Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Three commercially available chromatographic materials were tested in a column mode for use in separating Am, Pu, and ™Sr from actual neutralized cladding removal waste (NCRW) taken from a Hanford waste tank. For these experiments, the NCRW was dissolved in HNO3/HF solutions. TRU-Spec™ was evaluated for the separation of transuranic elements. TRU-Spec™ removed Am and Pu from a dissolved NCRW solution, but not as effectively as the TRUEX solvent extraction process. Sr. Spec™ and SuperLig™ 601 were evaluated for the separation of Sr, Sr- Spec™ performed very well in the separation of SK from dissolved NCRW solution; Sr was not detectable in the column effluent after six bed volumes of solution had been passed through the column. SuperLig™ 601 was less effective than Sr- Spec™ at separating Sr from dissolved NCRW solution under the conditions used in this experiment. The poor performance of SuperLig Spec™ 601 has been attributed to slow kinetics of absorption of Sr.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lumetta et al. (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: