of Pu in the presence of the Mn mineral pyrolusite.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207