EXTERNAL REPORT
SCK•CEN-ER-120
10/PDC/P-9
Behaviour of Selenium in Boom Clay
Pierre De Cannière1, André Maes2, Steve Williams3,
Christophe Bruggeman2, Thomas Beauwens1,
Norbert Maes1, and Mark Cowper3
1
SCK• CEN
KULeuven
3
AEA Technology
2
SCK• CEN ref: CO 90 01 1467.01 1467 RP.W&D.037
NIROND ref: CCHO2004/00/00 DS251-A44/2.1
May, 2010
SCK• CEN
Boeretang 200
BE-2400 Mol
Belgium
RDD
EXTERNAL REPORT OF THE BELGIAN NUCLEAR RESEARCH CENTRE
SCK•CEN-ER-120
10/PDC/P-9
Behaviour of Selenium in Boom Clay
Pierre De Cannière1, André Maes2, Steve Williams3,
Christophe Bruggeman2, Thomas Beauwens1,
Norbert Maes1, and Mark Cowper3
1
SCK• CEN
KULeuven
3
AEA Technology
2
SCK• CEN ref: CO 90 01 1467.01 1467
RP.W&D.037
NIROND ref: CCHO2004/00/00 DS251A44/2.1
May, 2010
Status: Unclassified
ISSN 1782-2335
SCK• CEN
Boeretang 200
BE-2400 Mol
Belgium
This report can be cited as follows:
De Cannière P., Maes A., Williams S., Bruggeman C., Beauwens T., Maes N., and Cowper M.
(2010) Behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay. Work performed under contract: SCK• CEN ref:
CO 90 01 1467.01 1467 RP.W&D.037 – NIROND ref: CCHO2004/00/00 DS251-A44/2.1.
External Report of the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre, SCK•CEN-ER-120. May 2010. PDF
file available at:
http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/
http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/simple-search
© SCK• CEN
Studiecentrum voor Kernenergie
Centre d’étude de l’énergie Nucléaire
Boeretang 200
BE-2400 Mol
Belgium
Phone +32 14 33 21 11
Fax +32 14 31 50 21
http://www.sckcen.be
Contact:
Knowledge Centre
library@sckcen.be
RESTRICTED
All property rights and copyright are reserved. Any communication or reproduction of this document, and
any communication or use of its content without explicit authorization is prohibited. Any infringement to
this rule is illegal and entitles to claim damages from the infringer, without prejudice to any other right in
case of granting a patent or registration in the field of intellectual property.
SCK• CEN, Studiecentrumvoor Kernenergie/Centre d'Etude de l'Energie Nucléaire
Stichting van Openbaar Nut – Fondation d'Utilité Publique - Foundation of Public Utility
Registered Office: Avenue Herrmann Debroux 40 – BE-1160 BRUSSEL
Operational Office: Boeretang 200 – BE-2400 MOL
5/328
6/328
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................11
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................11
Summary ............................................................................................................................................................11
Redox disequilibrium..............................................................................................................................12
Unknown initial speciation of 79Se in the source term............................................................................13
Migration parameters selected for 79Se ...................................................................................................13
Abstract.....................................................................................................................................................................17
1.
Introduction......................................................................................................................................................21
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
2.
Thermodynamic calculations – AEAT ...........................................................................................................29
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
3.
Introduction.............................................................................................................................................37
Sorption of selenium on Boom Clay and its components .......................................................................37
Kinetics of reduction of selenite .............................................................................................................41
Solubility of selenium compounds under reducing conditions ...............................................................42
Association of selenium with Boom Clay organic matter.......................................................................43
Conclusions.............................................................................................................................................45
Determination of migration parameters of selenium in Boom Clay ............................................................49
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
5.
Overview.................................................................................................................................................29
Applied geochemical codes and reference database – AEAT.................................................................29
In situ Boom Clay conditions – AEAT ...................................................................................................29
Expected speciation of selenium under Boom Clay conditions – AEAT................................................30
Calculated thermodynamical solubility of selenium under Boom Clay conditions – AEAT..................32
Geochemical behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay .......................................................................................37
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
4.
Background.............................................................................................................................................21
Objective.................................................................................................................................................22
Main uncertainties and research strategy ................................................................................................22
1.3.1
Complexity and uncertainties affecting the experiments with selenium ..................................23
1.3.2
Objectives and research strategy ..............................................................................................24
Introduction.............................................................................................................................................49
Experimental...........................................................................................................................................50
Results.....................................................................................................................................................51
Discussion...............................................................................................................................................54
4.4.1
Pore diffusion coefficient (Dp) .................................................................................................56
4.4.2
Porosity (η) ..............................................................................................................................56
4.4.3
Sorption – retardation (R) ........................................................................................................57
Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................................58
4.5.1
Summary of the migration parameters for 79Se in Boom Clay.................................................59
Summary and conclusions ...............................................................................................................................63
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
Overview.................................................................................................................................................63
Key uncertainties and abstraction for performance assessment ..............................................................64
Summary of the transport parameters for the selenium species considered............................................68
7/328
5.4.
Recommendations and future works.......................................................................................................71
6.
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................75
7.
References .........................................................................................................................................................79
APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................................................................149
A1 General information on selenium ...................................................................................................................153
A1.1
A1.2
A1.3
A1.4
A1.5
A1.6
A1.7
Overview.................................................................................................................................................153
Inventory and isotopic composition ........................................................................................................153
Uncertainties related to the value of selenium-79 half-life and recent changes ......................................154
Nuclear decay mode of 79Se and 75Se......................................................................................................157
Selenium inorganic and organic chemistry .............................................................................................157
Chemotoxicity of selenium .....................................................................................................................160
References...............................................................................................................................................162
A2 Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay..............................................................................167
A2.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................................167
A2.2 Primary sources of selenium in the earth crust and sediments................................................................167
A2.3 Bioconcentration of selenium by a coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi, and correlation
selenium/calcium carbonate....................................................................................................................169
A2.4 Environmental pollutions related to natural and industrial selenium sources .........................................171
A2.5 Concentrations of natural selenium in the environment..........................................................................171
A2.6 Concentrations of natural selenium in Boom Clay .................................................................................173
A2.6.1 Selenium in pyrite extracted from Boom Clay.........................................................................175
A2.6.2 Selenium in Boom Clay water..................................................................................................176
A3 Selenium speciation in the source term ..........................................................................................................181
A3.1
A3.2
A3.3
A3.4
Selenium in spent fuel.............................................................................................................................181
Selenium in vitrified high-level waste ....................................................................................................183
Selenium in bituminised MLW...............................................................................................................184
Dissolution controlled by alpha radiolysis..............................................................................................184
A4 Selenium speciation behaviour in Boom Clay................................................................................................187
A4.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................................187
A4.2 Very slow reduction kinetics and derived uncertainties affecting the solubility value ...........................187
A4.3 Behaviour of selenate: SeO42– .................................................................................................................189
A4.3.1 Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite ..............................................................................................189
A4.3.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite (high concentration).....................................189
A4.3.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite (low concentration) ...............................190
A4.3.2 Interaction of SeO42– with Boom Clay – KULeuven................................................................190
A4.3.3 Kinetics of reduction of SeO42– – KULeuven...........................................................................191
A4.3.4 Solubility of SeO42– – KULeuven ............................................................................................191
A4.3.5 Conclusions for SeO42– .............................................................................................................192
A4.4 Behaviour of selenite: SeO32–..................................................................................................................193
A4.4.1 Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)............................................195
A4.4.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite) ............................196
A4.4.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM).............204
A4.4.2 Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay – KULeuven................................................................211
8/328
A4.4.3 Kinetic of reduction of SeO32– onto pyrite – KULeuven..........................................................217
A4.4.4 Solubility of SeO32– – KULeuven ............................................................................................218
A4.4.5 Conclusions for SeO32– .............................................................................................................218
A4.5 Behaviour of elemental Se(s)..................................................................................................................220
A4.5.1 Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)..............................220
A4.5.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM) ......220
A4.5.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components (pyrite,
OM)...............................................................................................................................226
A4.5.2 Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay .......................................................................227
A4.5.2.1 AEAT: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay ...............................................227
A4.5.2.2 KULeuven: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay ........................................228
A4.5.3 Kinetic of reduction of elemental Se(s)....................................................................................228
A4.5.4 Solubility of elemental Se(s) – AEAT......................................................................................228
A4.5.5 Conclusions for elemental Se(s)...............................................................................................229
A4.6 Behaviour of selenide: HSe– ...................................................................................................................230
A4.6.1 Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM) ..............................................230
A4.6.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM) ......................230
A4.6.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM) ...............233
A4.6.2 Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay........................................................................................233
A4.6.2.1 AEAT: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay................................................................233
A4.6.2.2 KULeuven: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay.........................................................234
A4.6.3 Solubility of HSe– – AEAT ......................................................................................................234
A4.6.4 Conclusions for HSe– ...............................................................................................................235
A5 Immobilisation of selenium in the near-field .................................................................................................239
A5.1 Immobilisation of selenium in cementitious buffer ................................................................................239
A5.2 Immobilisation of selenium by alteration and corrosion products ..........................................................239
A5.2.1 Uptake of selenium by spent fuel degradation products...........................................................239
A5.2.2 Sorption of selenium by iron oxy-hydroxides ..........................................................................240
A6 Selenium background concentration in bentonite buffer materials ............................................................243
A6.1
A6.2
A6.3
A6.4
A6.5
A6.6
Introduction.............................................................................................................................................243
Experimental...........................................................................................................................................243
Results.....................................................................................................................................................243
Comparison of Se concentrations in near-field and far-field conditions.................................................245
Conclusions.............................................................................................................................................246
References...............................................................................................................................................247
A7 Sorption behaviour of selenite, selenate and sulfate on Fe and Al oxide surfaces ......................................251
A7.1 EXAFS studies of selenite and selenate adsorption on goethite .............................................................252
A7.1.1 Classical view of inner-sphere and outer-sphere surface complexes........................................252
A7.1.2 Evidence of inner-sphere complexes also implied for weakly sorbing species........................253
A7.2 ATR-FTIR studies of selenate and sulfate adsorption on Fe and Al (hydr)oxide ...................................253
A7.2.1 Sulfate adsorption on Fe oxyhydroxide....................................................................................253
A7.2.2 Selenate and sulfate adsorption on Fe and Al (hydr)oxide.......................................................254
A7.2.3 Formation of outer-sphere versus inner-sphere surface complexes..........................................255
A7.2.4 Effect of the nature of the mineral surface ...............................................................................257
A8 Selenium and organic matter ..........................................................................................................................261
9/328
A9 Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay................................................................................................269
A9.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................................269
A9.2 Percolation Experiments .........................................................................................................................270
A9.2.1 Percolation experiments with 75SeO32– .....................................................................................270
A9.2.1.1 Percolation tests: experimental .....................................................................................270
A9.2.1.2 Evolution of 75Se concentration in the percolation water..............................................271
A9.2.1.3 75Se migration profile in the solid clay..........................................................................273
A9.2.1.4 Modelling of the 75Se profile in the solid clay: questionable attempt ...........................277
A9.2.1.5 Comparison with the results of previous migration experiments made with clay
plugs equilibrated with elemental and reduced 75Se......................................................278
A9.2.2 Lessons learned during the updating of the Data Collection Forms (DCF’s) in 1999..............279
A9.2.3 Conclusion of percolation experiments ....................................................................................282
A9.2.4 Percolation experiments with dual tracer: FeSe contacted with 14C-OM .................................283
A9.3 Electromigration experiments .................................................................................................................286
A9.3.1 Electromigration: experimental setup.......................................................................................286
A9.3.2 Electromigration experiments with oxidized Se sources (SeO42– and SeO32–) (Beauwens et
al., 2005) ..................................................................................................................................287
A9.3.3 Electromigration experiments with 75SeO3 – Boom Clay slurries............................................295
A10 Redox disequilibrium and reluctance of sulfate for reduction in deep clay formations ............................299
A11 Behaviour of redox-sensitive elements in a nitrate plume associated with bituminized MLW – The
selenium case study ..........................................................................................................................................303
A12 List of Abbreviations........................................................................................................................................307
A13 List of Symbols .................................................................................................................................................323
A14 List of Physical Constants and Units ..............................................................................................................327
10/328
Executive Summary
Foreword
The main objective of the disposal of radioactive waste in deep geological formation is to
guarantee the long-term safety by isolating the waste from man and the biosphere and by
confining long-lived radionuclides as long as possible to delay and to attenuate their release
towards aquifers and the biosphere.
In Belgium, geological disposal is studied since 1974 to assess the long-term safety of a deep
repository of high-level waste and spent fuel in a clay formation, and since then, Boom Clay
is studied as the reference host formation. Low permeability sedimentary clay formations are
presently considered the best geological barriers providing both a physical (limited water
flow) and a chemical (radionuclides retention) containment limiting the radionuclide
transport. Because of the very low hydraulic conductivity and the small natural hydraulic
gradient of the Boom Clay formation, molecular diffusion is considered as the dominant
solute-transport mechanism.
This report presents the most up-to-date understanding and data dealing with the selenium
transport in the Boom Clay formation.
With the re-estimation of the half-life of 79Se from 65 ka to 295 or 370 ka, the radioactive
decay of 79Se in the clay barrier is negligible. 79Se is presently considered as the key mobile
fission product for nuclear waste disposal in the Boom Clay. The correct understanding of
selenium migration behaviour through the clay barrier is essential to underpin its transport
parameters (apparent diffusion coefficient, Dapp; accessible porosity, η; retardation factor, R;
and solubility limit, S) selected for the performance assessment calculations of a deep
repository for spent fuel and high-level waste.
Summary
FeSe, FeSe2, Se0 (solid phase) and HSe– (aqueous species) are the thermodynamically stable
selenium species expected under in situ reducing conditions in undisturbed Boom Clay at
depth. HSe– migration should be limited by the low solubility of iron selenide or elemental
selenium. Table 1 present the different interactions expected for all the inorganic species
under which selenium could be released by the various waste forms to be disposed in Boom
Clay.
11/328
Table 1: Matrix of different interactions expected for inorganic selenium species in Boom Clay.
Oxidation
State
Possible
Solubility
Limiting Phase
Aqueous
Species
At equilibrium
Reduction
in Boom Clay
Sorption
OM
Association
+6
No
(+ solid solution
in cement)
SeO42–aq.
Extremely slow
(redox
disequilibrium)
Null
or very weak
None
+4
CaSeO3
(+ solid solution
in cement)
SeO32–aq.
Easy
Medium
(inner-sphere
complex)
Association
(+ reduction)
observed
Se(0)
SeO32–aq. / HSe–aq.
Slow
—
Colloid –
colloid
FeSe2 , Fe×Sey
FeSe
HSe–aq.
—
Unknown
(not considered)
Not yet
observed
0
–1
–2
A main feature observed during the different studies on the behaviour of selenium in Boom
Clay is that its oxy-anionic species may suffer severe redox disequilibrium: indeed, selenate is
very reluctant to reduction, while the sorption-reduction-precipitation of selenite is kinetically
controlled. For this reason, it is necessary to also consider the non-solubility limited SeO42– as
a possible migrating species because of the large uncertainty on the speciation of selenium in
the waste form.
To explain the choice of the migration parameters selected for 79Se in the present study, the
two major uncertainties affecting the selenium chemical state in a deep disposal system are
first summarized hereafter: (1) redox disequilibrium and (2) selenium original speciation in
the source term (mainly spent fuel and vitrified HLW but also bituminized MLW).
Redox disequilibrium
Under reducing conditions, at ambient temperature and in the absence of catalyst, or bacterial
enzymatic activity, selenate is reluctant to reduction. In natural conditions, it is also often the
case for the highest valence species of other elements (e.g., sulfate, perchlorate, arsenate, …),
because of the multiple electron transfers needed in the reduction reaction. Under in situ
conditions prevailing in Boom Clay, the selenate reduction is uncertain due to kinetic
limitations. Another reason could be that electron donors are present in insufficient quantity in
the system, not enough accessible, too less reactive, or have been consumed by oxidation
reactions and water radiolysis (or other repository-induced perturbations).
A well known case of redox disequilibrium is the persistence of sulfate often observed in deep
reducing sediments. Under strongly reducing conditions prevailing in Boom Clay, sulfur is
12/328
expected to be present as HS– aqueous species in equilibrium with FeS2 (pyrite) at a solubility
of about 10-8 to 10-7 mol·L–1. However, SO42– is detected in “undisturbed” Boom Clay
porewater at the Mol site at higher concentration, typically of the order of 1 mg·L-1 (10-5
mol·L-1) or more, i.e., two to three orders of magnitude above the expected sulfide
concentration. Although this might be due to traces of sulfate produced by pyrite oxidation, it
could also reflect the true residual sulfate concentration present in the Boom Clay porewater.
The presence of higher concentration of sulfate in ancient porewater of Opalinus Clay
(~ 180 Ma) and Callovo-Oxfordian Clay (~ 155 Ma) is another natural evidence that a
fraction of sulfate can resist to reduction over geological time period and that hexavalent
sulfur, S(VI), can still be present today and coexist with pyrite under strongly reducing
conditions at depth.
Considering the chemical similarities between selenate and sulfate for their recalcitrance to
reduction, we have thus to conclude that selenate could also subsist in deep geological
formations under reducing conditions.
Unknown initial speciation of 79Se in the source term
Presently, we ignore under which chemical form is 79Se present in spent nuclear fuel, vitrified
HLW, or bituminized MLW waste (Eurobitum). It could be under a reduced form [Se(0),
Se(-II)] as well as an oxidised species [Se(VI)]. Radiolytic effects (producing oxidising free
radicals in water) are expected to favour the presence of selenate, while elemental selenium or
selenide could be protected by U(4+) (reductant) present in the UO2 matrix of spent nuclear
fuel (SF) or by other reductants (e.g., saccharose) added to the glass frit during the
vitrification process of HLW. In the case of nitrate-bearing Eurobitum waste, the presence of
79
Se under the selenate form can certainly not be ruled out because of the massive amounts of
nitrate salts (up to 25 – 30 wt. %) present in this type of waste and the oxidizing conditions of
the production process. As a consequence, in the absence of reduction of selenate, it is
necessary to also take into account selenate along with the thermodynamically favoured
selenide species expected for Boom Clay conditions.
Migration parameters selected for 79Se
As conclusion, at least two sets of transport parameters are certainly needed to assess the
long-term dose-to-man delivered by 79Se: a first set for selenate (without solubility limit), and
a second one for selenide (with solubility limit). For selenate, a consistent set of parameters
was derived from migration experiments, while for selenide, only the solubility limit was
measured, the other parameters of selenide being taken in line with these of iodide. The
parameter values are given in Table 2.
13/328
Table 2: Overview of the migration parameters selected for selenate and selenide in undisturbed Boom Clay.
Values relevant for the Mol site under the present geochemical conditions, i.e., in the absence of perturbation.
Best Estimate
Expert Range
Source Range
SeO42– (divalent anion)
2 –1
-11
-11
Dapp
(m s )
3.17 (±0.98) × 10
2.2 – 4.2 × 10
1.5 – 7.3 × 10-11
0.10
0.05 – 0.18
0.05 – 0.18
η
(—)
R
(—)
Solubility (mol dm-3)
2.3
unlimited
1–5
unlimited
1–5
unlimited
HSe– (monovalent anion)
Dapp
(m2 s–1)
Best Estimate
1.2 × 10-10
0.16
Expert Range
1.0 – 1.3 × 10-10
0.14 – 0.18
Source Range
0.8 – 1.7 × 10-10
0.12 – 0.18
η
(—)
R
(—)
1
1
1
Solubility (mol dm-3)
2 × 10-8
1 × 10-9 – 1 × 10-7
1 × 10-9 – 1 × 10-7
Source range of a parameter is a range of values outside of which the parameter value is unlikely to lie,
considering our current knowledge.
Expert range of a parameter is the range of values within which experts expect the parameter value to lie.
In the present study only transport and retention of selenium in the Boom Clay formation
have been investigated in detail. No retention with the corrosion products of carbon steel
(siderite, magnetite, hematite, goethite, ferric hydrous oxide, green rust, …), or with cement
hydrated phases in the concrete buffer of the SuperContainer, have been considered. While
selenide is poorly soluble in the presence of Fe2+ released by iron corrosion products, in a
cementitious buffer, selenite solubility may be limited by CaSeO3 in the presence of
portlandite, Ca(OH)2. Selenate and selenite might also be incorporated in ettringite, AFt and
AFm phases or be sorbed by calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) and layered double hydroxide
(LDH) in the cement paste (Baur 2002; Baur and Johnson, 2003a,b, Bonhoure et al., 2006).
These retention mechanisms, limited to the near-field of a deep repository, have been
presently neglected and their role is also considered marginal for cemented medium-level
waste (MLW).
For nitrate-bearing bituminised waste (MLW), as nitrate first undergoes reduction before
sulfate or selenate (Oremland et al., 1999), no selenate reduction should be considered to
remain conservative in safety calculations.
It must be noticed that only the mineral species of selenium have been accounted for in the
present study. No volatile organic species of selenium, such as dimethyl selenide (DMSe) and
dimethyl diselenide (DMDSe), or selenium associated with natural organic matter (NOM),
have been presently considered. These organic species are often produced in nature by microorganisms, planktonic algae and superior living organisms. They are only relevant if the
exposure route of man to 79Se should be envisaged via the gas phase, i.e., in case where
repositories galleries would be left open for centuries, or more, for the sake of retrievability of
waste packages in the frame of a reversible repository. In the present study, the galleries of a
14/328
deep repository are considered immediately backfilled and closed as soon as possible after
waste emplacement.
15/328
16/328
Abstract
With the re-estimation of the half-life of 79Se to 295 or 370 ka, the radioactive decay of 79Se
in the clay barrier appears to be negligible. 79Se is thus presently considered as the key mobile
fission product for nuclear waste disposal in the Boom Clay, the reference host formation
presently studied in Belgium. Therefore, a good understanding of selenium migration
behaviour through the clay barrier is essential to underpin its transport parameters (apparent
diffusion coefficient, Dapp; accessible porosity, η; retardation factor, R; and solubility limit, S)
selected for the performance assessment of a deep repository for spent fuel and high-level
waste. Under the reducing conditions prevailing in Boom Clay at depth, selenide, [Se(-II)], is
the predominant thermodynamically stable chemical form of selenium. HSe– is expected as
the main aqueous species and its migration should be limited by the low solubility of iron
selenide or elemental selenium. However, selenium may suffer of severe redox disequilibrium
and experimental evidences presently suggest that selenate is very reluctant to reduction while
a kinetically controlled sorption-reduction-precipitation behaviour is observed for selenite.
Due to the large uncertainty on the speciation of selenium in the waste form, and taking the
stability of selenate versus reduction into account, it is also necessary to consider the nonsolubility limited SeO42– as a possible migrating species. However, when a lower oxidation
state [Se(IV), Se(0), and Se(-II)] is present in the waste form, a solubility limit may also
contribute to delay and attenuate the 79Se release from the source term and to spread it on a
longer time period. Therefore, two sets of transport parameters are needed to assess the longterm dose-to-man associated to 79Se: a first set for selenate (without solubility limit) and a
second set for selenide (with solubility limit). For selenate, a consistent set of parameters was
derived from migration experiments, while for selenide, only the solubility limit was
measured, the other parameters of selenide being unknown and considered in line with these
of iodide.
Migration parameters selected for selenate and selenide in undisturbed Boom Clay.
Values relevant for the Mol site under the geochemical conditions prevailing today.
Transport Parameter
79
H79Se–
SeO42–
(Best Estimate, BE)
Dapp
η
R
(m2 s–1)
3.17 (±0.98) × 10-11
1.2 × 10-10
(—)
0.10
(divalent anion)
0.16
(monovalent anion)
(—)
2.3
Solubility (mol dm-3)
unlimited
17/328
1
2 × 10-8
Presently, the main uncertainty for the long-term safety assessment of 79Se clearly resides in
the unknown speciation of selenium in the waste form. Indeed, spent fuel and vitrified highlevel waste can accommodate both reduced and oxidized forms of selenium but experimental
data are lacking.
Keywords: Se-79, selenium-79, selenium, selenate, selenite, selenide, sorption, reduction,
precipitation, solubility, Boom Clay, redox-disequilibrium, reactive transport, fission product,
diffusion, retention, transport parameters, performance assessment, uncertainty, spent fuel,
high-level waste, HLW, radioactive waste disposal.
18/328
1. Introduction
19/328
20/328
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Selenium-79 is a mobile fission product presently considered as the main contributor to the
dose-to-man for the disposal of spent fuel (SF) and high-level waste (HLW) in Boom Clay
(Marivoet et al., 1999; Mallants et al., 1999; Sillen and Marivoet, 2000; Marivoet and
Weetjens, 2007). Selenium is a redox-sensitive element whose chemistry closely resembles
that of sulfur. All its inorganic species are anionic and its more oxidised form (selenate) is
very mobile in surface water body and in the near-surface environment (unsaturated soils:
vadose zone) where oxygen is present. Only under strictly anoxic and reducing conditions, as
those encountered at depth in organic rich shale or clay, selenium mobility of its more
reduced forms (elemental selenium and heavy metal selenide) is limited by a low solubility.
Selenium is also a trace mineral that is essential to health but required only in small amounts
(ODS–NIH, 2004). Since the years 1970–1980 the behaviour of selenium in the environment
is the object of a large number of scientific publications reviewed in now classical text books
(Frankenberger and Benson, 1994; Frankenberger and Engberg, 1998; Plant et al., 2004). The
interest for selenium simultaneously arises from its high toxicity and from concerns for
human health because important selenium deficits are also observed in dietary source in some
part of the world. Selenium deficit can cause chronic diseases such as cancer, heart, endocrine
and immune diseases, because selenium is a micronutrient indispensable to life. Indeed,
selenium is incorporated into proteins to make selenoproteins, which are important
antioxidant enzymes (e.g., glutathione peroxidase, Rotruck et al., 1973). The antioxidant
properties of selenoproteins help prevent cellular damage from free radicals generated by the
oxygen metabolism.
Although extensively studied in mineral and organic chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and
medicine, with an overwhelming number of scientific publications, the behaviour of selenium
in the environment, particularly in clay under reducing conditions remains complicated and
sometimes difficult to predict.
Low but non-negligible amounts of selenium-79 produced by nuclear fission in electrical
power plant have to be disposed of in geological repositories. The quantity of 79Se expected
per current meter of underground gallery is of the same order of magnitude than for 129I:
typically in the range of 0.1 to 1 mol of 79Se per current meter. Specific uncertainties deal also
with 79Se itself. Indeed, the half-life (T½) of selenium-79 has been revised several time in the
last decade, varying on nearly two orders of magnitude (between 6.5 × 104 y and 1.1 × 106 y)
and is presently estimated as ~ 3 × 105 y. Other uncertainties also exist on the chemical form
21/328
of selenium in the waste forms and on the inventory in vitrified high-level waste (HLW)
because the loss of volatile selenium during reprocessing and vitrification operations. For
more background information on selenium the reader can refer to Appendices A1–A3.
1.2. Objective
To better understand the processes and the mechanisms controlling the behaviour of
selenium-79 in Boom Clay under reducing conditions, ONDRAF/NIRAS passed contract
with three laboratories: SCK•CEN, AEA Technology, and KULeuven. The objective of this
report is to present an overview of the main results of the experimental and modelling works
performed by these three laboratories. The main methods used to understand the retention and
diffusion of selenium in Boom Clay were speciation measurements, batch sorption tests,
migration experiments, and geochemical modelling. The final aim pursued is to draw
geochemical mechanisms and conclusions correctly describing the behaviour of 79Se in Boom
Clay and that could be translated in terms of processes, concepts, models, and parameters
values usable for the safety studies.
1.3. Main uncertainties and research strategy
Although the general bases of the inorganic chemistry of selenium in simple aqueous
solutions (synthetic systems) are well established and that selenium chemistry closely
resembles to that of sulfur, the behaviour a selenium in soils and reducing environments can
be very complex and remains often difficult to decipher. Hereafter some reasons are
mentioned why the study of the behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay under reducing
conditions is a technical and scientific challenge.
1. First, the experimental window available to observe very low concentrations of selenium
as found in natural waters is narrow and requires low-level detection techniques. The
lower and upper working boundaries are respectively imposed by the limit of detection
(~ 10-10 mol dm-3) of selenium in solution, and by the low solubility of most of the
selenium mineral phases (~ 10-8 mol dm-3) under reducing conditions. The useful working
range for sorption and solubility experiments is not wide and it is difficult to guarantee
that sorption experiments can always be conducted below the limit of solubility of
reduced selenium forms. This is specially true at low Eh values when the higher valences
of selenium are progressively reduced to let the place to less soluble species.
2. Kinetics limitations and redox-disequilibrium states hinder the reduction of the highest
valences of selenium, increasing the complexity of observations in the laboratory.
22/328
3. Reduced forms of selenium are also very sensitive to oxidation: so, strictly anaerobic
conditions have to be continuously maintained and monitored to prevent undesired
perturbations of the studied systems and to guarantee the experiments validity. The nature
and the purity of the solid phases supposed to control the selenium solubility are also
critical and must be carefully controlled. Aqueous speciation techniques with enough
sensitivity are also required to check under what chemical form is selenium present at
very low concentration in water.
4. The complex biochemistry of selenium and its occurrence in the skeleton of natural
organic molecules makes the studied systems even more complex.
5. And finally, as only abiotic selenium reduction pathways are considered for compact
Boom Clay at depth, it is particularly important to avoid in the laboratory studies the
development of undesired micro-organisms in the clay suspensions system.
1.3.1
Complexity and uncertainties affecting the experiments with selenium
The speciation of selenium-79 in the solid waste matrix is unknown. Selenium could be
released by spent fuel (SF) and vitrified high-level waste (HLW) in a variety of redox states,
including selenium oxyanions such as SeO32– or SeO42–. Therefore, experiments were set up
in order to:
1. Check whether all the selenium species present are transformed
thermodynamically stable species in the Boom Clay on short time periods;
into
the
2. Identify the thermodynamically stable species and to measure selenium solubility;
3. Assess the appropriate transport parameters (retardation factor, accessible porosity,
apparent diffusion coefficient) to be used for performance assessment studies, and;
4. Control that selenium is not interacting with mobile organic matter, thereby increasing the
selenium mobility within the clay layer.
The interpretation of data on the transport of selenium in Boom Clay and on the natural
selenium background concentration in the clay formation have revealed unexpected
uncertainties in the behaviour of selenium under reducing conditions.
Laboratory percolation experiments made during about one year on undisturbed Boom Clay
cores with a 75Se source, considered to be primarily composed of Na275SeO3 first revealed the
23/328
presence of a mobile selenium species moving in the water at a concentration range of 10-9 –
10-8 mol dm-3. Simultaneously, the distribution profile of the selenium activity in the solid
clay core was complex and very difficult to interpret.
Electro-migration experiments studying the diffusion of selenium in Boom Clay on shorter
time scales (days to weeks), also revealed complex migration patterns in the clay cores and
showed the existence of negatively charged species with different mobility.
Natural selenium is present in Boom Clay and appears to be primarily associated with pyrite
(FeS2). The concentration of natural selenium measured in Boom Clay porewater is about
2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3, a value consistent with the solubility limit of a selenium-bearing solid
phase. However, as a fraction of selenium in interstitial water is associated with natural
dissolved organic matter (or even part of its molecular structure), the selenium concentration
measured in porewater might not correspond to a true solubility.
The three experimental observations presented above are not straightforward to interpret
because uncertainties subsist on selenium speciation, retention mechanisms (sorption or
precipitation) and redox disequilibrium, a.o.:
1. Lack of data on selenium speciation in the water and in the solid phase:
In all of the above mentioned experiments, it is unclear which selenium species is under
investigation and whether radio-labelled selenium can interact with the natural Boom Clay
organic matter, or not, and what type of association mechanism could be involved.
2. Uncertainty about the chemical retention mechanisms:
The main question is that we do not know if the observed selenium concentrations are
controlled by sorption or limited by solubility.
3. Uncertainty about kinetics of redox reactions:
Many publications in the literature indicate that selenium oxidation/reduction reactions in
natural media are not straightforward because of thermodynamical disequilibrium. So,
often, several oxidation states may simultaneously coexist and achieving of the
thermodynamical equilibrium seems to be kinetically controlled.
1.3.2
Objectives and research strategy
To overcome the afore-mentioned limitations and to reduce the uncertainties, an appropriate
conceptual model describing the main processes at work and the corresponding parameters
are needed. Therefore, a threefold strategy is elaborated to deliver scientifically sound
information for performance assessment on the basis of (i) thermodynamic calculations, (ii)
24/328
laboratory batch interaction tests (sorption, reduction, solubility, association with OM), and
(iii) migration experiments.
1. Geochemical modelling calculations are made to predict the speciation of selenium
expected under Boom Clay conditions and to estimate its thermodynamic solubility.
2. Laboratory batch experiments are performed by KULeuven and AEA Technology, (details
can be found in Appendix A4 (Selenium speciation behaviour in Boom Clay) and in
following reports: Baker et al., 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002; Bruggeman et al., 2002, 2004,
2005, 2006, 2007; Cowper et al., 2003; Heath et al., 1997, 2000; Maes A. et al., 2004a,b,
2005) from different starting selenium solutions to achieve final Se equilibrium in
conditions aiming to simulate these prevailing in situ in undisturbed Boom Clay. In order
to predict the behaviour of selenium in the reducing conditions of Boom Clay, it is
necessary to identify the mechanisms of interaction between selenium and the various
components of Boom Clay and to understand the more relevant processes. Since selenium
is a redox-sensitive element, it is clear that the reactive surface of reducing minerals
naturally present in Boom Clay, such as pyrite (FeS2) and siderite (FeCO3), may play a
major role in its chemical behaviour. Pyrite surface is considered as the main reduction
site because it is the redox-controlling phase and it might be very reactive towards the
redox-sensitive selenium. Since organic molecules are also present as potential
complexing and mobilising agents, their influence on the speciation of selenium also
needs to be evaluated. To study the solubility of selenium in the reducing conditions of
Boom Clay, two different experimental routes are followed from opposite initial oxidation
states: on the one hand, starting from supersaturation with soluble oxidized selenium
species (SeO32– and SeO42–), and, on the other hand, starting from undersaturation with
poorly soluble reduced elemental Se(s) and Fe(II) selenides. The purpose of using
oversaturation is to examine if the solubility values measured under Boom Clay
conditions effectively corresponds to the theoretical predictions based on redox equilibria
and thermodynamic solubilities of the pertinent selenium solid phases. Conclusions with
respect to speciation at equilibrium, kinetics of reduction, solubility and transport are
drawn for each case.
3. Migration experiments are carried out to determine the best estimate of migration
parameters needed by performance assessment (PA) studies for selenium and to
understand the possible chemical-coupled processes (sorption, reduction, and
precipitation) at work during its transport (details can be found in Appendix A9 on
“Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay” and in following reports and papers:
De Cannière et al., 1995, 1996; Maes N. et al., 2004e,f; Beauwens et al., 2005).
25/328
This strategy is aimed to globally understand the behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay, and to
identify processes from which relevant parameters and associated uncertainties can be derived
for PA studies. Also, unresolved key issues about some mechanisms and open questions
would be identified to provide new recommendations for PA approach and further studies
related to experimental research and modelling works.
26/328
2. Thermodynamic calculations
27/328
28/328
2. Thermodynamic calculations – AEAT
2.1. Overview
Geochemical modelling of inorganic selenium speciation and solubility have been performed
for conditions representative of the Boom Clay using PHREEQC and the HATCHES
database. Under strongly oxidising conditions selenate (SeO42–) dominates, under mildlyoxidizing conditions, selenite (SeO32–) oxidation state is stable, while under strongly reducing
conditions, hydrogen selenide (HSe–) is the major aqueous species. Considering fixed pH
values, the selenium solubility strongly depends on the redox potential. For elemental
selenium, Se(s), the selenium concentration curves as a function of Eh exhibit a very
characteristic V-shape valley profile. The Se(s) solubility is predicted to be strongly
dependent on redox potential because its oxidation state in the solid, Se(0), is always different
to that in solution, Se(-II), Se(IV) or Se(VI). The minimum in the solubility curves occurs
where Se(s) is in equilibrium with both selenide and selenite species in solution.
2.2. Applied geochemical codes and reference database – AEAT
Calculations made by Serco Assurance as part of the AEA Technology study were performed
using the PHREEQC geochemical program version 2.8 developed by Parkhurst and Appelo
(2003). Thermodynamic data were selected from the HATCHES database version NEA15
compiled by Bond et al. (1997). The relevant data in HATCHES were compared with these
used by SCK•CEN to model selenium in Boom Clay. The SCK•CEN database contains data
for selenium selected from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) database
and data selected from HATCHES; there is no significant difference between the two
databases concerning the major aqueous selenium species.
In the meantime, after the calculations presented here, thermodynamic data on selenium have
been recently updated by Olin et al. (2005) in the frame of the Thermochemical Database
Project (TDB) managed by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). Complementary information
on the chemical thermodynamics of compounds and complexes of Se (amongst other
elements such as U, Np, Pu, Am, Tc, Ni and Zr) with selected organic ligands have also been
newly compiled by Mompean et al. (2005). The present calculation results have thus been
made prior to these two new updates simply mentioned her to be complete.
2.3. In situ Boom Clay conditions – AEAT
The composition of synthetic Boom Clay water was calculated from the recipe used in the
experiments (Dierckx, 1997). The resulting solution was predicted to equilibrate at a pH of
8.1 compared to a measured value of 8.3. Equilibration with a nitrogen atmosphere resulted
29/328
in a pH rise to 9.9, presumed to be due to loss of carbon dioxide. Modelling indicated that
this was consistent with a drop in the total concentration of carbonate from 1.4 × 10-2
mol dm-3 to 9.6 × 10-3 mol dm-3. This lower carbonate concentration was applied in all
subsequent calculations. A new detailed synthesis on the Boom Clay porewater composition
has been compiled later by De Craen et al. (2004), but was not available at the time of the
present study on selenium. However, the selenium speciation is not very sensitive to the
minor differences in the estimated composition of the porewater.
For the mineralogical composition of Boom Clay, more detailed information is also provided
by Baeyens et al. (1985a,b), Merceron et al. (1993, 1994, 1995), Griffault et al. (1996),
Beaucaire et al. (2000), and more recently De Craen et al. (2004).
2.4. Expected speciation of selenium under Boom Clay conditions – AEAT
The speciation of selenium was calculated for three sets of conditions over the pH range 6 to
11:
(a)
pH + pe = 20.0 — strongly-oxidising conditions;
(b)
pH + pe = 12.1 — mildly-oxidising (aerobic) conditions;
(c)
pH + pe = 0.0
— strongly-reducing conditions.
Under strongly-oxidising conditions selenium is calculated to be present as the uncomplexed
selenate ion across the pH range 6 to 11. Under mildly-oxidising to mildly-reducing
conditions the selenite oxidation state is stable and the calculated speciation is shown in
Figure 2.4.1 (AEAT). Under strongly-reducing conditions, the speciation is dominated by the
hydrogen selenide ion, HSe–.
The effect of redox potential was studied in more detail by carrying out further calculations at
fixed pH values (8.4 and 9.9) with the redox potential varied over the range -600 mV to
+600 mV vs Standard Hydrogen Electrode (SHE) (all subsequent redox potentials (Eh) are
quoted vs SHE). The calculated selenium speciation as a function of Eh at pH 8.4 is shown in
Figure 2.4.2 (AEAT). At low redox potentials selenide species dominate. The cross-over to
selenite occurs at around -80 mV, and that from selenite to selenate is predicted at around
+380 mV. Similar behaviour is expected at pH 9.9 but the oxidation state transitions are
calculated to occur at lower Eh values.
30/328
1.2E-10
Total Se
Concentration/ mol dm-3
1.0E-10
8.0E-11
SeO3
2-
6.0E-11
4.0E-11
2.0E-11
HSeO3
-
0.0E+00
6
7
8
9
10
11
pH
Figure 2.4.1 (AEAT): Predicted selenium speciation under mildly-oxidising conditions (pH + pE = 12.1).
1.2E-10
1.0E-10
Total Se
2-
Concentration/ mol dm-3
SeO3
HSe
8.0E-11
-
SeO4
2-
6.0E-11
4.0E-11
2.0E-11
HSeO3
0.0E+00
-600
-400
-200
0
-
200
400
600
Eh/ mV
Figure 2.4.2 (AEAT): Predicted selenium speciation as a function of Eh at pH = 8.4.
31/328
800
2.5. Calculated thermodynamical solubility of selenium under Boom Clay conditions –
AEAT
The calculated solubility of FeSe(s) and elemental Se(s) in contact with synthetic Boom Clay
water is shown as a function of pH in Figure 2.5.1 (AEAT). Under mildly-reducing
conditions, selenium is predicted to be present as selenite in solution and the solubility curve
for FeSe(s) shows a minimum at around pH 10. For elemental Se(s), the calculated solubility
is strongly dependent on the redox conditions. The lowest solubility is predicted for Se(s) in
equilibrium with selenide under mildly-reducing conditions. However, the solubility is
calculated to increase greatly under strongly-reducing conditions as selenide is favoured with
respect to Se(s). Similarly, as the redox potential is raised the solubility is enhanced due to
the increasing stability of selenite (V-shape curve).
1.0E-03
Se(s)/ selenide, strongly reducing
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
Total Se Concentration/ mol dm-3
1.0E-06
FeSe(s)/ selenide
1.0E-07
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
1.0E-10
Se(s)/ selenide, mildly reducing
1.0E-11
Se(s)/ selenite
1.0E-12
1.0E-13
Total Se with FeSe added. pH + pE = 0
Total Se with elemental Se added. pH + pE = 0
Total Se with elemental Se added. pH + pE = 6.5
Total Se with elemental Se added. pH + pE = 8.4
1.0E-14
1.0E-15
6
7
8
9
10
11
pH
Figure 2.5.1 (AEAT): Total selenium concentration vs pH for synthetic Boom Clay water (SBCW) contacted
with either 5 × 10-4 M FeSe(s) or 5 × 10-4 M elemental Se(s).
The calculated solubility of elemental Se(s) at pH 8.4 and pH 9.9 with variation in redox
potential is shown in Figure 2.5.2 (AEAT). The reason for the strong dependence of the
solubility of Se(s) on redox potential shown in Figure 2.5.1 (AEAT) is now clearer. The Se(s)
solubility is predicted to be strongly dependent on redox potential because its oxidation state
in the solid, Se(0), is always different to that in solution, Se(-II), Se(IV) or Se(VI). The
minimum in the solubility curves occurs where Se(s) is in equilibrium with both selenide and
selenite species in solution (V-shape valley profile).
32/328
1.0E+00
1.0E-01
1.0E-02
1.0E-03
Concentration/ mol dm-3
1.0E-04
Predicted Se(s) solubility (pH = 8.4)
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
Predicted Se(s) solubility (pH = 9.9)
1.0E-07
selenide
1.0E-08
1.0E-09
selenite
1.0E-10
selenate
1.0E-11
1.0E-12
Speciation prediction: the predominant
oxidation state is shown only for pH 8.4
1.0E-13
1.0E-14
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
Eh/ mV
Figure 2.5.2 (AEAT): Predicted Se(s) solubility as a function of Eh in the presence of pyrite at pH = 8.4 and
pH = 9.9 (inventory-limited concentration = 5 × 10-4 mol dm-3).
The predicted solubility of FeSe(s) with varying redox potential is shown in
Figure 2.5.3 (AEAT) at pH 8.4, for a range of different assumptions regarding equilibration
with other solid phases. Curve A shows the predicted FeSe(s) solubility for the assumption
that it can be converted to Se(s) when the elemental form is predicted to be the most stable
phase. In this case the predicted solubility of FeSe(s) is around 2 × 10-8 mol dm-3 but the solid
is only predicted to be stable up to around -400 mV. Above this Eh value the solubility
decreases due to the formation of Se(s) before rising as Se is oxidised to soluble selenite and
selenate species. For the assumption that pyrite is in equilibrium with the solution (Curve B),
the selenium solubility is predicted to be lower at low Eh values due to an increase in Fe(II) in
solution. For the assumption that Fe(II) is oxidised to Fe(III) and will form crystalline
hematite, an increase in Se solubility is predicted between Eh values of -300 mV and 0 mV
(Curve C). Similar trends are predicted at pH 9.9.
33/328
1.0E+00
1.0E-01
1.0E-02
1.0E-03
Curve C
Concentration/ mol dm-3
1.0E-04
1.0E-05
1.0E-06
1.0E-07
Curve A
1.0E-08
Curve B
1.0E-09
Predicted FeSe(s) solubility (pyrite present, Fe(OH)3 can precipitate)
1.0E-10
1.0E-11
Predicted FeSe(s) solubility (pyrite present, haematite can precipitate)
1.0E-12
Predicted FeSe(s) solubility (no pyrite, all Se minerals can precipitate)
1.0E-13
1.0E-14
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
Eh/ mV
Figure 2.5.3 (AEAT): Predicted solubility of FeSe(s) as a function of Eh at pH = 8.4 (inventory-limited
concentration = 5 × 10-4 mol dm-3).
34/328
800
3. Geochemical behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay
35/328
36/328
3. Geochemical behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay
3.1. Introduction
The fate of selenium in Boom Clay is governed by various abiotic and perhaps also
microbially-mediated reactions. The main mechanisms expected to immobilise 79Se in Boom
Clay deal with sorption, reduction and precipitation reactions. In the absence of catalyst or
microbial activity, kinetic limitations and redox disequilibrium can affect the reduction of
selenate and selenite species. The role of the selenium association with organic matter and
bacterial reduction are also important and cannot be overlooked. However, the present
experimental works on selenium in Boom Clay have only taken into account mineral
reactions and neglected biochemical processes, amongst others responsible for the formation
of volatile low molecular mass organic compounds of selenium.
3.2. Sorption of selenium on Boom Clay and its components
Inorganic selenium is always present in water as an anion: SeO42–, SeO32– and HSe–. The nonspecific electrostatic repulsion forces between these anions and the negatively charged surface
of clay minerals (at neutral or slightly alkaline pH) hinder their sorption.
However, some oxy-anions, such as, a.o., borate, silicate, phosphate, molybdate, arsenate, and
selenite, can form inner-sphere complexes at the surface of oxy-hydroxides of Fe3+ and Al3+.
This sorption mechanism also often implies a ligand exchange when a functional group
expulse, or replace another one. The common reaction scheme can be represented as follows:
SeO32– + =Fe–OH
<—>
=Fe–SeO3– + OH–
HSeO3– + =Fe–OH
<—>
=Fe–SeO3– + H2O
or,
where the selenite ligand attacks the Fe3+ nucleus and expels one hydroxyl group to take its
place at the surface of the mineral. This reaction is analogue to the nucleophilic substitution
reaction in organic chemistry. The expulsion of the –OH “leaving group” can be facilitated
under acidic conditions when the group is protonated as –OH2+. Indeed, the departure of a
neutral H2O molecule is energetically easier that this of an OH– ion.
It is formally possible to write several similar reactions describing the complexation of
selenite on hydroxylated surfaces. These reactions can imply the formation of monodentate or
bidentate surface complexes with one or two metallic nuclei (here Fe3+). Therefore one will
refer to monodentate, bidentate mononuclear, or bidentate binuclear, surface complexes. The
37/328
here abovementioned reaction refers to the formation of a simple monodentate mononuclear
surface complex. More complex chemical drawing are required to adequately describe the
molecular structure of bidentate mononuclear, or bidentate binuclear, surface complexes.
Under Boom Clay conditions, amongst the selenium oxyanions, only selenite (SeO32–) forms
stable inner-sphere complexes at neutral and slightly alkaline pH and can sorb on oxide
surfaces by surface complexation reaction. Selenate sorption is much weaker than that of
selenite and requires quite acidic conditions for the ligand exchange. As a consequence,
selenate forms preferentially weak outer-sphere complexes and the formation of inner-sphere
complexes is not favoured in Boom Clay.
The more efficient sorption sites expected are these of hydrous ferric oxides (HFO) (Dzombak
and Morel, 1990) and oxy-hydroxide of aluminum. HFO sorption sites can be easily formed at
the surface of pyrite when oxidation occurs. The aluminium-type sites are present as aluminol
groups at the lateral edges of TOT (tetrahedron – octahedron – tetrahedron) clay minerals
platelets where the gibbsite octahedral layers becomes accessible. In the case of the nonswelling TO (tetrahedron – octahedron) clay minerals, such as kaolinite, Al–OH groups could
also be accessible at the outer octahedral basal plane of the clay platelets.
Only spectroscopic data can provide evidences confirming the existence of a particular
surface complex. X-ray Absorption Spectroscopies (XAS) are tools of choice but they require
very intense synchrotron light sources and large international infrastructures. Their
application still remains delicate for alumino-silicate minerals because Al and Si atoms have a
relatively small electron number (z = 13 and 14 respectively) and so poorly scatter X-rays.
Effect of water radiolysis and the interactions of redox-sensitive elements with the intense Xray beam can also complicate the studies: indeed, Bruggeman (2006) noticed the reduction of
selenite into pink elemental Se0 during exposure of his sorption samples to the X-ray
beamline. Finally, the mathematical interpretation of XAS experimental data to infer the
molecular structure of surface complexes is also delicate. It must not be underestimated and
requires the collaboration of skilled specialists in the field.
Hayes et al. (1987) were amongst the first to apply the Extended X-ray Absorption Fine
Structure (EXAFS) spectroscopy to the study of the sorption of SeO42– and SeO32– on goethite
(FeO(OH); Fe: z = 26). They evidenced the formation of SeO32– inner-sphere bidentate
binuclear surface complexes with goethite. Boyle-Wight et al. (2002) also studied the
adsorption of SeO32– on γ-Al2O3 with EXAFS but the weak X-ray scattering produced by
aluminum atoms (z = 13) did not allow them to successfully determine the structure of SeO32–
surface complexes. Peak et al. (2006) also make use of EXAFS and X-ray Absorption NearEdge Spectroscopy (XANES) to unravel the SeO32– bonding mechanisms on a different Albearing materials.
38/328
In the frame of the present study, Bruggeman (2006) has performed XANES and EXAFS
measurements on samples of illite du Puy contacted with selenite solution at different pH
values. XANES and EXAFS spectra closely reflected the spectrum of the HSeO3– species.
New features observable in the Fourier-transformed radial structure function (RSF) of
EXAFS spectra pointed out the formation of inner-sphere complexes with selenite on the clay
platelet edges. The EXAFS spectra could be fitted up to the first and the second coordination
shells, but not beyond. In addition, the EXAFS spectra were not recorded in the range of
in situ pH value (8 – 8.5) for Boom Clay and were affected by non-negligible concentration of
selenite remaining in solution. So the molecular structure of the different surface complexes
could not be accurately determined and the corresponding sorption mechanisms remain
uncertain. It was thus not possible to discriminate between monodentate, bidentate
mononuclear, or bidentate binuclear, selenite surface complexes.
Bruggeman (2006) also performed sorption isotherms with SeO32– and sorption as a function
of pH (so-called “sorption edge”) on illite du Puy. Adsorption was maximal in the neutral-toacid pH range and sharply decreased from pH 6.0 to 8.5. Sorption isotherms were fairly linear
and independent of the background electrolyte concentration. This latter feature is inherent to
the inner-sphere sorption and thus confirmed the results obtained by EXAFS spectroscopy.
Surface complexation modelling using the titration data determined by Bradbury and Baeyens
(2005) for illite du Puy was also consistent with a monodentate inner-sphere surface complex
with selenite.
For Boom Clay, a linear sorption behaviour has been observed for selenite only. Distribution
ratios (RD) in the range from 5 and 5 000 dm3 kg-1 have been measured. The distribution
ratios for SeO32– depend mainly on the solution-to-liquid ratios and on the contact time. The
removal of selenite from solution is the faster for systems containing large quantities of solids
and low concentration of SeO32–.
However, the sorption studies of selenite on pyrite, or on Boom Clay containing pyrite, are
complicated by the progressive chemical reduction of SeO32– followed by the precipitation of
elemental selenium, Se(0), or iron selenide, (FeSe, Fe×Sey, FeSe2). Then, the studied systems
progressively evolves with time from a sorption mechanism to a slow chemical/precipitation
process. At the end, the dissolved selenium concentration seems to be solubility controlled
because it converges towards a value of ~ 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 in all the studied systems. This
makes difficult to interpret the experimental results and to translate them in a simple
conceptual model directly usable for the safety studies. Aqueous selenium is removed from
solution by a combination of sorption and precipitation whose proportion varies as a function
of time.
39/328
In Boom Clay, no sorption has been observed in batch tests for selenate (SeO42–) which is not
known to form strong inner-sphere complexes with hydroxylated surfaces at in situ pH value
representative of Boom Clay. However, EXAFS studies of Manceau and Charlet (1994) and
recent surface complexation modelling from Fukushi and Sverjensky (2007) indicate that at
lower pH, selenate could also form weak inner-sphere complex on the surface of iron oxide.
This could also explain the small retardation factor (R = 3.2 corresponding to a minute Kd of
0.4 L kg-1) recently determined for sulfate from breakthrough curves of percolation tests made
with 35SO42–. So, selenate is expected to migrate in Boom Clay as a very weakly sorbed or
nearly unretarded species.
No sorption has been observed for selenide (HSe–), an anion lacking of oxygen atom, so
a priori not expected to form inner-sphere complexes. However, it has only been studied in
the frame of solubility experiments made with elemental selenium, Se(0), or iron selenide,
FeSe. Studies of selenide in solution are also complicated by the low solubility of Se(0) and
FeSe solid phases and the great sensitivity of solid selenides and dissolved HSe– to oxidation.
If oxidation occurs, the selenium concentration is dominated by small amounts of SeO32– or
SeO42– soluble species and no solubility value can be determined. At the present time, we do
not have any experimental evidence proving the sorption of HSe– in Boom Clay, or on pyrite.
In addition, according to the principle of hard and soft Lewis acids and bases (HSAB)
(Sposito, 1981, p. 76), no significant interaction with the surface hydroxyl groups (strong
Lewis acid sites) located on the clay edges is expected for soft Lewis bases as iodide and
selenide. So, based on the HSAB classification, in the absence of experimental evidence,
HSe– (a large and polarisable single anion with a low electronegativity as I–) is tentatively
considered as an unretarded species in Boom Clay as it is the case for I–.
In spite of this, one could imagine that a selenide anion could be exchanged with a sulfide
anion at the surface of pyrite, but this process could not be demonstrated in the frame of the
present work. So, for safety studies selenide is presently considered as a non-retarded species.
However, a paper of Liu et al. (2008) (Subatech, Ecole des Mines de Nantes, France)
published after the completion of the present study mentions that dissolved selenide (HSe–)
could be oxidized in elemental selenium (Se0) by the disulfide anion present in pyrite (which
get reduced into sulfide), giving rise to an apparent distribution coefficient of ~ 67 L·kg-1 for
selenium.
HSe– —> Se0 + H+ + 2 e–
S22– + H+ + 2 e– —> S2– + HS–
Fe2+ + S2– —> FeS
HSe– + FeS2
(oxidation of hydrogeno-selenide in elemental selenium)
(reduction of pyrite disulfide, –Se–Se–, in two sulfides)
(precipitation of one of the 2 sulfides with a ferrous ion)
—> Se0 + FeS + HS– (global apparent reaction)
40/328
This reaction could be responsible for the possible retention of selenide in Boom Clay and
should be experimentally verified by means of batch tests with Boom Clay pyrite suspensions
and also with diffusion experiments to be made with H75Se–. However, in the absence of any
experimental measurements, selenide is presently considered as non sorbed in Boom Clay.
To summarize, exception made of SeO32–, (RD: 5 – 5 000 dm3 kg-1), no other dissolved
selenium species has been found to significantly sorb onto Boom Clay or pyrite.
3.3. Kinetics of reduction of selenite
Only the kinetic of reduction of selenite (SeO32–) has been studied in detail by Bruggeman
et al. (2005). No results have been obtained in the present work for the other selenium
species.
Upon contacting SeO32– with pure pyrite (FeS2), a steady decrease in time (60 days) of SeO32–
concentrations was observed, until a final concentration in solution of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 was
reached. All investigated systems appear to follow a same rate law. According to Bruggeman
et al., (2005), the decrease in Se(IV) concentration as a function of time seems proportional to
the concentration of dissolved selenite and to the amount of solid FeS2 present in the system,
and inversely proportional to the square root of the FeS2 occupancy by selenite. These
observations suggest that SeO32– reduction takes place through sorption onto FeS2 and that a
selenium precipitate with a solubility of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 was formed.
d [Se(+ IV )]
= −k [Se(+ IV )][FeS2 ]0
dt
[FeS2 ]0
[Se(+ IV )]0
(eq. 3.3.1)
One also observes that the Se(IV) reduction rate slows down when clay minerals and
dissolved Boom Clay organic matter (OM) are present in the system. It is interpreted as a
competition mechanism because SeO32– also remains associated with illite by an inner-sphere
complex or with OM by an iron bridge.
The reduction of selenate (SeO42–) in the Boom Clay conditions is not presently demonstrated
and certainly very difficult, if existent, in the absence of catalyst. The kinetic limitations could
likely be overcome by the enzymatic activity of sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB) if they
develop in the clay suspensions in the laboratory experiments. However, under in situ
conditions with a high degree of clay compaction, due to space (and water) restrictions, the
microbial activity is expected to be limited. According to a recent work of Cui et al. (2006),
41/328
green rust, a Fe(II)-mixed double layer hydroxide found in the corrosion products of iron
under anaerobic conditions could be also able to reduce selenate.
The kinetic of reduction/dissolution of elemental Se(0) into HSe– has not been studied in
detail. The reduction of Se(0) probably occurred at low Eh values in solubility tests when iron
strips were added to the system to lower the redox potential. The HSe– ions released by the
reduction/dissolution of Se(0) are expected to precipitate with Fe2+ to form FeSe. This
precipitation of a less soluble phase simultaneously increases the dissolution of elemental
selenium and the corrosion of metallic iron in the tests of AEAT with iron strips.
3.4. Solubility of selenium compounds under reducing conditions
The solubility of selenium mainly depend on the redox conditions. Under oxidizing
conditions, selenium (VI) and (IV) salts are soluble and very mobile. No solubility limit are
reached for SeO42– and SeO32– in Boom Clay water. Under reducing conditions, the mobility
of selenium is limited by the solubility of poorly soluble compounds, such as elemental
selenium, Se(0) and iron selenide(-II), FeSe. Under reducing conditions, selenium solubility
also strongly depends on the value of the redox potential (see p. 33, Chapter 2, the V-shape
curve on Figure 2.5.2).
The solubility of Se(0) and FeSe has been measured in synthetic clay water and in Boom Clay
porewater, in the presence and in the absence of pyrite and iron strip, specially added to
control the Eh value, the main parameter influencing the selenium solubility under reducing
conditions (Figures 2.4.2 and 2.5.2).
In general, the solubility values obtained with stable commercial compounds of Se(0) and
FeSe by AEAT are higher than these determined by means of solids synthesised on purpose
by KULeuven and labelled with 75Se. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images have
revealed the undesirable presence of oxidized phases in the commercial synthetic products.
Indeed, the purity of the solid phase is of the utmost importance. If oxidation products slightly
contaminate the reagents, non-solubility limited species (SeO32– or SeO42– ) impose the
selenium concentration in solution and it becomes strictly impossible to determine a true
solubility value. To remove the soluble selenium salts, the reagent were successively washed
with desionised water and the supernatant removed. After this “pre-leaching” operation, the
solubility were determined again and much lower values were obtained. The main results of
solubility experiments performed by AEAT and KULeuven (Appendix A4: Selenium
speciation behaviour in Boom Clay) are summarised at Table 3.4.1.
42/328
Table 3.4.1: Main results of solubility (S) experiments performed with Se(0) and FeSe as solid phases.
Se(0) S (mol dm-3)
Solid Phase
Medium \ Lab
AEAT
FeSe S (mol dm-3)
KULeuven
SCW (no OM)
1 × 10-7 – 3 × 10-7
SCW (+ FeS2)
1 × 10-7 – 4 × 10-7
—
BCW (+ OM)
2 × 10-7 – 6 × 10-5
—
6 × 10-7 – 5 × 10-6
1.7 × 10-9 – 8 × 10-8
1 × 10-6 – 2 × 10-6
—
3 × 10-8 – 5 × 10-8
BCW (+ clay)
Fe strips
—
1 × 10-6 – 4 × 10-6
2 × 10-8 – 9 × 10-8
AEAT
1 × 10-5 – 3 × 10-5
—
KULeuven
4 × 10-10 – 4 × 10-9
—
—
8 × 10-10– 2 × 10-9
—
SCW: synthetic clay water;
BCW: Boom Clay water;
OM: organic matter.
3.5. Association of selenium with Boom Clay organic matter
Natural selenium is often found in association with organic matter (OM) in soils and marine
sediments. Boom Clay organic matter also contains traces of natural selenium (for more
information see Appendices A2 and A8). This selenium is likely of organic nature and was
incorporated in organic molecules by biochemical pathways where selenium occupies the
place of sulfur and plays an important role in biochemical and enzymatic processes necessary
to life. The incorporation of traces of natural selenium in Boom Clay organic matter by living
organisms has occurred at the time of the clay sedimentation, 35–30 millions years ago.
Natural selenium is present in Boom Clay and appears to be primarily associated with pyrite
(FeS2). The concentration of natural selenium measured in Boom Clay porewater is about
2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3, a value consistent with the solubility limit of a selenium-bearing solid
phase. However, as a fraction of selenium in interstitial water is associated with natural
dissolved organic matter (or may even be part of its molecular structure, in case of really
covalent bond), the selenium concentration measured in porewater could not correspond to a
true solubility.
The exact significance for geochemical calculations of the background levels of natural
selenium concentrations measured in pyrite and in Boom Clay porewater remain also an open
question. If the total selenium concentrations measured in Boom Clay porewater are partly
ascribable to organo-selenium species, their values cannot be directly used in geochemical
calculations to determine the solubility, or the saturation index (SI) of inorganic selenium
43/328
species such as iron selenide. Therefore, it is recommended to systematically analyse the
natural selenium concentration in the purified clay fraction, pyrite, calcium carbonate, and in
the Boom Clay organic matter (both solid (kerogen) and dissolved) and to determine the
fraction of true inorganic selenium in Boom Clay.
All the common species of dissolved inorganic selenium in water are of anionic nature:
SeO42–, SeO32– and HSe–. The non-specific electrostatic repulsion forces between these
negatively charged entities and organic matter (a polydispersed polyelectrolyte structure
bearing many negative functional groups) is also a priori not favourable to a direct
association between inorganic selenium and OM.
Selenite (SeO32–) is the only aqueous species of selenium clearly interacting with “dissolved”
high molecular weight (MW) Boom Clay organic mater. A set of experiments were performed
with homogeneous solutions, i.e., in absence of solid phases or mineral surfaces. A spike of
75
SeO32– (10-6 mol dm-3) was added to synthetic and natural solutions containing “dissolved”
organic matter (DOM) of different origin: OM extracted from Boom Clay and redispersed in
synthetic water (128 mg dm-3), or OM-rich water from Gorleben aquifer (160 mg dm-3). After
increasing contact times, the solutions were ultracentrifuged and 75Se and DOM measured in
the supernatant respectively by γ-counting and readout of UV absorbency at 280 nm. A
progressive removal of 75Se from solution was observed. After several months about 70–80 %
of selenite introduced in the aqueous systems containing DOM was removed. So, an
association or a reaction with the high MW centrifugeable OM was suspected. Gel permeation
(GPC) and ion (IC) chromatography measurements were then performed to obtain
information on the aqueous speciation of selenium in the supernatant recovered after
centrifugation or ultrafiltration after contact with dissolved organic matter. The GPC results
revealed than the narrow peak of 75SeO32– observed at long elution time typical for small
anions gradually decreased while a broad band of 75Se was simultaneously growing in the
front of the chromatogram at the shorter elution times corresponding to the breakthrough of
the larger OM molecules. These observations first suggest an association between selenite and
OM, but the formation of colloidal elemental selenium by reduction of selenite by OM could
also give a consistent explanation of the results. So, two possible mechanisms are proposed to
explain these observations, but confirmation by advanced X-ray absorption spectroscopies
(XAS) is still needed to raise all ambiguities.
In a first hypothesis, selenite could form inner-sphere complexes with Fe present in the humic
acids and be bound by an “iron bridge” (OM—Fe—SeO32–) as suggested by Gustafsson and
Johnsson (1994) in laboratory experiments on forested ecosystem. However, it is unclear if
Fe2+–humic complexes are able to bind SeO32– under reducing conditions as Fe3+–humic
complexes do under air.
44/328
On the other hand, selenite is easily prone to reduction in the presence of organic agents such
as ascorbic acid (Shaker, 1996). According to several authors (Matthiesen, 1994; Nakayasu
et al., 1999; Struyck and Sposito, 2001) humic acids have also a certain redox capacity and
are able to reduce oxyanion in solution. So, SeO32– might be reduced by OM under the form
of amorphous colloidal elemental Se(0). These selenium colloids could directly precipitate out
of solution or might interact by hydrophobic forces with organic matter colloids, so that a
weak physical association [Se colloids/OM colloids] could also be envisaged.
Finally, a third tentative association mechanism envisaged is the direct complexation of
SeO32– by positively charged functional groups present in the poorly characterised structure of
humic acids such as, e.g., ammonium groups from amino-acids residues or peptide
degradation products. However, to our knowledge little is known on positively charged sites
in humic acids and such a hypothesis also requires the amine functions to be protonated what
first needs a pH well below the pKa value of the functional group.
In contrast to selenite, no association of selenate with high molecular organic matter has been
evidenced in Boom Clay. The same method used for selenite was also applied to selenate and
no removal from solution was observed by ultracentrifugation or ultrafiltration. Moreover,
GPC and IC measurements did not succeed to evidence an association, or a reduction, of
SeO42– with OM. So, the interaction of SeO42– with OM is considered to be very weak (below
detection capabilities of the techniques used) or negligible because selenate reduction is
kinetically hindered and that selenate does not form inner-sphere complexes at slightly
alkaline pH to establish strong chemical bonds with OM (e.g., via iron bridges).
Finally, up to now, no association has been observed between elemental selenium, Se(0), or
iron selenide, FeSe, contacted with Boom Clay organic matter. No effect could be observed
by ultrafiltration (cfr. AEAT results), suggesting the absence of small selenium colloids in the
systems studied, or that Se-bearing particles were larger than 0.22 μm and so already
eliminated at the first prefiltration step. Independent analyses with gel permeation
chromatography and La3+ precipitation have not make possible to detect a significant
association between Se(0), or FeSe, and colloids of Boom Clay organic matter.
3.6. Conclusions
The main mechanisms controlling the behaviour of inorganic selenium in Boom Clay are
summarised in Table 3.6.1. They can be summarised as follows:
Selenate is not or weakly sorbed, is very recalcitrant to reduction and could subsist under
reducing condition. Selenate is not solubility limited, nor associated with organic matter
(OM).
45/328
Selenite is moderately sorbed on Boom Clay and easily undergoes reduction. Selenite is
soluble, except in cementitious buffer where it forms an insoluble calcium salt in the presence
of portlandite (Ca(OH)2), or solid solutions with CSH, AFt (ettringite) and AFm cement
phases (for more information, see Appendix A5.1: Immobilisation of selenium in cementitious
buffer). An association is observed with OM, but it is unclear if the reason is due to the
formation of inner sphere complexes involving the creation of iron bridges with OM, or if this
association is caused by the formation of nano-colloids of elemental selenium (Se0) or iron
selenide (FeSe×) intimately mixed with OM (weak hydrophobic interactions).
Table 3.6.1: Matrix of different interactions expected for inorganic selenium species in Boom Clay.
Oxidation
State
Species
Sorption
Reduction
Precipitation
OM
Association
+6
SeO42–(aq)
Very low
Extremely
reluctant
No solubility
limit
None
+4
SeO32–(aq)
Medium
(inner-sphere
complex)
Easy
CaSeO3
(+ solid solution
in cement)
Association
(+ reduction)
observed
Se(s)
—
Slow
Se
Colloid –
colloid
HSe–(aq)
Unknown
(not considered)
—
FeSe2 , Fe×Sey
None
0
–2
Elemental selenium (Se0) is a solid phase which might control the solubility of selenium in
Boom Clay and can also interact with OM by means of weak colloidal interactions. Elemental
selenium can be further reduced in selenide, or at the contrary easily oxidized in selenite,
giving rise to the famous V-shape solubility curve of reduced selenium.
Finally, selenide is poorly soluble in the presence of ferrous ions, but very few is known on its
sorption in Boom Clay and this point still deserve experimental investigations. Although not
impossible, no interaction has yet been observed with Boom Clay OM.
46/328
4. Determination of migration parameters of
selenium in Boom Clay
47/328
48/328
4. Determination of migration parameters of selenium in Boom Clay
4.1. Introduction
The values of transport parameters of selenium in Boom Clay presently selected for
performance assessment calculations only deal with selenate. The reason is that because of
redox disequilibrium, this species could subsist in Boom Clay for an undetermined period of
time and is also assumed to have the highest mobility. Because of its stability under
laboratory conditions, well controlled migration experiments have been performed with
selenate and sulfate, its chemical analogue. On the other hand, it is a particularly challenging
task to study the transport of selenite and selenide in Boom Clay. Selenite is a more reactive
species than selenate and undergoes a progressive reduction after sorption on the edges of
clay minerals (inner-sphere complexes). As a consequence, it slowly precipitates during
transport to form elemental selenium or iron selenide. Interpretations and modelling of several
migration experiments with selenite affected by chemical-coupled transport did not succeeded
to provide reliable migration parameters for selenium in Boom Clay (see more detail in
Appendix A9: Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay). Experiments with selenide, the
thermodynamical stable form of selenium in Boom Clay are also not easy and remain to be
done. First, they require the complete chemical reduction of all selenium species in selenide,
which is not a trivial operation starting with 75Se-labelled selenite or selenate sources. The
reduction reaction or the chemical separation processes must be complete to isolate the only
selenide species and to avoid contamination by other selenium species or residual chemicals.
So, the chemical purity of the 75Se-labelled selenide must be carefully controlled to guarantee
that no other selenium species are still present and that no chemical impurities that could
affect experiments are left after the reduction operations. Finally, the very low solubility limit
of iron selenide and the high sensitivity of dissolved HSe– to oxidation complicate the
experiments and preclude the use of pulse injection test. Only well characterized pure FeSe
solid sources confined between two undisturbed clay cores and imposing a constant solubility
limit can be used in practice.
So, specific migration experiments have been performed to determine the transport
parameters of selenate (75SeO42–) and sulfate (35SO42–) in Boom Clay. Selenate was studied by
electro-migration experiments while sulfate was investigated with different conventional
diffusion tests. Sulfate labelled with 35S chemically resemble to selenate and was chosen to
understand the migration of divalent anions in Boom Clay, and especially to better understand
the effect of the double charge on the anionic exclusion.
49/328
4.2. Experimental
Migration experiments with sulfate (35SO42–)
The different types of percolation experiments (core infiltration tests made on small “column”
(height = 7 cm) of compact clay core submitted to a high hydraulic gradient) used to study the
migration of sulfate (labelled with 35S: ß- emitter, T½ = 86.7 d) in Boom Clay are
schematically illustrated in Figure 4.2.1. The classification and the description of D2-pulse
injection, C4-type percolation experiments and C3-type back-to-back diffusion experiment
(same configuration as C4 but without hydraulic gradient), are given by Henrion et al. (1990)
and Put et al. (1992) and also summarized in Appendix A9: Selenium migration behaviour in
Boom Clay. Modelling of the breakthrough curves from the D2-pulse injection and the C4percolation tests results in values for Dapp and ηR, while interpretation of the diffusion profile
in the clay after post-mortem analysis of a C3 back-to-back diffusion experiment only
provides the Dapp value.
RN
injection
RBCW
percolation
ΔP
Clay
“D2-pulse injection
(1-2 MPa)
RN
collection
[RN]
RN breakthrough curve (for
non or weak retarded RN)
ΔP
t
RBCW
injection
Clay
Clay
RN
collection
RN Source
[RN]
[RN]
“C4-percolation”
x
RN distribution profile after
cutting (for retarded RN)
t
RN breakthrough curve (for
solubility controlled RN – sigmoïd curve and for non or weak retarded RN)
Figure 4.2.1: Different types of percolation experiments used to determine the transport parameters of
sulfate with 35SO42–: D2-pulse injection and C4-type percolation experiments (see Put et al., 1992).
Electromigration of selenate (75SeO42–)
The experimental set-up used for the electromigration tests with 75Se-labelled selenate (75Se:
e- capture (EC), T½ = 120 d) at different values of electrical field is described by Beauwens
et al. (2005). Chemically pure 75SeO42– was not commercially supplied because 75Se is
usually conditioned under the form of selenite (75SeO32–). Beauwens et al. (2005) prepared
50/328
pure 75Se-labelled selenate by oxidizing aliquots of labelled selenite with hydrogen peroxide
(H2O2).
Modelling of the diffusion profiles after post-mortem analysis of the clay cores provides
apparent dispersion coefficients (Di) and apparent velocities (Vapp). By performing
electromigration experiments at different electrical fields, hence different apparent velocities,
the apparent diffusion coefficient (Dapp) can be obtained from following linear relationship:
Di = Dapp + αVapp
Where α stands for dispersion length (expressed in meter).
4.3. Results
The results obtained with D2-pulse injection and C4-type percolation experiments are
discussed hereafter. Breakthrough curves of the percolation experiments (C4 and D2) are
presented in Figure 4.3.1 and the corresponding recovery curves in Figure 4.3.2.
2 E+6
D2 – 7.4
C4 – 7.12
7 E+6
1 E+6
6 E+6
1 E+6
C4 – 7.11
C4 – 7.12
D2 – 7.2
D2 – 7.4
5 E+6
4 E+6
C4 – 7.11
1 E+6
8 E+5
3 E+6
6 E+5
2 E+6
4 E+5
1 E+6
2 E+5
D2 – 7.2
0 E+0
0
5
10
S-35 Conc. (Bq/L) [7.2 – 7.4]
S-35 Conc. (Bq/L) [7.11 – 7.12]
8 E+6
0 E+0
15
20
25
30
35
40
Σ Volume percolated water (ml)
Figure 4.3.1: Breakthrough curves of 35SO42– obtained with the C4 and D2 type of percolation
experiments. The 35S recovery yield considerably varied for an unclear reason.
Both Figures 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 show a different recovery yield of 35S activity in the two types of
percolation experiments. A first set of experiment presents an acceptable recovery yield
51/328
within the error bar of the activity measurements (100 to 110 %) while the second one is
much lower (25 to 40 %) for an unclear reason.
120
D2 – 7.4
S-35 Recovery (%)
100
C4 – 7.12
80
60
C4 – 7.11
40
D2 – 7.2
20
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Σ Volume percolated water (ml)
Figure 4.3.2: Recovery curves of 35SO42– obtained with the C4 and D2 type of percolation
experiments. The 35S recovery yield considerably varied for an unclear reason.
The incomplete recovery affecting the two types of experiments could be due to an undetected
experimental perturbation (e.g., sulfate precipitation induced by pyrite oxidation).
In case of pyrite oxidation, several poorly soluble sulfate salts could be formed, with whom
35
SO42– could coprecipitate, or undergo an isotopic exchange (solid solution): barite (BaSO4),
celestite (SrSO4), gypsum (CaSO4 · 2 H2O), jarosite (KFe3(SO4)2(OH)6).
Despite the problem of incomplete recovery, consistent Dapp (and ηR) values were derived:
average Dapp = 2.7 × 10-11 (D2) and 3.8 × 10-11 m² s-1 (C4).
Figure 4.3.3 presents the 35SO42– profile obtained in a clay core after a pure diffusion
experiment (type C3 according Put et al., 2002) with sulfate (14 days duration). Only the
apparent diffusion coefficient of sulfate was determined by means of this pure diffusion
experiment: Dapp = 4.4 × 10-11 m2 s-1.
Figure 4.3.4 summarises the results of 7 electro-migration experiments made with 75SeO42– at
different values of electrical field (Beauwens et al., 2005). The apparent diffusion coefficient
(Dapp) is then obtained by linear extrapolation to a zero apparent velocity (Vapp) (i.e., in the
52/328
absence of electrical field) from a plot of the dispersion coefficients (Di) of 75SeO42– as a
function of the apparent velocity. More explanations on the electro-migration technique and
the way to derive transport parameters from these experimental results are given by Maes
et al. (1998; 1999; 2001; 2002).
800
Bulk Activity (cps/g)
35
2–
SO4
Pure diffusion (C3)
experiment with
2 back-to-back
Boom Clay cores
14 days
600
400
200
0
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
Distance from source (mm)
Figure 4.3.3: Distribution profile of 35SO42– in a Boom Clay core after a pure
diffusion experiment (duration: 14 days).
Di 1,2E-10
(m²/s)
1,0E-10
8,0E-11
6,0E-11
y = 2,19E-04x + 1,73E-11
R2 = 9,01E-01
4,0E-11
2,0E-11
0,0E+00
0,0E+00
1,0E-07
2,0E-07
3,0E-07
4,0E-07
5,0E-07
Vapp (m/s)
Figure 4.3.4: Linear extrapolation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (Dapp) from dispersion
coefficients (Di) obtained at different apparent velocity (Vapp) in electro-migration experiments
performed with 75Se-labelled selenate at various values of electrical field.
53/328
Only the value of Dapp can be derived from the results obtained with the electro-migration
technique. From the here above mentioned extrapolation, Beauwens et al. (2005) determined
for selenate a value of Dapp = 1.7 × 10-11 m2 s-1.
In Table 4.3.1 the parameters derived for SO42– by means of conventional diffusion or
percolation experiments are compared to these of SeO42– obtained by electro-migration.
ηR
(—)
Dapp
(m2 s-1)
Deff = ηRDapp
(m2 s-1)
~ 25
~ 110
Average:
0.29
0.25
0.27
2.8 × 10-11
2.6 × 10-11
2.7 × 10-11
8.1 × 10-12
6.5 × 10-12
7.3 × 10-12
C4
C4
~ 40
~ 100
Average:
0.15
0.21
0.18
3.7 × 10-11
3.8 × 10-11
3.75 × 10-11
5.6 × 10-12
8.0 × 10-12
6.8 × 10-12
PD–SO42–
PD
—
—
4.4 × 10-11
—
EM–SeO42–
EM
—
—
1.7 × 10-11
—
All
Experiments
—
—
Average:
± Std. Dev.:
3.17 × 10-11
±0.98 × 10-11
7.29 × 10-12
±1.04 × 10-12
Table 4.3.1: Migration parameters derived for sulfate compared to these obtained for selenate.
Code
(—)
Type
(—)
Recovery
Yield (%)
7.2–SO42–
7.4–SO42–
D2
D2
7.11–SO42–
7.12–SO42–
D2:
C4:
PD:
EM:
Std. Dev.:
0.23
±0.06
pulse injection percolation experiment;
back-to-back percolation experiment;
pure Diffusion experiment;
electro-Migration experiment;
Standard Deviation.
4.4. Discussion
The different applied experiments lead to a relatively consistent set of values for Dapp and ηR.
For sulfate, the obtained values slightly depend on the kind of experiment (D2 or C4
percolation type). This is not only due to the nature of the transport and interaction processes
54/328
at work in each experiment, but also to limitations inherent to the modelling: it also thus
depends on the conceptual model used, on the boundary conditions, on the basis hypotheses
and simplifications introduced in the model itself.
Surprisingly, the value of the apparent diffusion coefficient (Dapp = 3.2 ± 1.0 × 10-11 m2 s-1) is
one order of magnitude lower than that normally expected in Boom Clay for the pore
diffusion coefficient (Dp = 2 × 10-10 m2 s-1) with the hypothesis that anions are not sorbed
(Dapp = Dp/R; if R = 1, —> Dapp = Dp). This could indicate that this hypothesis is not valid and
that the studied oxyanions are sorbed (R > 1). As it can be observed on Table 4.3.1, to the
highest Dapp values correspond also the lowest ηR values and vice et versa, but this
relationship is not sufficiently significant and the parameters cannot be considered as
correlated. The value of the effective diffusion coefficient (Deff = ηRDapp) is quite stable
(7.0 ± 1.2 × 10-12 m2 s-1) but is also one order of magnitude lower than the value normally
expected for anions in Boom Clay (~ 2 × 10-11 m2 s-1). The relationship between these
different diffusion coefficients is given by the following set of equations:
Dapp = Daq / R Rf
Dp
= Daq / Rf
Dapp = Dp / R
Deff = ηRDapp = ηDp
Where:
Dapp :
Daq :
Dp :
Deff :
η:
R:
Rf :
apparent diffusion coefficient;
diffusion coefficient in pure water;
pore diffusion coefficient;
effective diffusion coefficient;
diffusion accessible porosity;
retardation factor;
rock factor depending on the tortuosity (τ) of the clay matrix and on the constrictivity of the pores.
The origin of the lower Dapp value for sulfate could be found in a lower Daq, or in a higher Rf
or R value. In the absence of sorption (i.e., if R = 1), the Dapp value of divalent oxyanions
studied here is not compatible with the typical Dp value for monovalent anions such as I–. The
alternative is that some sorption could occur for oxyanions (R > 1) in Boom Clay. This could
be the case because, in contrast to what was a priori expected, the ηR value (0.23) is higher
than for the monovalent iodide (0.16). The increase of R would also compensate for a lower
diffusion accessible porosity (η) expected for divalent anions because of the Donnan
exclusion.
55/328
4.4.1
Pore diffusion coefficient (Dp)
The values of the diffusion coefficient of ions in pure water (Daq) can be compared for iodide,
hydrogeno-sulfate and sulfate from data of Li and Gregory (1974):
Daq (I–)
= 2.06 × 10-9 m2 s-1;
Daq (HSO4–) = 1.37 × 10-9 m2 s-1 (ratio iodide/hydrogeno-sulfate: 1.50);
Daq (SO42–) = 1.07 × 10-9 m2 s-1 (ratio iodide/sulfate: 1.93).
Only a factor < 2 is observed between the aqueous diffusion coefficients (Daq) of iodide
(monovalent monoatomic ion) and of sulfate (divalent oxyanion) in water.
Dp = Daq/Rf = Daq/τ2
Where τ represents the tortuosity.
Dp depends on Daq, so a factor of 2 could be invoked.
Dp also depends on the rock factor (Rf) which is related to the tortuosity (τ): τ (HTO) ~ 3.1 vs.
τ (I–) ~ 3.8 from experimental measurements (Rf (HTO) = 9.6; Rf (I–) = 14.7). However, the
effect of the tortuosity is less important and will also results in a factor lower than 2: indeed,
the ratio τ2 (I–)/τ2 (HTO) = 1.50. Thus, the Dp value expected for a divalent anion could be
globally adapted by a factor of about 2 × 1.5 = 3, but a factor of ~3.33 still subsists to explain
the difference of one order of magnitude with the observed Dapp. So, sorption seems also to
have to be involved to fill the gap.
4.4.2
Porosity (η)
The porosity η cannot be directly determined from a migration experiment, only the product
ηR (sometimes also referred to as α or ω, the rock capacity factor) is obtained by fitting. The
Bruggeman equation (De Preter et al., 1992; Put et al., 1995) provides a relationship between
the effective diffusion coefficient (Deff = ηRDapp) and the porosity (η):
Deff = 6.84 × 10-10 × η1.5
(eq. 4.4.1)
As the average Deff value experimentally determined for SO42– and SeO42– is about 7 × 10-12
m2 s-1 it results in a porosity η = 0.05.
56/328
The value of the diffusion accessible porosity η calculated with the Bruggeman relationship
for a divalent oxyanion is indeed smaller than for a monovalent anion. The η values similarly
predicted for I– and HTO are respectively 0.10 and 0.25 while values of 0.16 and 0.37 have
been experimentally determined. Taking this into account, the relative high ηR value (0.23)
implies thus a small retardation factor.
4.4.3
Sorption – retardation (R)
Many studies (a.o., Bar-Yosef and Meek, 1987; Hayes et al., 1987; Kafkafi et al., 1988;
Geelhoed et al., 1997a,b; Hiemstra and van Riemsdijk, 1996, 1999; Lefèvre and Fédoroff,
2006; Peak et al., 2006) indicate that oxyanion species (phosphate, arsenate, selenite) can sorb
onto iron and aluminium oxy-hydroxide and on clay minerals edges surface by formation of
inner- and outer- sphere complexes and also strongly depends on pH (sharp edge curves with
pH). At low pH, when ≡S–OH groups present at the minerals surface are protonated and that
the surface becomes positively charged, more outer- and inner-sphere complexes (weak and
strong sites) are formed and oxyanion sorption increases. According to surface complexation
modeling of hydrous ferric oxide surface from Dzombak and Morel (1990), at the slightly
alkaline pH value of Boom Clay (8 – 8.5), no significant sorption is expected for the weak
outer-sphere complexes formed with sulfate or selenate. Only a weak electrostatic interaction
could probably be envisaged to explain a very small retardation of sulfate in compact Boom
Clay. A more detailed information is given on the sorption mechanisms of selenium
oxyanions on mineral surfaces in Appendix A7: Sorption behaviour of selenite, selenate and
sulfate on Fe and Al oxide surface. Recent implications of a debate initiated by Manceau and
Charlet (1994) who observed by EXAFS measurements the unexpected ability for the weakly
sorbing selenate, to still form weak inner-sphere complexes at the surface of goethite and
hydrous ferric oxide will be discussed there. However, what could be the exact molecular
nature of this weak sorption mechanism, it does not change anything to the transport process
at the macroscopic scale and has no impact on the values of the migration parameters: the
sorption of selenate and sulfate in Boom Clay is extremely weak and probably below the limit
of detection of conventional batch sorption tests as those performed by Bruggeman (2006).
Contrary to the well known behaviour of selenite able to form strong inner-sphere complexes
at the surface of iron oxides (Hayes et al., 1987) and clay minerals (Bar-Yosef and Meek,
1987), sorption experiments made by Bruggeman (2006) with selenate onto pyrite and Boom
Clay suspensions did not succeed to show any significant sorption of selenate. The
infinitesimal decrease of concentration in the supernatant lying within the measurement error
bar it makes extremely difficult to experimentally determine very small distribution
coefficients (Kd of 0.2 –1 ml/g) corresponding to R values in the range 2 – 6.
57/328
4.5. Conclusion
To summarise the previously developed arguments, one can make the following observations:
•
•
•
The Dp value of divalent sulfate and selenate needs to be decreased (by a factor of ~ 2) to
reflect the difference between diffusion coefficients in pure water;
Because of Donnan exclusion, the porosity of doubled charged oxyanions should be
smaller than for single charged anions, and;
It is necessary to also consider a weak sorption for oxyanions.
So, considering the following values of the transport parameters of sulfate:
Dp
Dapp
ηR
= 7.3 × 10-11 m2 s-1 (versus 1.4 × 10-10 m2 s-1 for iodide) – calculated from Daq (SO42-)
and considering the same rock factor as for iodide Rf = 14.7;
= 3.17 × 10-11 m2 s-1
= 0.23
Deff = ηRDapp = 7.29 × 10-12 m2 s-1
The retardation factor (R) and the diffusion accessible porosity (η) for sulfate can be
calculated:
R
η
= Dp/Dapp = 2.3
= (ηR)/R = 0.10
The corresponding distribution coefficient (Kd) for sulfate can also be calculated:
R = 1 + (Kd × ρd/η)
or
Kd = (R-1) × η/ρd
where ρd is the dry density for Boom Clay: ρd = 1.7 g cm-3
for η = 0.10 (diffusion accessible porosity of the SO42– anion), Kd = 0.076 L kg-1.
for η = 0.38 (total porosity filled by water, η of HTO), Kd = 0.291 L kg-1.
A consistent dataset of migration parameters is then obtained for sulfate and selenate. The
small retardation factor of 2.3 so calculated for sulfate corresponds to a Kd value of less than
0.3 L kg-1 which remains to be independently verified with a delicate and adequately designed
sorption experiment on a dilute suspension of Boom Clay dispersed in porewater under in situ
conditions. This dataset is proposed for selenate for the performance assessment calculations
58/328
if this selenium species does not undergo reduction in Boom Clay at very long term because
of redox-disequilibrium.
4.5.1
Summary of the migration parameters for 79Se in Boom Clay
As conclusion, because of possible severe redox-disequilibrium, it is necessary to also take
into account selenate along with the expected thermodynamically favoured selenide for Boom
Clay conditions. Therefore, two sets of migration parameters including both selenate and
selenide have been selected for safety calculations and performance assessment and are given
hereafter in Table 4.5.1.
Table 4.5.1: Migration parameters selected for selenate and selenide in undisturbed Boom Clay.
(unit)
SeO42– (*)
HSe– ($)
(m2 s-1)
3.17 (± 0.98) × 10-11
1.2 × 10-10
0.23 (± 0.06)
0.16
7.3 × 10-12
1.9 × 10-11
(m2 s-1)
1.07 × 10-9
1.73 × 10-9
Dp = Daq /Rf
(m2 s-1)
using Rf (I–) = 14.7
7.28 × 10-11
1.2 × 10-10
Parameter
Dapp
ηR
(—)
De = ηRDapp = η Dp (m2 s-1)
Daq (#)
R = Dp/Dapp
(—)
2.3
1.0
η =ηR/R
(—)
0.10
(divalent anion)
0.16
(monovalent anion)
(*) SeO42– is assumed to migrate very slightly retarded, and a consistent set of migration parameters is derived
from these of sulfate.
($) HSe– is assumed to migrate unretarded as a monovalent anion, and, in the absence of experimental results, its
migration parameters are considered to be in line with those of iodide. The Dapp (I–) = 1.4 × 10-10 m² s-1 and
the ratio between Daq(HSe–)/Daq(I–) = 0.83, and the Dapp for HSe– is corrected to be in line with this ratio.
(#) Daq for SeO42– and HSe– are respectively taken equal to the corresponding values of SO42– and HS– (Li and
Gregory, 1974).
59/328
60/328
5. Summary and conclusions
61/328
62/328
5. Summary and conclusions
5.1. Overview
The inorganic chemistry of selenium is well known and the uncertainties on its
thermodynamic constants used to calculate its aqueous speciation and its solubility under
Boom Clay conditions are fairly limited. However, selenium behaviour in the subsurface
environment, and in particular its interactions with sediment components and organic matter
under reducing conditions, are complex and often difficult to unravel as illustrated by
Table 5.1.1 summarising the behaviour of the different inorganic selenium species in Boom
Clay as a function of their oxidation state.
Table 5.1.1: Matrix of abiotic interactions observed for inorganic selenium species in Boom Clay.
Oxidation
State
Possible
Solubility
Limiting Phase
Aqueous
Species (eq.)
Reduction
in Boom Clay
Sorption
OM
Association
+6
No
(+ solid solution
in cement)
SeO42–aq.
Extremely slow
(redox
disequilibrium)
Very weak
Not observed
+4
CaSeO3
(+ solid solution
in cement)
SeO32–aq.
Easy
Medium
(inner-sphere
complex at clay
platelet edges)
Association
(+ reduction)
observed
Se(0)
SeO32–aq. / HSe–
Slow
—
Colloid –
colloid
—
Unknown
(not considered)
Not observed
0
aq.
–1
–2
FeSe2 , Fe×Sey
FeSe
HSe–aq.
One of the main reasons of this complexity is that selenium is a redox-sensitive element and
that its reduction rate can be hindered because it involves the transfer of multiple electrons
along with multiple oxygen atoms between its various oxidation states (VI, IV, 0, -I, -II). The
reduction rate strongly varies with the oxidation number of the central atom in an oxyanion,
and the higher the oxidation number, the slower the reaction (Shriver et al., 1990). As a
consequence, selenate can be very recalcitrant to the reduction process and can subsist in
metastable conditions, far from the thermodynamical equilibrium for undetermined periods of
time. As for sulfur, the inorganic speciation of selenium in water is of anionic nature, but
selenium can also be incorporated in natural organic compounds by biochemical
transformations where it follows the pathways of sulfur. So, the selenium cycle and its
behaviour in nature are complex and remain not fully elucidated (Shrift, 1964; Nriagu, 1976).
63/328
The selenium speciation in the source term is presently unknown, and selenate could be
present in the waste form. If selenate is not reduced to a lower valence because of redoxdisequilibrium (or more simply by lack of electron donors, or oxidizing conditions affecting
the clay barrier, e.g. in a nitrate plume developing around bituminized MLW galleries), the
geochemical predictions based on thermodynamical models are no longer valid for
performance assessment calculations. Selenate is not solubility limited, nor significantly
retarded under Boom Clay conditions. If selenate subsists on the long term, it implies for
performance assessment that no more solubility limit can be taken into account for 79Se. So,
two scenarios have to be considered: a first one with selenate (worse case: redoxdisequilibrium) and a second one with selenide (best case: thermodynamic equilibrium). In
both case, selenium is considered unretarded, and a solubility limit can only be applied in the
case of selenide if Fe2+ is also present in the system.
From batch interaction experiments, it appears that selenite is the only reactive selenium
species with Boom Clay components: sorption on pyrite and illite edges and interaction with
organic matter (OM), finally leading to its reduction as elemental selenium or iron selenide.
Because of this reactivity, selenite is unstable under Boom Clay conditions and is not
expected to subsist in the formation on the long term, so, selenite is a transient species not
considered for performance assessment (PA) calculations.
Natural selenium is also present in Boom Clay, mainly in pyrite and in the mobile and
immobile organic matter and could also possibly be correlated to carbonate (Carignan, 2008;
Personal Communication; Gaucher and Tournassat; 2008; Personal Communication). Two
questions arise thus:
1. What is the real significance of the measured total selenium concentration in porewater ?
Is it possible to estimate a “natural” solubility limit for selenium released by pyrite in
Boom Clay water if a non-negligible fraction of dissolved selenium consists of organoselenium incorporated in the molecular structure of organic matter ?
2. Is there a possible interaction (e.g., by isotopic exchange) between 79Se and natural
selenium in Boom Clay (3 components in the system: pyrite, kerogen and carbonate) ?
5.2. Key uncertainties and abstraction for performance assessment
To draw robust conclusions and recommendations for performance assessment and to address
open questions in future researches, it is important to clearly identify the remaining
uncertainties and our knowledge gap. The main features of the behaviour of selenium in
Boom Clay are thus summarized in Table 5.2.1 and commented hereafter.
64/328
Table 5.2.1: List of uncertainties dealing with selenium to be accounted for in performance assessment studies.
Properties
Known
Uncertain Comments
Half-life of 79Se
±
±
Present best estimate circa 295 – 377 ka
Inventory in the source term
z
Poorly known: volatilisation in reprocessing
Speciation in the source term
z
Lack of experimental measurements
Abiotic processes in Boom Clay
Sorption
– SeO42–
– SeO32–
– HSe–
Known
z
z
Reduction
– SeO42–
– SeO32–
z
Precipitation
– SeO42–
– SeO32–
– HSe–
z
z
z
Abiotic association with OM
– SeO42–
– SeO32–
– HSe–
z
z
Microbial transformations
Known
Uncertain
z
z
Comments
Very weak sorption for selenate
Selenite prone to inner-sphere complexes
Unknown for selenide, but expected weak
Very slow reduction: redox-disequilibrium
Quite fast reduction for selenite
No solubility limit for selenate
Selenite poorly soluble in cement
FeSe2: very poorly soluble in clay (+ Fe2+)
z
Uncertain
No observed association for selenate
Very clear association for selenite
Unknown for selenide (see also kerogen)
Comments
Near-field
z
Microbial metabolism not excluded
Far-field
z
Low probability of microbial activity
Performance Assessment
Transport Parameters
– SeO42–
– SeO32–
–
– HSe
Known
z
Uncertain
z
z
Comments
η, R, Dapp taken as for SO42–
η, R, Dapp unknown for labile selenite
η, R, Dapp unknown and taken equal as for I–
S = 10-9 – 10-7 M
Microbial transformations are vast and could account for the reduction and precipitation of selenium as colloidal
elemental selenium or iron selenide, or for the methylation of selenium and its volatilisation as dimethyl selenide
(DMSe) or dimethyl diselenide (DMDSe).
65/328
79
Se is one of the rare radionuclides whose half-life has considerably evolved in the recent
years with non-negligible consequences for safety calculations. The flux of 79Se at the Boom
Clay / aquifer interface is very sensitive to the values selected for its half-life. The half-life of
Se-79 has been re-estimated several times in the last 20 years and more particularly since
2001, as schematically illustrated by Figure 5.2.1. With the shortest half-life value of 65 ka, a
non-negligible fraction of 79Se could decay in the clay barrier but with the longer T½ values
recently determined, it is no more the case. A difference of about 25 % still affects the two
more recent values of 79Se T½: 295 ka (Jiang Song-Sheng, 2001; Singh, 2002; Bé et al., 2005)
and 377 ka (Bienvenu et al., 2007). More details on the recent redetermination of 79Se halflife are given in Appendix A1: General information on selenium.
1 200
T½ (ka)
T½ = 1 100 ka
Evolution of
79
Se half-life these last 20 years
800
T½ = 650 ka
Best Estimate T½ = 377 ka
400
T½ = 356 ka
T½ = 295 ka
0
1 990
T½ = 65 ka
1 995
2 000
2 005
Year
2 010
Figure 5.2.1: Recent evolution of 79Se half-life in the last 20 years. For numerical data and discussion, see also:
Appendix A1: General information on selenium.
Except for selenite (SeO32–), the other anionic species of selenium are not significantly sorbed
in Boom Clay.
Selenate (SeO42–), which does not undergo any observable reduction in Boom Clay at the
laboratory space and time scale, migrates unretarded, or very weakly retarded (R = 2.3;
Kd < 0.3 L kg-1), in Boom Clay as evidenced by electromigration experiments (Beauwens
et al., 2005) and by deduction from comparable results of percolation tests made with 34Slabelled sulfate.
66/328
The migration behaviour of selenide (HSe–) in Boom Clay has not yet been studied but
selenide is presently considered unretarded (R = 1; Kd = 0) because it is a soft Lewis base
deprived of oxygen ligands to form surface complexes (it is also the case for iodide (I–)
another soft Lewis base). Under the reducing conditions prevailing in Boom Clay and in the
presence of a controlling selenium solid phase (Se0, FeSe2, FeSe) selenide (HSe–) mobility is
only restricted by a solubility limit (S ≃ 5 × 10-8 mol dm-3). However, this assumption is only
valid if selenate effectively undergoes reduction in Boom Clay.
The behaviour of selenite in Boom Clay is complex. Selenite is an oxy-anion forming innersphere complexes at the surface of iron and aluminium oxy-hydroxides groups located on the
edges of the clay minerals (Bar-Yosef and Meek, 1987; Bruggeman, 2006). The principal
experimental difficulty encountered in sorption tests with selenite under reducing conditions
occurs from the fact that after its sorption on the clay minerals surface, selenite (SeO32–) is
progressively reduced into elemental selenium (Se0) or selenide (HSe–). Then selenium
precipitates as Se0, or FeSe, if Fe2+ is also present in solution, or adsorbed on the minerals
surface. In these conditions, with continuous changes of speciation caused by the progressive
reduction of selenite, it is not easy to distinguish between sorption and precipitation.
Therefore, it is difficult to determine a distribution coefficient (Kd), or to estimate a
retardation factor (R) for pure selenite. Anyway, the reduction / precipitation of selenium is
favourable to its retention, but it complicates the interpretation of the system because the
mechanisms of immobilisation are difficult to decipher.
Despite the fact that it is well evidenced for selenite (SeO32–), reduction in Boom Clay is very
unlikely and not proven for selenate (SeO42–) in the absence of microbially-mediated
reduction (Oremland, 1994; Oremland, et al., 1989, 1994, 1998). So, we are presently not able
to demonstrate that selenate will be reduced in compact Boom Clay, even at very long term, if
the “far-from-equilibrium” system is kinetically hindered. Then the system is no longer
controlled by thermodynamics but by kinetics limitations. The worse case scenario for
performance assessment studies is to consider that all selenium present in the source term
(spent fuel, vitrified HLW, or bituminised waste) occurs as selenate because of the oxidizing
conditions locally imposed in the waste matrix by alpha and gamma radiolysis (or by NO3–
present in bituminised waste). In this case, selenium is expected to be in a chemical form
totally soluble and not sorbed.
67/328
5.3. Summary of the transport parameters for the selenium species considered
Based on the experimental results and simple calculations, two sets of transport parameters
are proposed in Table 5.3.1 to assess the long-term dose-to-man delivered by 79Se:
•
a first set for selenate (SeO42–, divalent anion, no solubility limit), and;
•
a second set for selenide (HSe–, monovalent anion, with a solubility limit).
Table 5.3.1: Overview of the migration parameters selected for selenate and selenide in undisturbed Boom Clay.
Values relevant for the Mol site under the present geochemical conditions, i.e., in the absence of perturbation.
SeO42– (divalent anion)
Best Estimate
Expert Range
Source Range
3.17 (±0.98) × 10-11
2.2 – 4.2 × 10-11
1.5 – 7.3 × 10-11
(—)
0.10
0.05 – 0.18
0.05 – 0.18
(—)
2.3
1–5
1–5
Solubility (mol dm-3)
unlimited
unlimited
unlimited
HSe– (monovalent anion)
Best Estimate
Expert Range
Source Range
1.2 × 10-10
1.0 – 1.3 × 10-10
0.8 – 1.7 × 10-10
(—)
0.16
0.14 – 0.18
0.12 – 0.18
(—)
1
1
1
1 × 10-9 – 1 × 10-7
1 × 10-9 – 1 × 10-7
Dapp
η
R
Dapp
η
R
(m2 s–1)
(m2 s–1)
Solubility (mol dm-3)
2 × 10-8
Source Range (SR) of a parameter is a range of values outside of which the parameter value is unlikely to lie,
considering our current knowledge.
Expert Range (ER) of a parameter is the range of values within which experts expect the parameter value to lie.
Best Estimate (BE) value of a parameter is the selected value corresponding to the best current knowledge and
proposed by experts as nominal value for the performance assessment calculations.
For selenate, a consistent set of transport parameters is derived from the interpretation of
migration experiments made with selenate and sulfate. For selenide, only the solubility limit
was measured. In the absence of experimental data for determining its transport parameters,
HSe– is tentatively considered as a species unretarded in Boom Clay. The same values than
these of the transport parameters of I– in Boom Clay summarised by Bruggeman et al., (2010)
are attributed to HSe– on the basis of the resemblance of their electronic structures and related
chemical properties. Indeed, according to the theory of hard and soft Lewis acids and bases
(HSAB) (for more details, see Sposito, 1981, p. 76), no significant interaction (i.e., sorption)
is expected between strong Lewis acid sites (S–OH groups located on the clay platelets edges)
and soft Lewis bases such as iodide and selenide (large and polarisable monoatomic anion
with a low electronegativity).
68/328
The rationale underpinning the selection of the parameter ranges (Best Estimate – BE values;
Expert Range – ER, and Source Range – SR) presented in Table 5.3.1 is summarised
hereafter.
Selenate – SeO42–
Concentration / solubility limit, S:
• BE/ER/SR: no solubility limiting solid phase is considered for SeO42– in Boom Clay.
Retardation factor, R:
•
•
BE: from migration experiments an average ηR = 0.23 was obtained (higher than 0.16 for
iodide suggesting a slight sorption). BE R = Dp/Dapp (7.28 × 10-11 / 3.17 × 10-11 = 2.3)
with Dp taken equal to 7.28 × 10-11 m² s-1 (cfr. Table 4.5.1, p. 59).
ER: lower limit assuming non-retarded transport; the upper limit is the calculated value
taking ηR = 0.23 (diffusion experiment) and the lower limit for η = 0.05.
•
SR: taken equal to ER.
•
BE: from migration experiments an average ηR = 0.23 was obtained, and BE R = 2.3,
•
ER: lower limit η calculated from the Bruggeman equation (eq. 4.4.1, p. 56) using an
Diffusion accessible porosity, η:
•
thus η = ηR/R = 0.23/2.3 = 0.1.
average Deff = 7 × 10-12 m² s-1. Upper limit taken equal to η value of I–. The selected
range encompasses the standard deviation measured for ηR in the diffusion
experiments.
SR: taken equal to ER. Values relevant for the Mol site under the present geochemical
conditions, i.e., in the absence of perturbation. No effect of ionic strength is taken
into account for the diffusion accessible porosity of anions.
Apparent diffusion coefficient, Dapp:
• BE: average of the apparent diffusion coefficients values determined from the migration
experiments made with SeO42– and SO42–.
•
•
ER: BE value ± the standard deviation calculated from the experimentally determined
values.
SR: since Dapp = Dp/R, the variation in Dapp must reflect the variation in R. Therefore SR
upper and lower limits are adjusted with respect to BE to account for R range of 1–5
(with BE R = 2.3).
Selenide – HSe–
Concentration / solubility limit, S:
•
BE: the thermodynamic solubility calculated by AEA Technology for FeSe(s).
69/328
•
ER: lower and upper limit experimentally measured values considered to correspond to
Se(-II) solubility.
•
SR: taken equal to ER.
Retardation factor, R:
• BE/ER/SR: assuming non-retarded transport, with selenide similar to iodide.
Diffusion accessible porosity, η:
•
BE: same as for I–.
•
ER/SR: taken identical to I–. SR also taken equal to ER. Values relevant for the Mol site
under the present geochemical conditions, i.e., in the absence of perturbation. No effect of
ionic strength is taken into account for the diffusion accessible porosity of anions.
Apparent diffusion coefficient, Dapp:
• BE/ER/SR: for HSe– taken equal to these of I–, but corrected for the difference in Daq.
Ratio Daq(HSe–)/Daq(I–) = 0.83. For more information on I– transport parameters in Boom
Clay, see Bruggeman et al. (2010).
For the sake of completeness, Table 5.3.2 gives an overview of the evolution of the 79Se
transport parameters that have been selected for safety assessment calculations since the first
PAGIS (1986) study. For more information on the changes of these parameters previously,
see also Appendix A9: Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay.
Table 5.3.2: Evolution of 79Se transport parameters used for performance assessment calculations in Boom Clay.
Project /
PAGIS
PACOMA
EVEREST
SPA
SAFIR 2
Study
& UPD 90
(Year)
(m2 s-1)
Dp
DCF: DS1
DCF: DS2
(1986)
(1989-1990)
(1994)
(1998)
(1999)
3.20 × 10-10
2.00 × 10-10
2.00 × 10-10
2.00 × 10-10
2.00 × 10-10
R
(—)
320
10
10
300
1
η
(—)
0.33
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.13
S
(mol dm–3)
—
—
1.00 × 10-8
1.50 × 10-8
5.50 × 10-8
1.00 × 10-12
2.00 × 10-11
2.00 × 10-11
6.67 × 10-13
2.00 × 10-10
105.6
1
1
30
0.13
1.06 × 10-10
2.00 × 10-11
2.00 × 10-11
2.00 × 10-11
2.60 × 10-11
Dapp
(m2 s-1)
ηR
(—)
Deff
(m2 s-1)
UPD 90: Updating 90;
DCF: Data Collection (Form) exercise;
DS: Data Set.
70/328
5.4. Recommendations and future works
Several unresolved issues remain to be addressed, more particularly by order of decreasing
importance:
– What is the selenium speciation in the source term (spent fuel and vitrified HLW)?
– The accurate reappraisal of the selenide and selenate transport parameters in Boom Clay
by means of better controlled migration experiments with 75Se sources already at chemical
equilibrium prior to start the tests, i.e. without labile selenite, and with sources of pure
H75Se- and 75SeO42– species;
– And finally, a less crucial question: what is the role of solid carbonates (aragonite, calcite,
siderite, …) as possible overlooked sinks of natural selenium in Boom Clay?
These questions are developed more in detail hereafter.
1. Selenium speciation in the source term is important to determine the fraction of selenium
initially present as mobile selenate recalcitrant to reduction in Boom Clay. The
experimental study of this question is difficult because a relative small activity of 79Se is
mixed with large amounts of other fission products and minor actinides in the spent fuel
UO2 matrix (Comte, 2001; Comte et al., 2000; 2001; 2002a,b; 2003). The speciation of
selenium in the high-activity vitrified waste could likely be more easily understood thanks
to the extensive knowledge existing in the glass manufacturing industry which uses
selenium as an additive to control the glass colour. In this perspective, the real redox
conditions prevailing in the glass matrix should be assessed at least by a review of the
literature and of the conditions in which the high-level waste is vitrified (what is the effect
of sugar added as a reductant to the liquid waste before the calcination and vitrification
processes to minimize the ruthenium volatility ?). Under what chemical form (SeO42–,
SeO32–, Se0, or Se2–) is selenium present in the spent fuel and in the glass matrix ?
2. Proposal of new migration experiments avoiding the kinetically controlled sorption /
reduction of selenite present in sources not in chemical equilibrium prior to start the tests.
In the measure of the possible, it would be advisable to perform:
– Migration experiments with a pure H75Se- source at low concentration (below the
solubility limit of Se0, FeSe2, and FeSe) to determine the migration parameters of
reduced selenium forms, and;
– Migration experiments with a pure 75SeO42– source (i.e., without selenite !) to confirm
the values of accessible porosity (η) and retardation factor (R) presently selected for
selenate but only derived from a deductive reasoning based on the results obtained
from migration experiments with sulfate.
71/328
3. Under what chemical form is natural selenium present in Boom Clay ? Is selenium only
associated with pyrite (in solid solution) and organic matter (as degradation products of
seleno-proteins present in the kerogen), or does it exist other sources of natural selenium
in Boom Clay: e.g., also in the CaCO3 deposited by coccolithophores ? Is natural selenium
also associated with illite and smectite clay minerals as oxyanions ? To answer to these
questions, it could be useful to perform analyses of natural selenium in Boom Clay
porewater and clay samples along with routine measurements already carried out for other
trace elements. It would also be worth to determine the natural selenium concentration in
the purified clay fractions, in pyrite, in organic matter (both solid and dissolved), and in
carbonate fractions isolated from Boom Clay. So, it could be useful to apply to Boom
Clay the selenium sequential extraction methods developed by Kulp and Pratt (2004) and
Oram et al., (2008). Finally, the study of the vertical distribution profile of natural
selenium in the Boom Clay formation could allow to identify a possible correlation with
kerogen or CaCO3.
Finally, a particular attention should be paid in the future to any modifications regarding the
half-life of selenium-79. In the same way, the values of the half-life used for 79Se should
always be systematically mentioned along with the results of all the future safety calculations.
72/328
6. Acknowledgments
73/328
74/328
6. Acknowledgments
This work is undertaken in close co-operation with, and with the financial support of,
ONDRAF/NIRAS, the Belgian Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials.
Parts of the research presented here have also been funded by the European Commission in
the framework of the TRANCOM-I (Contract N° FI4W-CT95-0013) and TRANCOM-II
(Contract N° FIKW-CT-2000-00008) projects. Lian Wang, Jan Marivoet, Xavier Sillen and
Eef Weetjens are acknowledged for their contributions to the safety calculations, and for their
numerous exchanges of ideas on the diffusion of selenium in clay. The support and the fruitful
discussions with Cherry Tweed, Nick Pilkington, Robert Gens, and Ann Dierckx have been
highly appreciated. Marc Aertsens made the modelling of the Se diffusion experiments, while
Véra Pirlet provided data on the leaching of Se from glass exposed to conditions expected in
the near-field. Hugo Moors, Marc Van Gompel, Louis Van Ravestyn, and Jacqueline Van
Cluysen are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance during the experiments.
We are also grateful to our colleagues Achim Albrecht, Hélène Pauwels and Elie Valcke for
the many informal scientific exchanges on the question of the reduction of selenate and other
redox-sensitive elements in the frame of the Mont Terri Bitumen Nitrate (BN) experiment.
Finally, we wish also to thank Pierre Henrion and Martin Put, our predecessors in charge of
the diffusion experiments with Boom Clay, for their pioneer contributions to the Belgian
Geological Waste Disposal project since its start more than three decades ago.
75/328
76/328
7. References
77/328
78/328
7. References
Abrams M.M., Burau R.G., and Zasoski R.J. (1990) Organic selenium distribution in selected
California soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 54(4), 979–982.
Aertsens M. (2000) Results from modelling the selenium diffusion experiments. Unpublished
internal SCK•CEN note. 5 pp. Two annexes. Annex 1: The model Dfit38_prec. Annex 2: The
model Dissflow. Personal Communication. <modelling Se diff exp 2000.doc>.
Aertsens M., Put M., and Dierckx A. (1999) An analytical model for pulse injection
experiments. In Proceedings of the Conference “Modelling of transport processes in soils at
various scales in time and space” held in Leuven, Belgium, 24-26 November 1999, Leuven.
67–76.
Aertsens M., Wemaere I., and Wouters L. (2004) Spatial variability of transport parameters in
the Boom Clay. Applied Clay Science 26, 37–45.
Aertsens M., Dierckx A., Put M., Moors H., Janssen K., Van Ravestyn L., Van Gompel Mc.,
and De Cannière P. (2005a) Determination of the hydraulic conductivity, the product ηR of
the porosity η and the retardation factor R, and the apparent diffusion coefficient Dp on Boom
Clay cores from the Mol-1 drilling. Final report for Task 2-7 for NIRAS/ONDRAF, contract
N° CCHO-98/332; SCK•CEN contract N° KNT 90 98 1042. SCK•CEN report R-3503. Mol,
Belgium. 22 pp. without appendices.
Aertsens M., Dierckx A., Put M., Moors H., Janssen K., Van Ravestyn L., Van Gompel Mc.,
Van Gompel Ma., and De Cannière P. (2005b) Determination of the hydraulic conductivity,
ηR and the apparent diffusion coefficient on Ieper Clay and Boom Clay cores from the Doel-1
and Doel-2b drillings. Final report for Task 2-71 and 2-73 covering the period 1998-1999 for
NIRAS/ONDRAF, contract N° CCHO-98/332; SCK•CEN contract N° KNT 90 98 1042.
SCK•CEN report R-3589. Mol, Belgium. 18 pp. without appendices.
Aguerre S. and Frechou C. (2006) Development of a radiochemical separation for selenium
with the aim of measuring its isotope 79 in low and intermediate nuclear wastes by ICP-MS.
Talanta 69(3), 565–571. doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2005.10.028.
Akira Kitamure, Masahiro Shibata, and Hideo Kitao (2004) Solubility measurement of ironselenium compounds under reducing conditions. Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. (MRS) 807, 609–
614.
79/328
Albrecht Achim (2005-2009) Personal communication. Selenate reduction could be hindered
by the presence of nitrate salts conditioned in the bituminised waste (Cogema, Eurobitum).
Contact with Oremland. Informal scientific exchanges in the frame of the Mont Terri Bitumen
Nitrate (BN) experiment. See the Mont Terri Technical Discussion protocols and the mission
reports of Andra – SCK•CEN exchange meetings.
Albrecht A. (2008) The oxidation-reduction potential in the near-field of a high level waste
disposal site and the possible impact on Se speciation and migration. Presentation. Bioprota
International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere, 5 and 6 May 2008, Nagra Wettingen (CH).
In: Smith K. (Ed.) (2008) Report of Se-79 in the Biosphere. BIOPROTA Workshop, hosted
by Nagra, Wettingen, 5–6 May 2008, V2.0, Final. BIOPROTA – http://www.bioprota.com.
Amouroux D., Liss P.S., Tessier E., Hamren-Larsson, M. and Donard, O.F.X. (2001) Role of
oceans as biogenic sources of selenium. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 189 (3-4), 277–
283.
Anderson D.R. (1993) Use of conceptual models in performance assessments of repositories
for disposal of high-level and transuranic radioactive waste. pp. 139–143 in: OECD (1993)
The role of conceptual models in demonstrating repository post-closure safety. Proceedings of
a NEA Workshop, Paris, 16-18 November 1993. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). OECD
Documents. 190 pp. ISBN 92-64-14429-3.
Andersson K. and Allard B. (1983) Sorption of radionuclides on geologic media: a literature
survey. Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, KBS Report TR 83-07.
Andra (2005a) Dossier 2005 Argile – Tome Evolution phénoménologique du stockage
géologique. Rapport Andra n° C.RP.ADP.04.0025B. Collection « Les rapports », Andra
(France), 520 pp.
Voir: sélénium, p. 449, Encadré 10.7: La solubilité et la sorption des radionucléides dans les
argiles gonflantes;
Voir: sélénium, p. 453, Encadré 10.9: La solubilité et la sorption des radionucléides dans les
matériaux cimentaires;
Voir: sélénium, p. 463, Encadré 10.11: La solubilité et la sorption des radionucléides dans les
argilites du Callovo-Oxfordien.
Andra (2005b) Dossier 2005 Argile – Tome Référentiel du site Meuse/Haute-Marne –
Tome 1. Collection « Les rapports », Andra (France), 714 pp.
Andra (2005c) Dossier 2005 Argile – Tome évaluation de sûreté du stockage géologique.
Collection « Les rapports », Andra (France), 737 pp. Chap 5 – Evaluation des performances à
80/328
long terme du stockage.
Voir: 79Se, p. 231, Tableau 5.3-5: Valeurs des paramètres de transport et de rétention
chimique dans le béton des colis de déchets B – calcul de référence.
Voir: 79Se, p. 238, Tableau 5.3-10: Valeurs des paramètres hydrauliques, de transport et de
rétention chimique dans les zones fracturées et microfissurées – calcul de référence.
Andra (2005d) Dossier 2005 – Référentiel de connaissance et modèle d'inventaire des colis de
déchets à haute activité et à vie longue; Rapport Andra n° C.RP.AHVL.04.0006/A.
Andra (2005e) Dossier 2005 – Référentiel "Comportement des radionucléides et des toxiques
chimiques d'un stockage dans le Callovo-Oxfordien jusqu'à l'homme" – Site de Meuse/Haute
Marne; Rapport Andra n° C.RP.ASTR.04.0032.B.
Arai Y. and Sparks D.L. (2001) ATR–FTIR spectroscopic investigation on phosphate
adsorption mechanisms at the ferrihydrite–water interface. Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science 241(2), 317–326.
Araie H., Obata T., and Shiraiwa Y. (2003) Metabolism of selenium in a coccolithophorid,
Emiliania Huxleyi. J Plant Res. 116, 119.
Atkins P.W (1982) Physical Chemistry. Oxford University Press. Second edition.
ATSDR (2003) Toxicological profile for selenium (update September 2003). Selenium CAS #
7782-49-2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Atlanta, GA: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. ToxFAQs address:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html.
Avoscan L., Carrière M., Jehanneuf F., Collins R., Carrot F., Covès J., Gouget B. (2005)
Ralstonia metallidurans CH34 resistance to selenium oxyanions: Growth kinetics,
bioaccumulation and reduction. Human and Environmental Toxicology. Pierre Süe
Laboratory UMR 9956 CEA-CNRS, France.
Baes C.F. and Mesmer R.E. (1976) The hydrolysis of cations. 489 pp. Wiley Inc. New York.
Baeyens B. (1982) Strontium, cesium and europium retention in Boom Clay: a potential
repository site for nuclear waste. Ph.D. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
Baeyens B., Maes A., Cremers A., and Henrion P.N. (1985a) In situ physico-chemical
characterization of Boom Clay. Radioactive Waste Management and the Nuclear Fuel Cycle
6(3-4), 391–408.
81/328
Baeyens B., Maes A., Cremers A., and Henrion P.N. (1985b) Aging effects in Boom Clay.
Radioactive Waste Management and the Nuclear Fuel Cycle 6(3-4), 409–423.
Baeyens B. and Bradbury M. (1991) A physico-chemical characterisation technique for
determining the porewater chemistry in argillaceous rocks. PSI-Bericht Nr. 103. Paul
Scherrer Institut, Villigen.
Bradbury M.H. and Baeyens B. (1997a) Derivation of in situ Opalinus Clay porewater
compositions from experimental and geochemical modelling studies. PSI-Bericht Nr. 97-14.
Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen.
Baeyens B. and Bradbury M.H. (1997b) A mechanistic description of Ni and Zn sorption on
Na-montmorillonite. Part I. Titration and sorption measurements. Journal of Contaminant
Hydrology 27, 199–222.
Bradbury M.H. and Baeyens B. (1998) A physicochemical characterisation and geochemical
modelling approach for determining porewater chemistries in argillaceous rocks. Geochimica
et Cosmochimica Acta 62(5), 783–795.
Baeyens B. and Bradbury M.H. (2004) Cation exchange capacity measurements on illite
using the sodium and cesium isotope dilution technique: Effects of the index cation,
electrolyte concentration and competition modelling. Clays and Clay Minerals 52(4), 421–
431.
Bagnall K.W. (1966) The chemistry of selenium, tellurium, and polonium. 200 pp. Elsevier
Amsterdam, New York. Topics in inorganic and general chemistry. Monograph 7 (with
11 illustration and 25 tables).
Baker S., Baston G.M.N., Green A., Heath T.G., Ilett D.J., Pilkington N.J., Tweed C.J., and
Williams S.J. (1997) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom Clay – 2nd Progress Report, Issue 1
(September 1997).
Baker S., Baston G.M.N., Green A., Heath T.G., Pilkington N.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams
S.J. (1998) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom Clay – Task 2 and Task 3 Report. AEA
Technology Report AEAT-3313, March 1998.
Baker S., Baston G.M.N., Boult K.A., Brownsword M., Ilett D.J., Maning M.C., Pilkington
N.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams S.J. (2000) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom Clay – Phase II,
Part 1: 2nd Interim Report, AEAT/R/NS/0055 Issue 1 (February 2000).
82/328
Baker S., Baston G.M.N., Boult K.A., Brownsword M., Cowper M., Green A., Heath T., Ilett
D., Manning M., Pilkington N., Tweed C., and Williams S. (2000) Radionuclide solubilities
in Boom Clay. Final Report, Part 2 (AEA Technology, July 2000).
Baker S., Cowper M.M., Maning M.C., and Williams S.J. (2002) Plutonium and selenium
studies – First Progress Report, AEAT/R/NS/0553 Issue 1 (March 2002).
Balistrieri L.S. and Chao T.T. (1987) Selenium adsorption by goethite. Soil Science Society of
America Journal 51(5), 1145–1151.
Balistrieri L.S. and Chao T.T. (1990) Adsorption of selenium by amorphous iron
oxyhydroxide and manganese-dioxide. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 54(3), 739–751.
Bañuelos G., Terry N., LeDuc D.L., Pilon-Smits E.A.H., and Mackey B. (2005) Field trial of
transgenic Indian mustard plants shows enhanced phytoremediation of selenium-contaminated
sediment. Environment Science and Technology, online publication, ASAP:
doi:10.1021/es049035f.
Bar-Yosef B. (1987) Selenium desorption from C-kaolinite. Communications in Soil Science
and Plant Analysis. 18(4), 771–779. ISSN 0010-3624.
Bar-Yosef B. and Meek D. (1987) Selenium sorption by kaolinite and montmorillonite. Soil
Science 144(1), 11–19. ISSN 0038-075X.
Bar-Yosef B., Afik I., and Rosenberg R. (1988) Fluoride sorption by montmorillonite and
kaolinite. Soil Science 145(3), 194–200. ISSN 0038-075X.
Bar-Yosef B and Kafkafi U. (1978) Phosphate desorption from kaolinite suspensions. Soil
Science Society of America Journal 42(4), 570–574.
Bar-Yosef B, Kafkafi U, Rosenberg R, and Sposito G. (1988) Phosphorus adsorption by
kaolinite and montmorillonite: I. effect of time, ionic strength, and pH. Soil Science Society of
America Journal SSSJD4 52(6), 1580–1585. November-December 1988. 6 Fig., 1 Table, 26
ref. US-Israel Binational Agricultural R & D Grant I-401-82.
Baur Isabel Keller Regula (2002) The immobilisation of heavy metals and metalloids in
cement stabilised wastes: a study focussing on the selenium oxyanions SeO32– and SeO42–. A
dissertation submitted to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zürich for the degree of
Doctor of Natural Sciences. 112. Dissertation ETH-Zürich N°. 14 840. Zürich 2002.
83/328
Baur I. and Johnson C.A. (2003a) The solubility of selenate-AFt
(3 CaO · Al2O3 · 3 CaSeO4 · 37.5 H2O) and selenate-AFm (3 CaO · Al2O3 · CaSeO4 · x H2O).
Cement and Concrete Research 33(11), 1741–1748.
Baur I. and Johnson C.A. (2003b) Sorption of selenite and selenate to cement minerals.
Environmental Science and Technology 37(15), 3442–3447.
Bazer-Bachi F., Tevissen E., Descostes M., Grenut B., Meier P., Simonnot M.-O., and Sardin
M. (2006) Characterization of iodide retention on Callovo-Oxfordian argillites and its
influence on iodide migration. MIGRATION 2005, The 10th International Conference on the
Chemistry and Migration of Actinides and Fission Products in the Geosphere. Physics and
Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C 31(10-14), 517-522. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2006.04.015.
Bé M.-M., Chisté V., and Dulieu C. (2005) Périodes radioactives: Table de valeurs
recommandées. Half-lives: Table of recommended values. CEA, Laboratoire National Henri
Becquerel. Note Technique DETECS/LNHB/2005-8. Edition Fév. 2005. See T½ of 79Se =
2.95 × 105 anno on p. 3.
Bé M.-M., Chisté V., and Dulieu C. (2006) Périodes radioactives: Table de valeurs
recommandées. Half-lives: Table of recommended values. CEA, Laboratoire National Henri
Becquerel. Note Technique DETECS/LNHB/2006-58. Edition Oct. 2006.
See T½ of 79Se = 3.56 × 105 anno on p. 3.
Beaucaire C., Pitsch H., Toulhoat P., Mottellier S., and Louvat D. (2000) Regional fluid
characterisation and modelling of water-rock equilibria in the Boom Clay Formation and in
the Rupelian aquifer at Mol, Belgium. Applied Geochemistry 15, 667–686.
Beauwens T., De Cannière P., Moors H., Wang L., and Maes N. (2005) Studying the
migration behaviour of selenate in Boom Clay by electromigration. Engineering Geology 77,
285–293. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.07.019 (paper presented at the EREM’03 Conference).
Bell M.J. (1973) ORIGEN – The ORNL isotope generation and depletion code. Oak Ridge
National Laboratory. Report ORNL-4623.
Belzile N., Chen Y.W., and Xu R.R. (2000) Early diagenetic behaviour of selenium in
freshwater sediments. Applied Geochemistry 15(10), 1439–1454.
84/328
Benjamin M.M. and Bloom N.S. (1981) Effects of strong binding of anionic adsorbates on
adsorption of trace metals on amorphous iron oxyhydroxide. In: Adsorption from aqueous
solution. Tewari P.H. (ed.) (1981) Plenum Press, New York, pp. 41–60.
Berner U. (2002) Project Opalinus Clay: radionuclides limits in the near-field of a repository
for spent fuel and vitrified HLW. PSI Report (PSI Bericht Nr 02-22, ISSN 1019-0643)
(December 2002).
Berner U. (2002) In: The use of thermodynamic databases in performance assessment,
Workshop Proceedings, OECD-NEA, Paris 2002, pp. 139–149.
Bertolino F.A., Torriero A.A.J., Salinas E., Olsina R., Martinez L.D., Raba J. (2006)
Speciation analysis of selenium in natural water using square-wave voltammetry after
preconcentration on activated carbon. Analytica Acta.
Bethke C.M. (2000) The Geochemist’s Workbench. A user’s Guide to Rxn, Act 2, Tact, React
and Gtplot. Release 3.1. University of Illinois.
Bienvenu P., Cassette P., Andreoletti G., Bé M., Comte J., and Lépy M. (2007) A new
determination of 79Se half-life. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 65 (3), 355-364.
doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2006.09.009.
Bienvenu P., Ferreux L., Andreoletti G., Arnal N., Lépy M., and Bé M. (2009) Determination
of 126Sn half-life from ICP-MS and gamma spectrometry measurements. Radiochimica Acta
97 (12), 687–694. doi:10.1524/ract.2009.1673.
BIOPROTA (2008) International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere, 5 and 6 May 2008.
Hosted by Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland. http://www.bioprota.com (short citation).
BIOPROTA (2008) Key issues in biosphere aspects of assessment of the long-term impact of
contaminant releases associated with radioactive waste management. Report of an
International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere. 5–6 May 2008. Hosted by Nagra, Wettingen,
Switzerland. Editor: K. Smith (2008) Version 2.0, Final, June 2008.
http://www.bioprota.com. (full citation).
Blaylock M.J. and James B.R. (1993) Selenite and selenate quantification by hydride
generation atomic spectrometry, ion chromatography, and colorimetry. Journal of
Environmental Quality 22(4), 851–857.
85/328
Blaylock M.J., Tawfic T.A., and Vance G.F. (1995) Modeling selenite sorption in reclaimed
coal mine soil materials. Soil Science 159 (1), 43–48.
Bolan N.S., Syers J.K., and Tillman R.W. (1986) Ionic strength effects on surface charge and
adsorption of phosphate and sulphate by soils. European Journal of Soil Science 37(3), 379–
388. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.1986.tb00371.x.
Bond K.A., Heath T.G., and Tweed C.J. (1997) HATCHES a referenced thermodynamic
database for chemical equilibrium studies. Nirex Report NSS/R379.
Bonhoure I., Baur I., Wieland E., Johnson C.A., and Scheidegger A.M. (2006) Uptake of
Se(IV/VI) oxyanions by hardened cement paste and cement minerals: An X-ray absorption
spectroscopy study. Cement and Concrete Research 36 (1), 91–98.
Bostick B.C. and Fendorf S. (2003) Arsenite sorption on troilite (FeS) and pyrite (FeS2),
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 67(5), 909–921.
Boulanger D. (2006) Characterization of irradiated fuel assemblies. Part 2:Technical Note.
Report BelgoNucléaire, BN ref. 0204246 / 221 – “A”.
Boult K.A., Cowper M.M., Heath T.G., Sato H., Shibutani T., and Yui M. (1998) Towards an
understanding of the sorption of U(VI) and Se(IV) on sodium bentonite. Journal of
Contaminant Hydrology 35 (1-3), 141–150.
Boyle-Wight E.J., Katz L.E., and Hayes K.F. (2002) Spectroscopic studies of the effects of
selenate and selenite on cobalt sorption to gamma-Al2O3, Environmental Science &
Technology 36, 1219–1225.
Bradbury M.H. and Baeyens B. (1997) A mechanistic description of Ni and Zn sorption on
Na-montmorillonite. Part II: modelling, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 27, 223–248.
Bradbury M.H. and Baeyens B. (2005) Modelling titration data and the sorption of Sr(II),
Ni(II), Eu(III) and U(VI) on Na-illite. 71 pp. PSI Nuclear Energy and Safety Research
Department – Laboratory for Waste Management, Villigen, Switzerland. ISSN 1019-0643.
Brennetot R., Pierry L., Atamyan T., Favre G., and Vailhen D. (2008) Optimisation of the
operating conditions of a quadrupole ICP-MS with hexapole collision/reaction cell for the
analysis of selenium-79 in spent nuclear fuel using experimental designs. Journal of
Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 23 (10), 1350-1358. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from
doi:10.1039/b802820f.
86/328
Brook L.S. (1952) The vapour pressures of tellurium and selenium. Journal of the American
Chemical Society 74, 227–229.
Brookins D.G. (1988) Eh – pH diagrams for geochemistry. Springer-Verlag. Berlin
Heidelberg New York London Paris Tokyo. 176 pp., 98 Figures and 61 Tables. For selenium,
see, Fig. 4: Eh – pH diagram for part of the system Se-O-H, pp. 18 and 19.
Bros R., Hiroshi H., Gento K., and Toshihiko O. (2003) Mobilization and mechanisms of
retardation in the Oklo natural reactor zone 2 (Gabon) – inferences from U, REE, Zr, Mo and
Se isotopes. Applied Geochemistry 18 (12), 1807–1824. doi:10.1016/S0883-2927(03)001136.
Brower F.M. and Graham E.L. (1958) Some chemical reactions of Colorado oil shale
kerogen. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 50 (7), 1059–1060. doi:10.1021/ie50583a043.
Brown G.E. Jr., Catalano J.G., Templeton A.S., Trainor T.P., Farges F., Bostick B.C.,
Kendelewicz T., Doyle C.S., Spormann A.M., Revill K., Morin G., Juillot F., and Calas G.
(2005) Environmental interfaces, heavy metals, microbes, and plants: applications of XAFS
spectroscopy and related synchrotron radiation methods to environmental science. Physica
Scripta 115, 80–87. doi:10.1238/physica.topical.115a00080.
Bruggeman C., Vancluysen J., and Maes A. (2002) New selenium solution speciation method
by ion chromatography plus gamma counting and its application to FeS2–controlled reducing
conditions. Radiochimica Acta 90(9-11), 629–635.
Bruggeman C., Maes A., Vancluysen J., and Vandemussele P. (2004) Selenite reduction in
Boom Clay: effect of FeS2, clay minerals and dissolved organic matter. Annex 8 to WP 3,
pp. 18, of the extended Final Scientific and Technical Report of the EC Trancom-II Project.
In: Maes N. coordinator et al. (2004e,f) Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in a
reducing clay sediment (TRANCOM-II). SCK•CEN-BLG-988 (04/NMa/P-50).
Bruggeman C., Maes A., Vancluysen J., and Vandemussele P. (2005) Selenite reduction in
Boom Clay: effect of FeS2, clay minerals and dissolved organic matter. Environmental
Pollution 137(2), 209–221. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02697491.
DOI: doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2005.02.010.
Bruggeman C. (2006) Assessment of the geochemical behaviour of selenium oxyanions under
Boom Clay geochemical conditions. 118 pp. PhD Thesis N° 733 (2006). Dissertationes de
Agricultura. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Faculteit Bio-ingenieurswetenschappen,
87/328
Department Microbiële en Moleculaire Systemen, Centrum voor Oppervlaktechemie en
Katalyse.
Bruggeman C. and Maes A. (2007) Outlines of selenium redox geochemistry. Mobile fission
and activation products in nuclear waste disposal. International workshop. L’Hermitage, La
Baule – France, January 16-19, 2007. http://mofap07.in2p3.fr/. Proceedings to appear as a
Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA, OECD) publication.
Bruggeman C., Aertsens M., Maes N., and Salah S. (2010) Iodine retention and migration
behaviour in Boom Clay – Topical report, First Full Draft. External Report SCK•CENER119, SCK•CEN, Mol, Belgium. PDF available at http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/
http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/simple-search
Bruggeman C., Maes N., Aertsens M., and De Cannière P. (2009) Tritiated water retention
and migration behaviour in Boom Clay – SFC1 level 5 report: First Full Draft,
ONDRAF/NIRAS report NIROND-TR-2009-16.
Bruggeman C., Maes N., Martens E., Govaerts J., Jacops E., Van Gompel M., and
Van Ravestyn L. (2010) Technetium retention and migration behaviour in Boom Clay –
Topical report, First Full Draft. External Report SCK•CEN-ER101, SCK•CEN, Mol,
Belgium. PDF available at http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/
http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/simple-search
Bruggeman C., Salah S., Maes N., Wang L., Dierckx A., and Ochs M. (2008) Outline of the
experimental approach adopted by SCK•CEN for developing radionuclide sorption
parameters. Mol, Belgium: SCK•CEN, 18 pp. External Report of the Belgian Nuclear
Research Centre; ER-73; CCHO 2004-2470/00/00, DS251-A44/2.1. – ISSN 1782-2335.
http://publications.sckcen.be/dspace/handle/10038/908 or, http://hdl.handle.net/10038/908
Bruno J., Bosbach D., Kulik, D., and Navrotsky A. (2006) Preparation of guidelines for the
evaluation of thermodynamic data for solid solutions: A state-of-the-art report. In
preparation, 264 pp.
Bueno M. and Potin-Gautier M. (2002) Solid–Phase extraction for the simultaneous
preconcentration of organic (seleno-cysteine) and inorganic [Se(IV), Se(VI)] selenium in
natural waters. Journal of Chromatography A 963, 185–193.
Buerge-Weirich D., Behra P., and Sigg L. (2003) Adsorption of copper, nickel, and cadmium
on goethite in the presence of organic ligands. Aquatic Geochemistry 9, 65–85.
88/328
Burns P.C. and Finch R. (eds.) (1999) Uranium: mineralogy, geochemistry and the
environment. Reviews in Mineralogy, volume 38. 679 pp. ISBN 0-939950-50-2. Series editor:
Paul H. Ribbe. Mineralogical Society of America. Washington DC. ISSN 0275-0279. See
uranyl selenites, Table 17, p. 136–137. See also piretite reported by Vochten et al. (1996).
Cadelli N., Cottone G., Bertozzi G., and Girardi F. (1984) PAGIS, summary report of
phase 1: a common methodological approach based on European data and models. EC,
Luxembourg, Report EUR 9220 EN.
Cai Y. and Braids O.C. (Editor) (2004) Biogeochemistry of environmentally important trace
elements. 452 pp. (ACS Symposium Series). American Chemical Society. ISBN:
0841238057.
Carignan J. and Wen H. (2007) Scaling NIST SRM 3149 for Se isotope analysis and isotopic
variations of natural samples. Chemical Geology 242 (3-4), 347–350.
Carignan J. (2009) Personal webpage with publications of Jean Carignan on selenium
geochemistry. CNRS Research Engineer, CRPG, Nancy University. Retrieved on January 5,
2010, from http://www.crpg.cnrs-nancy.fr/Equipes/FR/carignan.html.
Carvalho K.M. and Martin D.F. (2001) Removal of aqueous selenium by four aquatic plants.
Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 39, 33–36.
Cassette P., Chartier F., Isnard H., Fréchou C., Laszak I., Degros J., et al. (2010)
Determination of 93Zr decay scheme and half-life. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 68 (1),
122–130. doi:10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.08.011.
Catalano J.G., Zhang Z., Fenter P., and Bedzyk M.J. (2006) Inner-sphere adsorption geometry
of Se(IV) at the hematite (100)-water interface. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
297(2), 665–671.
CEA (2006) Le Journal du Centre CEA de Saclay, 2eme Trimestre 2006. N° 32. Dossier Le
Temps, Mesurer des durées. See T½ of 79Se on p. 5.
Chabroullet Christophe (2005) Étude de la remobilisation d’éléments traces à partir d'un sol
de surface contaminé: Influence du vieillissement des composés organiques du sol sur la
remobilisation du sélénium. Journées des thèses IRSN, 19-21 septembre 2005. Début de
thèse: 20 Octobre 2003 (2ème année de thèse). Ecole doctorale Terre Univers Environnement
(TUE); Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble. Directeur de Thèse: Jean-Paul Gaudet LTHE
89/328
(Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble). Responsable de Thèse IRSN/DEI/SECRE/LRE:
Arnaud Martin-Garin.
Chao, T.T., and Sanzolone, R.F. (1989) Fractionation of soil selenium by sequential partial
dissolution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53, 385–392.
Charlet L., Scheinost A.C., Tournassat C., Greneche J.M., Géhin A., Fernández-Martinez A.,
Coudert S., Tisserand D., and Brendle J. (2007) Electron transfer at the mineral/water
interface: Selenium reduction by ferrous iron sorbed on clay. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta 71 (23), 5731–5749. doi:10.1016/j.gca.2007.08.024.
Charlson R.J., Lovelock J.E., Andreae M.O., and Warren S.G. (1987) Oceanic phytoplankton,
atmospheric sulphur, cloud albedo and climate. Nature 326, 655–661. doi:10.1038/326655a0.
Chaves L.H.G. (2005) The role of green rust in the environment: a review. Rev. bras. eng.
agríc. ambient. [online], 9(2), 284–288. Available from: ISSN 1415-4366.
doi:10.1590/S1415-43662005000200021. Accessed on: 24 Nov 2006.
Chen F., Burns P.C., and Ewing R.C. (1999) 79Se: Geochemical and crystallo-chemical
retardation mechanisms. Journal of Nuclear Materials 275, 81–94.
Chen F., Burns P.C., and Ewing R.C. (2000) Near-field behavior of 99Tc during the oxidative
alteration of spent nuclear fuel. Journal of Nuclear Materials 278, 225–232.
Christl M., Wacker L., Lippold J., Synal H., and Suter M. (2007) Beam Interactions with
Materials and Atoms: Protactinium-231: A new radionuclide for AMS. Nuclear Instruments
and
Methods
in
Physics
Research
Section
B
262 (2),
379–384.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.05.017.
Christensen B.T., Bertelsen F., and Gissel-Nielsen G. (1989) Selenite fixation by soil
particle-size separates. Journal of Soil Science 40, 641–647.
Claret F., Lerouge C., Laurioux T., Bizi M., Conte T., Ghestem JP., Wille G., Sato T.,
Gaucher E.C., Giffaut E., Tournassat C. (2010) Natural iodine in a clay formation:
implications for iodine fate in geological disposals. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 74,
16–29.
Coget, Fernand (1966) Etude des précipités anodiques en électro-raffinage du cuivre.
Université Catholique de Louvain (UCL). SC/Laboratoire de Chimie Minérale. Thèse de
90/328
doctorat. Promoteur R. Breckpot. Communication personnelle: les boues anodiques
contiennent du sélénium.
Combs G.F, Jr. and Gray W.P. (1998) Chemopreventive agents: Selenium. Pharmacol. Ther.
79, 179–92.
Comte J., Brochard E., Bienvenu P., Genet M. (2000) Dosage du sélénium et de l'étain par
ICP/MS. (DCC/DESD/SCCD/LARC, CEA) Congrès/colloque: Journées Scientifiques Forum
LABO – 2000, 28/03/2000 – 31/03/2000, Paris, France.
Comte J. (2001) Dosage des radionucléides à vie longue 79Se et 126Sn dans les solutions de
produits
de
fission
issues
du
traitement
des
combustibles
nucléaires.
(DEN/CAD/DED/SAMRA/LARC, CEA). Thèse de l’Université Paris XI – UFR Scientifique
d'Orsay. 19/11/2001. 191 pages.
Comte J. et al. (2001) Dosage des radionucléides 79Se et 126Sn dans les solutions de produits
de fission issues du traitement des combustibles usés. Congrès/colloque: 3ème Université
d'Eté: Mesures et Analyses des Substances Radioactives – 2001. 17/09/2001 – 21/09/2001,
Méjannes le Clap, France.
Comte J., Bienvenu P., Point C., Excoffier E., et al. (2002a) Détermination de l'étain 126 par
ICP/MS et spectrométrie gamma dans les solutions de produits de fission issues du traitement
des combustibles nucléaires. Radiochimica Acta.
Comte J. et al. (2002b) Détermination du 79Se par ETV-ICP/MS dans les solutions de produits
de fission issus du traitement des combustibles nucléaires. Journal of Analytical Atomic
Spectrometry.
Comte J., Bienvenu P., Brochard E., Femandez J.-M. Andreoletti G. (2003) Determination of
selenium-79 in solutions of fission products after pre-treatment by ion exchange
chromatography and ETV-ICP-MS. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 18(7), 702–
707. doi:10.1039/b209253k. ISSN 0267-9477.
Coppin F., Chabroullet C., Martin-Garin A., Balesdent J. and Gaudet J.P., (2006)
Methodological approach to asses the effect of soil ageing on selenium behaviour: first results
concerning mobility and solid partition of selenium. Biology and Fertility of Soils 42, 379–
386.
Cordfunke E.H.P. and Konings R.J.M. (1988) Chemical interactions in water-cooled nuclear
fuel: a thermochemical approach. Journal of Nuclear Materials 152, 301–309.
91/328
Corvilain B., Contempre B., Longombe A.O., Goyens P., Gervy-Decoster C., Lamy F.,
Vanderpas J.B., and Dumont J.E. (1993) Selenium and the thyroid: How the relationship was
established. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 57 (2 Suppl.), 244S–248S.
Cowper M.M. and Williams S.J. (2003) Plutonium and selenium studies – third Progress
Report, AEAT/R/NS/0697 (September 2003).
Crusius J. and Thomson J. (2003) Mobility of authigenic rhenium, silver and selenium during
post-depositional oxidation in marine sediments. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 67 (2),
265–273.
Cui D. and Spahiu K. (2002) The reduction of U(VI) on corroded iron under anoxic
conditions. Radiochimica Acta 90 (9-11), 623–628. doi:10.1524/ract.2002.90.9-11_2002.623.
Cui D., Spahiu K., and Wersin P. (2003a) Redox reactions of iron and uranium dioxide in
simulated cement pore water under anoxic conditions. Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Series Vol 757
Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXXVI, p. 427.
Cui D., Low J., Lundstrom M., and Spahiu K. (2004) Spent fuel leaching under anoxic
conditions and the effect of canister materials. Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste
Management XXVII. Kalmar; Sweden, 15-19 June 2003. pp. 89–94.
Cui D., Scheidegger A., Puranen A., Wersin P., and Spahiu K. (2006) On the interactions
between iron canister materials and fission product 79Se under simulated deep repository
conditions. 30 pp. Progress report to the Near-Field Processes (NF-Pro) European project.
NFPro/RTDC2/WP5.
http://project.nf-pro.org/workspaces/rtdc2/deliverables/
Fe-Se-Deliverable 2[1].5.7.doc
Cullen W.R. and Reimer K.J. (1989) Arsenic speciation in the environment. Chemical
Reviews 89 (4), 713–764. doi:10.1021/cr00094a002.
Curti E., Kulik D.A., and Tits J. (2005) Solid solution of trace Eu(III) in calcite:
thermodynamic evaluation of experimental data over a wide range of pH and pCO2.
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69, 1721–1737.
Cutter G.A. (1978) Species determination of selenium in natural waters. Analytica Chimica
Acta 98(1), 59–66.
92/328
Cutter G.A. (1982) Selenium in reducing waters. Science 217(4562), 829–831.
Cutter G.A. and Bruland K.W. (1984) The marine biogeochemistry of selenium: a reevaluation. Limnology and Oceanography 29 (6), 1179–1192.
Cutter G.A. and Cutter L.S. (2004) Selenium biogeochemistry in the San Francisco Bay
estuary: changes in the water column behaviour. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 61,
463–476.
Dacey J.W.H. and Wakeham S. (1986) Oceanic dimethylsulfide: production during
zooplankton grazing on phytoplankton. Science 233 (4770), 1314–1316.
doi:10.1126/science.233.4770.1314.
Danbara A. and Shiraiwa Y. (1999) Requirement of selenium for the growth and selection of
adequate culture media in a marine coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi. Bulletin of the
Society of Sea Water Science, Japan 53 (6), 476–484.
Danbara A. and Shiraiwa Y. (2007) The requirement of selenium for the growth of marine
coccolithophorids, Emiliania huxleyi, Gephyrocapsa oceanica and Helladosphaera sp.
(Prymnesiophyceae). Plant and Cell Physiology 40 (7), 762–766.
DAMRI / DTA / CEA (1991) Radionucléides. pp. 190. DAMRI, Département des
Applications et de la Métrologie des Rayonnements Ionisants (CEA, Direction des
Technologies Avancées). Edition Elaboration, Plessis Robinson. Reédition Octobre 1991.
ISBN: 2-906483-03-6. Recueil regroupant les données principales relatives aux schémas de
désintégration des radionucléides les plus utiles. Voir 75Se p. 34.
Darcheville O., Février L., Haichar F.Z., O. Berge, Martin-Garin A., P. Renault., (2007)
Aqueous, solid and gaseous partitioning of selenium in a sandy soil under different
microbiological states. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity.
Davis J.A. and Leckie J.O. (1980) Surface ionization and complexation at the oxide/water
interface. III. Adsorption of anions. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 74, 32–43.
Davis J.A. and Kent D.B. (1990) Surface complexation modeling in aqueous geochemistry.
pp. 177 – 260. Chapter 5 in: Hochella M.F. Jr. and White A.F. Editors (1990) Mineral-water
interface geochemistry. 603 pp. Volume 23 of Reviews in mineralogy. Series Editor: Ribbe
P.H. (1990) Mineralogical Society of America. Washington, D.C. See Figures 13c and 14 on
p. 201: sorption edges of selenite and selenate oxyanions on ferrihydrite.
93/328
Davis J.A., Kent D.B., Rea B.A., Maest A.S., and Garabedian S.P. (1993) Influence of redox
environment and aqueous speciation on metal transport in groundwater: preliminary results of
trace injection studies. pp. 223–273. In: Metals in groundwater. Edited by Allen H.E., Perdue
M.E., and Brown D.S. Lewis Publishers.
DeBose J.L., Lema S.C., and Nevitt G.A. (2008) Dimethylsulfoniopropionate as a foraging
cue for reef fishes. Science 319 (5868), 1356. doi:10.1126/science.1151109.
De Cannière P. (1989) Etude de la radiolyse α et γ du carbonate de calcium. Contribution à la
datation par résonance paramagnétique électronique. Thèse de doctorat. Université
Catholique de Louvain, UCL, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique. See: the effect of nitrate
incorporated in calcite single crystals doped with 210Po: very typical triplet fingerprint
dominating the ESR spectra. Concentration up to 3 000 ppm of nitrate were measured in
ultrapure analytical grade of synthetic calcite. So, calcite could incorporate selenite as
observed for nitrate.
De Cannière et al. (1990 – 1999) Migration Studies. In: Geological disposal of conditioned
high-level and long lived radioactive waste. Reports R-2901/R2922 (1991), R-2948/R-2976
(1992), R-2968 (1993), R-3026/R-3053 (1994), R-3080 (1995), R-3088 (1996), R-3135
(1996), R-3240 (1998), R3380 (1999), SCK•CEN, Mol, Belgium (
De Cannière P., Wang L., Moors H., and Put M.J. (1995) Migration behaviour of 75Se in
Boom Clay under in situ conditions. Scientific communication presented as a poster at the
Fifth International Conference on the: Chemistry and migration behaviour of actinides and
fission products in the geosphere. Migration’95 Conference held in Saint-Malo (France),
September 10 – 15, 1995. Book of Abstracts, pp. 30–31, Abstract N° PB2-01, Unpublished.
De Cannière P., Moors H., Lolivier P., De Preter P., and Put M. (1996) Laboratory and in situ
migration experiments in the Boom Clay. 51 pp. European Commission, Nuclear Science and
Technology. Work carried out under a cost-sharing contract with the European Atomic
Energy Community in the framework of its fourth R&D programme entitled “Management
and storage of radioactive waste” (1990-1994) Part A, Task 4: “Disposal of radioactive
waste”. Contract N° FI2W-CT90-0039 with the European Commission, Nuclear Science and
Technology. Final report EUR 16 927 EN. See section 3.2.7 Selenium and Table 3.12: results
of the migration experiments with selenium under reducing conditions, pp. 26–29.
De Cannière P., Bruggeman C., Maes A., Wang L., Maes N., Beauwens T., Moors H.,
Aertsens M., Cowper M.M., and Williams S.J. (2003) Solubility, sorption and migration
behaviour of selenium in Boom Clay. Scientific communication presented as a poster at the
Ninth International Conference on the: Chemistry and migration behaviour of actinides and
94/328
fission products in the geosphere. Migration’03 Conference held in Gyeongju (Korea),
September 21 – 26, 2003. Book of Abstracts, pp. 140–141, Abstract N° PB1-6, Unpublished.
De Cannière P., Aoki K., Arcos D., Bath A., Boisson J.-Y., Courdouan A., Degueldre C.,
Fernández A.M., Fierz T., Gäbler H-E., Gaucher E., Gautschi A., Griffaut L., Hernán P.,
Mäder U., Mazurek M., Mettler S., Pearson F.J., Schippers A., Scholtis A., Schwyn B.,
Sergeant C., Stroes-Gascoyne S., Tournassat C., Turrero M.J., Vinsot A., Waber H.N., Wersin
P. (2008) Chapter 6: Geochemistry and microbiology experiments. pp. 69–86.
In: Paul Bossart and Marc Thury (editors) (2008) Mont Terri Rock Laboratory – Project,
Programme 1996 to 2007 and Results. Berichte der Landesgeologie – Rapports du Service
géologique national – Rapporti del Servizio geologico nazionale – Reports of the Swiss
Geological Survey N° 3. 443 pp. – Swiss Geological Survey, Wabern, 2008. ISSN 16619285. ISBN 978-3-302-40016-7. http://www.swisstopo.ch.
De Craen M., Van Geet M., Wang L., and Put M., (2004) High sulphate concentrations in
squeezed Boom Clay pore water: evidence of oxidation of clay cores. Physics and Chemistry
of the Earth 29(1), 91–103.
De Craen M., Wang L., Van Geet M., and Moors H. (2004) Geochemistry of Boom Clay pore
water at the Mol site – Status 2004. 179 pp. Scientific Report SCK•CEN-BLG-990
(04/MDC/P-48). September 2004. Unclassified report: ISSN 1379-2407. Waste and Disposal
Department.
Delécaut G. (2004) The geochemical behaviour of uranium in the Boom Clay. Ph.D. Thesis of
Catholic University of Louvain (UCL) made in the laboratories of SCK•CEN Mol. Louvainla-Neuve, academic year 2003-2004. pp. 215. UCL Promoter P. Sonnet, SCK•CEN mentor
P. De Cannière. See a.o., Section 7.2.1.1 Pyrite preparation, p. 143.
Deliens M., Piret P., and Comblain G. (1981) Les minéraux secondaires du Zaïre. Editions du
Musée Royal de l’Afrique Centrale, Tervuren, Belgium. 113 pp.
Deniau I. (2002) Caractérisation géochimique du kérogène associé à l'argile de Boom (Mol,
Belgique) et évolution sous divers stress thermiques, 213 pp. Thèse. Université Paris VI.
Deniau I. (2004) Étude cinétique et moléculaire des produits gazeux et liquides générés par la
matière organique insoluble de l'argile de Boom sous divers stress thermiques. Rapport de
synthèse, IRSN, Janvier 2003 – Décembre 2004, 50 pp.
Deniau I., Derenne S., Beaucaire C., Pitsch H., and Largeau C. (2001) Morphological and
chemical features of a kerogen from the underground Mol laboratory (Boom Clay Formation,
95/328
Oligocene, Belgium): structure, source organisms and formation pathways. Organic
Geochemistry 32, 1343-1356.
Deniau I., Derenne S., Beaucaire C., Pitsch H., and Largeau C. (2004) Occurrence and nature
of thermolabile compounds in the Boom Clay kerogen (Oligocene, underground Mol
laboratory, Belgium). Organic Geochemistry 35, 91-108.
Deniau I., Derenne S., Beaucaire C., Pitsch H., and Largeau C. (2005a) Simulation of thermal
stress influence on the Boom Clay kerogen (Oligocene, Belgium) in relation with long-term
storage of high activity nuclear waste. I – Study of generated soluble compounds. Applied
Geochemistry 20, 587-597.
Deniau I., Behar F., Largeau C., De Cannière P., Beaucaire C., and Pitsch H. (2005b)
Determination of kinetic parameters and simulation of early CO2 production from the Boom
Clay kerogen under low thermal stress. Applied Geochemistry 20, 2097-2107.
Deniau I., Lorant F., Pitsch H., De Cannière P., Beaucaire C., Behar F., and Largeau C.
(2006) Molecular and kinetic study of gaseous and liquid compounds generated by the
insoluble organic matter (kerogen) of the Boom Clay under various thermal stresses. Final
report for the post-doc of Isabelle Deniau. Collaboration between IRSN, ENSCP, IFP, and
SCK•CEN with the financial support of ONDRAF/NIRAS.
Deniau I., Devol-Brown I., Derenne S., Behar F., Largeau C. (2008) Comparison of the bulk
geochemical features and thermal reactivity of kerogens from Mol (Boom Clay), Bure
(Callovo–Oxfordian argillite) and Tournemire (Toarcian shales) underground research
laboratories. Science of the Total Environment 389(2-3), 475-485.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.09.013.
De Preter P., Put M., De Cannière P., and Moors H. (1992) Migration of radionuclides in
Boom Clay. State-of-the-art report, June 1992. Study performed under cost sharing contract
for the European Commission. Contract FI2W/0039. Report NIROND 92-07. See description
of the C4 type percolation experiments in Appendix 1: Different types of migration
experiments, pp. 1.7, 1.8 (type C4) and Fig. 1.1.1 (type C4). Bruggeman equation: see p. 4.
Descostes M., Mercier F., Beaucaire C., Zuddas P., and Trocellier P. (2001) Nature and
distribution of chemical species on oxidized pyrite surface: Complementarity of XPS and
nuclear microprobe analysis. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 181,
603–609.
96/328
De Silva V., Woznichak M.M., Burns K.L., Grant K.B., and May S.W. (2004) Selenium
redox cycling in the protective effects of organoselenides against oxidant-induced DNA
damage. Journal of the American Chemical Society 126 (8), 2409–2413.
Deverel S.J (1986) Distribution and mobility of selenium and other trace elements in shallow
ground water of the western San Joaquin Valley, California (Regional aquifer-system
analysis). 12 pp. U.S. Geological Survey. ASIN: B00070YG3A.
Devillanova F.A. (Editor) (2007) Handbook of chalcogen chemistry: new perspectives in
sulfur, selenium and tellurium. 740 pp. Royal Society of Chemistry. 1st edition. ISBN:
0854043667.
Devivier K., Devol-Brown I., and Savoye S. (2004) Study of iodide sorption to the argillite of
Tournemire in alkaline media. Proceedings of the Reims 2002 Andra International Workshop
on Clays in Natural and Engineered Barriers for Radioactive Waste Confinement. Applied
Clay Science 26(1-4), 171–179. doi:10.1016/j.clay.2003.07.010.
de Wouters R. (2005) Characterization of irradiated fuel assemblies. Part 1: Radiological
inventory. Issued September, 2005. Belgatom, avenue Ariane, 4 – B-1200 Brussels. Technical
Note. Report BN ref. 0204246 / 221 – “A” – 1.
Dierckx A., Maes A., Henrion P., and De Cannière P. (1997) Potentiometric titration of humic
substances extracted from Boom Clay. pp. 573 578 in: Drozd J., Gonet S.S., Senesi N. and
Weber J., eds. (1997) The role of humic substances in the ecosystems and in environmental
protection. PTSH – Polish Society of Humic Substances. Polish Chapter of the International
Humic Substances Society. Wroclaw, Poland (1997). Proceedings of the 8th meeting of the
International Humic Substances Society, Wroclaw, Poland, September 9-14, 1996.
Dierckx A. (1997) Boom Clay in situ porewater chemistry. SCK•CEN Report BLG-734. 3 pp.
February 1997.
Dierckx A., Put M., De Cannière P., Wang L., Maes N., Aertsens M., Maes A., Vancluysen J.,
Verdickt W., Gielen R., Christiaens M., Warwick P., Hall A., and van der Lee J. (2000)
Transport of radionuclides due to complexation with organic matter in Clay formations
(Trancom-Clay). European Commission, Nuclear Science and Technology. Contract N°
FI4W-CT95-0013. Final Report EUR 19 135. 170 pp.
Dong K., He M., Jiang S., Wong H., Qiu J., Guan Y., et al. (2007) Beam Interactions with
Materials and Atoms: Measurement of trace 129I concentrations in CsI powder and organic
97/328
liquid scintillator with accelerator mass spectrometry. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in
Physics Research Section B 259 (1), 271–276. doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.01.232.
Dowdleand P. and Oremland R. (1998) Microbial oxidation of elemental selenium in soil
slurries and bacterial cultures. Environmental Science and Technology 32, 3749–3755.
Drotar A., Fall L.R., Mishalanie E.A., Tavernier J.E., and Fall R. (1987) Enzymatic
methylation of sulfide, selenide, and organic thiols by Tetrahymena thermophila. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 53(9), 2111–2118.
Duc M., Lefevre G., and Fedoroff M. (2006) Sorption of selenite ions on hematite. Journal of
Colloid and Interface Science 298(2), 556–563.
Duc M., Lefevre G., Fedoroff M., Jeanjean J., Rouchaud J.C., Monteil-Rivera F., Dumonceau
J., and Milonjic S. (2003) Sorption of selenium anionic species on apatites and iron oxides
from aqueous solutions. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 70 (1-2), 61–72,
http://ejournals.ebsco.com/direct.asp?ArticleID=N69JL1D1R64AEVGCR68P
Dungan R.S. and Frankenberger W.T. (1999) Microbial transformations of selenium and the
bioremediation of seleniferous environments. Bioremediation Journal 3 (3), 171–188.
doi:10.1080/10889869991219299
Dungan R.S. and Frankenberger W.T., Jr. (2000) Factors affecting the volatilization of
dimethylselenide by Enterobacter cloacae SLD1a-1. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1353–1358.
Dungan R.S. and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2001) Biotransformation of selenium by
Enterobacter cloacae SLD1 a-1: Formation of dimethyl selenide. Biogeochemistry 55, 73–86.
Dungan R.S., Yates S.R., and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2002) Vadose zone processes and
chemical transport. Volatilization and degradation of soil-applied dimethylselenide. Journal
of Environmental Quality 31, 2045–2050.
Durand B. and Nicaise G. (1980) Procedures for kerogen isolations. In: Durand B. (Eds.),
Kerogen. Insoluble organic matter from sedimentary rocks. Technip, Paris, pp. 35-53.
Dworkin M. (Editor-in-Chief), Falkow S., Rosenberg E., Schleifer K.H., and Stackebrandt E.
(Editors) (2006) The prokaryotes. Third edition. A handbook on the biology of bacteria.
Volume 2: Ecophysiology and biochemistry. 1107 pp. Springer. New York, Singapore. ISBN10: 0-387-25492-7. doi:10.1007/0-387-30742-7.
98/328
Dzombak D.A. and Morel F.M.M. (1990) Surface complexation modeling – Hydrous ferric
oxide, 393 pp. A Wiley-Interscience Publication. John Wiley & Sons Inc. New York –
Chichester – Brisbane – Toronto – Singapore. ISBN 0-471-63731-9. See tables and figures
from: 7.6 Sulfate, pp. 219 – 220; 7.7 Selenate, pp. 221 – 225; 7.8 Selenite, pp. 226 – 227; and
7.9 Thiosulfate, pp. 228 – 229. See also Figure 10.3 pp. 310.
EC (1979) European catalogue of geological formations having favourable characteristics
for the disposal of solidified high-level and/or long-lived radioactive wastes. Volume 2:
Belgium. EC, Luxembourg.
Elleouet C., Quentel F., and Madec C. (1996) Determination of inorganic and organic
selenium species in natural waters by cathodic stripping voltammetry. Water Research 30(4),
909–914.
Ellis A.S., Johnson T.M., Herbel M.J., and Bullen T.D. (2003) Stable isotope fractionation of
selenium by natural microbial consortia. Chemical Geology 195, 119 – 129.
doi:10.1016/S0009-2541(02)00391-1.
Elrashidi M.A., Adriano D.C., Workman S.M., and Lindsay W.L. (1987) Chemical equilibria
of selenium in soils: a theoretical development. Soil Science 144(2), 141–152.
Elson C.M. and MacDonald A.S. (1979) Determination of selenium in pyrite by an ion
exchange electrothermal atomic-absorption spectrometric method. Analytica Chimica Acta
110(1), 153–156.
Ewing R.C. (2001) Corrosion of spent nuclear fuel: the long-term assessment. Interim Report.
Environmental Management Science Program. Nuclear Engineering and Radiological
Sciences, Materials Science & Engineering, Geological Sciences, University of Michigan.
Project I.D. No.: 73751 (previously 59849). Grant Number: DE-FG07-97ER14816. Project
Duration: 9/15/2000 to 9/14/2003.
Fernandez-Martinez A. and Charlet L. (2009) Selenium environmental cycling and
bioavailability: a structural chemist point of view. Review in Environmental Science and
Biotechnology 8, 81–110.
Ferry C., Poinssot C., Cappelaere C., Desgranges L., Jegou C., Miserque F., Piron J.P., Roudil
D., Gras J.M. (2006) Specific outcomes of the research on the spent fuel long-term evolution
in interim dry storage and deep geological disposal. Journal of Nuclear Materials 352, 246–
253. doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2006.02.061.
99/328
Ferri T. and Sangiorgio P. (1999) Voltammetric study of the interaction between Se(IV) and
dissolved organic matter in environmental aqueous matrices. Analytica Chimica Acta 385,
337–343.
Février L., Martin-Garin A., and Leclerc-Cessac E. (2007) Variation of the distribution
coefficient Kd of selenium in soils under various microbial states. Journal of Environmental
Radioactivity 97, 189–205.
Filius J.D., Hiemstra T., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1997) Adsorption of small weak organic
acids on goethite: Modeling of mechanisms. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 195,
368–380.
Filius J.D., Meeussen J.C.L., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1999) Transport of malonate in a
goethite–silica sand system. Colloids and Surfaces A-Physicochemical and Engineering
Aspects 151, 245–253.
Finch R. and Murakami T. (1999) Systematics and paragenesis of uranium minerals, pp. 91 –
179. Chapter 3 in: Burns P.C. and Finch R. (eds.) (1999) Uranium: mineralogy, geochemistry
and the environment. Reviews in Mineralogy, volume 38. 679 pp. ISBN 0-939950-50-2.
Series editor: Paul H. Ribbe. Mineralogical Society of America. Washington DC. ISSN 02750279. See uranyl selenites, Table 17, p. 136–137. See also piretite reported by Vochten et al.
(1996).
Fio J.L. and Fujii R. (1990) Selenium speciation methods and application to soil saturation
extracts from San Joaquin Valley, California, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54, 363–369.
Foster A.L., Brown G.E., Jr., and Parks G.A. (2003) X-ray absorption fine structure study of
As(V) and Se(IV) sorption complexes on hydrous Mn oxides. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta 67(11), 1937–1953.
Fox P.M., LeDuc D.L., Hussein H., Lin Z.Q., and Terry N. (2003) Selenium speciation in
soils and plants. Biogeochemistry of Environmentally Important Trace Elements 835, 339–
354.
Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (1989) Microbial volatilization of selenium at Kesterson Reservoir.
Interim report. Dept. of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of California. ISBN:
B000736YFA.
Frankenberger W.T. Jr. and Benson S. (eds.) (1994) Selenium in the environment. pp. 456
Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, Basel, Hong Kong. ISBN 0-8247-8993-8.
100/328
Frankenberger W.T. Jr. and Engberg R.A.. (eds.) (1998) Environmental chemistry of
selenium. pp. 711. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, Basel, Hong Kong.
Frankenberger W.T. Jr and Arshad M. (2001) Bioremediation of selenium-contaminated
sediments and water. Biofactors 14, 241–254.
Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2001) Environmental chemistry of arsenic. CRC: Books in Soils,
Plants, and the Environment. ISBN: 0824706765.
Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (ed.) (2002). Environmental chemistry of arsenic. pp. 410. Marcel
Dekker, Inc., New York, Basel, Hong Kong.
Friel J.K., Mercer C., Andrews W.L., Simmons B.R., Jackson S.E., and Longerich H.P.
(1996) Laboratory gloves as a source of trace element contamination. Biological Trace
Element Research 54, 135–142. See Table 2 p. 138: the very high contamination
concentration of selenium amongst the biologically important elements. Vinyl gloves are
identified as an important source of selenium contamination in this study. Other main
contaminants are Mg, Zn and Cu. The contamination source could be the filler used as load in
the vinyl gloves, or the talc.
Frigg R. and Hartmann S. (2006) “Models in Science”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Winter 2006 Edition), Zalta Edward N. (ed.), URL:
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2006/entries/models-science/.
Fukushi K. and Sverjensky D.A. (2007) A surface complexation model for sulfate and
selenate on iron oxides consistent with spectroscopic and theoretical molecular evidence.
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 71(1), 1–24. doi:10.1016/j.gca.2006.08.048.
Garrels R.M. and Christ C.L. (1965) Minerals, solutions and equilibria. 453 pp. Harper and
Rowley, New York.
Gaucher E., Blanc P., Bardot F., Braibant G., Buschaert S., Crouzet C., Gautier A., Girard J.P., Jacquot E., Lassin A., Négrel G., Tournassat C., Vinsot A., and Altmann S. (2006)
Modelling the porewater chemistry of the Callovian-Oxfordian formation at a regional scale.
Comptes Rendus Geosciences 29, 55–77.
Gaucher E.C., Tournassat C., Jacquot E., Altmann S., and Vinsot A. (2007) Improvements in
the modelling of the porewater chemistry of the Callovo-Oxfordian Formation. [Oral
presentation: O/04/2]. In Proc. Clays in natural and engineered barriers for radioactive waste
101/328
confinement – Lille 2007 – 3rd International Meeting. Organised by Andra in Lille (France),
17 – 20 September 2007.
Geelhoed J.S., Findenegg G.R., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1997) Availability to plants of
phosphate adsorbed on goethite: experiment and simulation. European Journal of Soil Science
48, 473–481.
Geelhoed J.S., Hiemstra T., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1997a) Phosphate and sulfate
adsorption on goethite: Single anion and competitive adsorption. Geochimica et
Cosmochimica Acta 61, 2389–2396.
Geelhoed J.S., Hiemstra T., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1998) Competitive interaction between
phosphate and citrate on goethite. Environmental Science & Technology 32, 2119–2123.
Geelhoed J.S., van Riemsdijk W.H., and Findenegg G.R. (1997b) Effects of sulphate and pH
on the plant-availability of phosphate adsorbed on goethite. Plant and Soil 197, 241–249.
Geering H.R., Cary E.E., Jones L.H.P., and Alloway W.H. (1968) Solubility and redox
criteria for the possible forms of selenium in soils. Soil Science Society of America
Proceedings 32, 35–40.
Gens R. (1998) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom Clay / Phase II – Part 1, Reference
RG/AV/98-2368, fax from R. Gens of ONDRAF/NIRAS to N.J. Pilkington of AEA
Technology, 13 July 1998.
Ghosh-Dastidar A., Mahuli S., Agnihotri R., and Fan L.-S. (1996) Selenium capture using
sorbent powders: mechanism of sorption by hydrated lime. Environmental Science &
Technology 30 (2), 447–452.
Gillespie M.R. (2001) Potential for secondary iron oxy-hydroxide minerals to retard
radionuclide migration: a literature review and assessment. Nirex Report NSS/R294.
Glaus M.A., Hummel W., and Van Loon L.R. (1997) Experimental determination and
modelling of trace metal-humate interactions. PSI-Bericht Nr. 97-13. Paul Scherrer Institut,
Villigen.
Gmelin (1990) Gmelin handbook of inorganic and organo-metallic chemistry. 8 edition. Se.
Selenium. Supplement Vol. B 1. Compounds with hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen. IX, 343 S.
Springer Berlin. ISBN 3-540-93437-5.
102/328
Goh K.H. and Lim T.T. (2004) Geochemistry of inorganic arsenic and selenium in a tropical
soil: effect of reaction time, pH and competitive anions on arsenic and selenium adsorption.
Chemosphere 55(6), 849–859.
Goldberg S. and Glaubig R.A. (1988) Anion sorption on a calcareous, montmorillonitic soil –
selenium. Soil Science Society of America Journal 52(4), 954–958.
Goldhaber S.B. (2003) Trace element risk assessment: essentiality versus toxicity. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology 38, 232–242.
Gómez-Ariza J.L., Sánchez-Rodas D., Morales E., Herrgott O., and Marr I.L. (1999)
Inorganic and organic selenium compound speciation with coupled HPLC-MWHG-AFS,
Applied Organometallic Chemistry 13, 783–787.
Griffault L., Merceron T., Mossmann J.R., Neerdael B., De Cannière P., Beaucaire C.,
Daumas S., Bianchi A. and Christen R. (1996) Acquisition et régulation de la chimie des eaux
en milieu argileux pour le projet de stockage de déchets radioactifs en formation géologique.
Projet « Archimède-Argile ». Rapport Final EUR 17454FR. Commission Européenne,
Sciences et Techniques Nucléaires. 176 pp. Travail coordonné par l’ANDRA dans le cadre du
contrat F12W-CT92-0117 avec la Commission Européenne.
Grimes R.W. and Catlow C.R.A. (1991) The stability of fission products in uranium dioxide.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 335, 609.
Gruebel K.A., Davis J.A., and Leckie J.O. (1995) Kinetics of oxidation of selenite to selenate
in the presence of oxygen, titania, and light. Environmental Science and Technology 29(3),
586–594.
Gudowski W., Gonzales E., Greneche D., Boucher L., Marivoet J., Zimmerman C., von
Lenza W., and Vokal A. (2006) Impact of partitioning, transmutation and waste reduction
technologies on the final nuclear waste disposal. Proceedings of the FISA 2006 Conference,
Luxembourg, March 13-16, 2006, European Commission (in preparation).
Guo L., Jury W., and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2001) Coupled production and transport of
selenium vapor in unsaturated soil; Evaluation by experiments and numerical simulation.
Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 49, 67–85.
Gustafson G. and Olsson O. (1993) The development of conceptual models for repository site
assessment. pp. 145–158 in: OECD (1993) The role of conceptual models in demonstrating
103/328
repository post-closure safety. Proceedings of a NEA Workshop, Paris, 16-18 November
1993. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). OECD Documents. 190 pp. ISBN 92-64-14429-3.
Gustafsson J.P. and Johnsson L. (1994) The association between selenium and humic
substances in forested ecosystems – Laboratory evidence. Applied Organometallic Chemistry
8, 141–147.
Gysemans M. and Moors H. (2000) Determination of Se-75, Zr-95, Np-237 and Am-241
activities in Boom Clay samples from laboratory migration experiments using gamma-ray
spectrometry. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 53(1-2), 209–213.
H3 (1992) Research and development on geological disposal of high-level radioactive waste,
first progress report – H3. PNC TN1410 93-059.
H12 (2000) H12: Project to establish the scientific and technical basis for HLW disposal in
Japan. Second progress report on research and development for the geological disposal of
HLW in Japan. Project overview report. JNC Report TN1410 2000-001. Japan Nuclear Cycle
Development Institute. April, 2000. See selenium parameters in Appendix K: Datasets for
sensitivity analysis, pp. K-4 and K-5: Table K-4: Solubilities used in sensitivity analysis
[mol l-1 at 25 °C]. Table K-5: Effective diffusion coefficients for the buffer used in sensitivity
analysis [m2 s-1 at 60 °C]. Table K-6: Distribution coefficients (Kd) used in sensitivity analysis
[m3 kg-1 at 25 °C]. http://www.jaea.go.jp/04/tisou/english/h12report/e_h12index.html
H17 (2005) Development and management of the technical knowledge base for the geological
disposal of HLW. JNC Report TN1400 2005-022. Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute.
September, 2005. http://www.jaea.go.jp/04/tisou/english/pdf/H17_KM_Report_E.pdf
Hanjie W., Carignan J., Yuzhuo Q., and Shirong L. (2006) Selenium speciation in kerogen
from two Chinese selenium deposits: Environmental implications. Environmental Science and
Technology 40 (4), 1126–1132.
Hansen, H.C.B. (2002) Environmental chemistry of iron(II)-iron(III) LDHs (green rusts).
Chapter 13, in: Rives, V. (Ed.) Layered double hydroxides: present and future, pp. 413–434,
Nova Sci. Publ., NY.
Hatfield D.L., Berry M.J., and Gladyshev V.N. (Editors) (2006) Selenium: its molecular
biology and role in human health. 444 pp. Springer. 2nd edition. ISBN: 0387338268.
104/328
Haudin C.S., Renault P., Hallaire V., Leclerc-Cessac E., Staunton S., (2007) Effect of aeration
on mobility of selenium in columns of aggregated soil as influenced by straw amendment and
tomato plant growth. Geoderma 141, 98–110.
Haudin C.S., Fardeau M.L., Amenc L., Renault P., Ollivier B., Leclerc-Cessac E., Staunton
S., (2007) Responses of anaerobic bacteria to soil amendment with selenite. Soil Biology and
Biochemistry 39, 2408–2413.
Haudin C.S., Renault P., Leclerc-Cessac E., Staunton S., (2007) Effect of selenite additions
on microbial activity and dynamics in three soils incubated under aerobic conditions. Soil
Biology and Biochemistry 39, 2670–2674.
Hayes K.F. (1987) Equilibrium, spectroscopic, and kinetics studies of ion adsorption at the
oxide/aqueous interface. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Hayes K.F., Roe A.L., Brown G.E., Hodgson K.O., Leckie J.O., and Parks G.A. (1987) In situ
x-ray absorption study of surface complexes: selenium oxyanions on α-FeOOH. Science 238,
783–786.
Hayes K.F., Papelis C., and Leckie J.O. (1988) Modeling ionic strength effects on anion
adsorption at hydrous oxide/solution interfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 78,
717–726.
He M., Jiang S., Peng B., Ruan X., Dong K., Guan Y., et al. (2007) Beam Interactions with
Materials and Atoms: 99Tc measurements with accelerator mass spectrometry at CIAE.
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B 259 (1), 708–713.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.01.209.
Heath T.G., Ilett D.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams S.J. (1997) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom
Clay – Draft Task 1 Report, AEA Technology Report, February 1997.
Heath T.G., Ilett D.J., Maning M.C., Pilkington N.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams S.J. (1997)
Radionuclide solubilities in Boom Clay – 1st Progress Report, (March 1997).
Heath T.G., Ilett D.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams S.J. (2000) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom
Clay. Final report, part 1, AEAT/NS/R/0180 part 1, AEA Technology, UK.
Heath T.G., Ilett D.J., Tweed C.J., and Williams S.J. (2000) Radionuclide solubilities in Boom
Clay. Final report, part 2, AEAT/NS/R/0180 part 2, AEA Technology, UK.
105/328
Hem J.D. (1985) Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural waters.
USGS, US Geological survey water-supply paper 2254. Third edition. 264 pp. The sulfur
cycle, p. 113.
Henrion P.N., Monsecour M., Fonteyne A., Put M., and De Regge P. (1985) Migration of
radionuclides in Boom Clay. Radioactive Waste Management and the Nuclear Fuel Cycle
6(3-4), 313–359.
Henrion P., Put M., and Monsecour M. (1990) Synthesis report on: Transport of
radionuclides in Boom Clay – State-of-the-Art. 87 p.p. SCK•CEN report coordinated by
P. De Regge. R-2863.
Henrion P. and De Cannière (1990) Semi-annual report of the second semester 1990.
Hens M. and Merckx R. (2002) The role of colloidal particles in the speciation and analysis of
“dissolved” phosphorus, Water Research 36, 1483–1492.
Herbel M.J., Blum J.S., Oremland R.S., and Borglin S.E. (2003) Reduction of elemental
selenium to selenide: experiments with anoxic sediments and bacteria that respire Seoxyanions. Geomicrobiology Journal 20(6), 587–602.
Herbel M., Johnson T., Oremland R., and Bullen T. (2000) Fractionation of selenium isotopes
during bacterial respiratory reduction of selenium oxyanions. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta 64(21), 3701–3709. doi:10.1016/S0016-7037(00)00456-7.
Hockin S.L. and Gadd G.M. (2003) Linked redox precipitation of sulfur and selenium under
anaerobic conditions by sulfate-reducing bacterial biofilms. Applied Environmental
Microbiology 69, 7063–7072.
Hiemstra T., De Wit J.C.M., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1989a) Multisite proton adsorption
modelling at the solid/solution interface of (hydr)oxides: A new approach. II. Application to
various important (hydr)oxides. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 133(1), 105–117.
Hiemstra T., van Riemsdijk W.H., and Bolt G.H. (1989b) Multisite proton adsorption
modelling at the solid/solution interface of (hydr)oxides: A new approach. I. Model
description and evaluation of intrinsic reaction constants. Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science 133(1), 91–104.
Hiemstra T. and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1996) A surface structural approach to ion adsorption:
The charge distribution (CD) model. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 179, 488–508.
106/328
Hiemstra T. and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1999) Surface structural ion adsorption modeling of
competitive binding of oxyanions by metal (hydr)oxides. Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science 210(1), 182–193.
Hiemstra T., Venema P., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1996) Intrinsic proton affinity of reactive
surface groups of metal (hydr)oxides: The bond valence principle. Journal of Colloid and
Interface Science 184, 680–692.
Hogg D.R. (Editor) (1975) Organic compounds of sulphur, selenium and tellurium. Royal
Society of Chemistry. ISBN: 0851862799.
Holland H.D. and Turekian K.K. (executives editors) (2004) Treatise on Geochemistry.
Collection of 10 volumes. Elsevier Pergamon Oxford. ISBN (set): 0-08-043751-6.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/referenceworks/0080437516. Selenium: search indexes
p. 157, Vol. 10.
Howard J.J. (1977) Geochemistry of selenium. Formation of ferroselite and selenium
behaviour in the vicinity of oxidizing sulfide and uranium deposits. Geochimica et
Cosmochimica Acta 41, 1665–1678.
Hug S.J. (1997) In situ Fourier transform infrared measurements of sulfate adsorption on
hematite in aqueous solutions. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 188, 415–422.
Hummel W., Berner U., Curti E., Pearson F.J. and Thoenen T. (2002) Nagra/PSI Chemical
Thermodynamic Data Base 01/01 (2002). Nagra Technical Report NTB 02-16, Nagra,
Wettingen, Switzerland, and Universal Publishers/uPublish.com, Parkland, Florida.
Hummel W. (Chairman), Anderegg G., Puigdomenech I., Rao L., and Tochiyama O. (2005)
Chemical thermodynamics of compounds and complexes of U, Np, Pu, Am, Tc, Se, Ni and Zr
with selected organic ligands. Chemical Thermodynamics Series Volume 9. Elsevier Science.
Ihnat M. (1989) Occurrence and distribution of selenium. 368 pp. CRC. ISBN: 084934932X.
Ishihara Y., Ishiguro K., and Umeki H. (1999) Effect of change in the half-life of Se-79 on the
safety of the HLW geological disposal system. JNC TN8400 99-086 (in Japanese).
Jacobs L.W. (1989) Selenium in Agriculture and the Environment. pp. 233: Proceedings
(Special Publication, No 23, Soil Science Society of America, SSSA,) ISBN: 0891187898.
(1989-05-01).
107/328
Jadhav R.A., Agnihotri R., Gupta H., and Fan L.-S. (2000) Mechanism of selenium sorption
by activated carbon. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 78 (1), 168–174.
Janssen K. (2003) μ-Xanes cartography of the spatial distribution of bio-accumulated
selenium in onion bulbs grown in selenium-rich solutions. Seminar given at SCK•CEN by
Prof. Koen Janssen (University of Antwerp, UA, campus Drie Eiken).
Jiang Song-Sheng, He Ming, Diao Li-Jun, Guo Jing-Ru, and Wu Shao-Yong (2001) Remeasurement of the half-life of 79Se with the projectile X-ray detection method. Chinese
Physical Letters 18, 746–749. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/18/6/311.
Jiang S-S., He M., Diao L-J., Li C., Guo J., and Wu S. (2002) Re-measurement of the half-life
of 79Se. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators,
Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 489(1-3), 195–201.
Jian-ming Z., Wei Z., Hai-bo Q., Zhi-gang F., Bao-shan Z., and Hong-can S. (2008) An
investigation on the source of soil Se in Yutangba, Enshi: evidence from native selenium.
Acta Mineralogica Sinica.
Johnson L.H. and Smith P.A. (2000) The interaction of radiolysis products and canister
corrosion products and the implications for radionuclide transport in the near-field of a
repository for spent fuel. Nagra Technical Report NTB 00-04, Wettingen, Switzerland.
Johnson T.M. (2004) A review of mass-dependent fractionation of selenium isotopes and
implications for other heavy stable isotopes. Chemical Geology 204 (3-4), 201–214.
http://ejournals.ebsco.com/direct.asp?ArticleID=MW1H7VLGW5YX03E6W1CM
Johnson T.M. and Bullen T.D. (2003) Selenium isotope fractionation during reduction by
Fe(II)-Fe(III) hydroxyde-sulfate (green rust). Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 67 (3), 413–
419.
Kafkafi U, Bar-Yosef B, Rosenberg R, and Sposito G. (1988) Phosphorus adsorption by
kaolinite and montmorillonite: II. organic anion competition. Soil Science Society of America
Journal SSSJD4 52(6), November-December 1988. 4 Fig., 2 Tables, 28 ref. US-Israel
Binational Agricultural R&D Grant I-401-82.
Kashefi K. and Lovley D.R. (2000) Reduction of Fe(III), Mn(IV), and toxic metals at 100 °C
by Pyrobaculum islandicum. Applied Environmental Microbiology 66(3), 1050–1060.
108/328
KBS-3 (1983) Final Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel. Report by the Swedish Nuclear Fuel
Supply Co. Stockholm, Sweden.
Killops S.D. and Killops V.J. (1993) An introduction to organic geochemistry. Longman
Scientific & Technical, Essex, England, 265 pp.
Klayman D.L. and Günther W.H.H. (1973) Organic selenium compounds: their chemistry
and biology. Wiley-Interscience, New York. ISBN: 0471490326.
Kleykamp H. (1985) The chemical state of fission products in oxide fuels. Journal of Nuclear
Materials 131, 221–246.
Kleykamp H. (1993) The solubility of selected fission products in UO2 and (U, Pu)O2.
Review article. Journal of Nuclear Materials 206, 82–86.
Klonowska A., Heulin T., and Vermeglio A. (2005) Selenite and tellurite reduction by
shewanella oneidensis. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71 (9), 5607–5609.
doi:10.1128/AEM.71.9.5607-5609.2005
Köhler S.J., Bosbach D., and Oelkers E.H. (2005) Do clay mineral dissolution rates reach
steady state? Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69(8), 1997–2006.
Köhler S.J., Dufaud F., and Oelkers E.H. (2003) An experimental study of illite dissolution
kinetics as a function of pH from 1.4 to 12.4 and temperature from 5 to 50°C. Geochimica et
Cosmochimica Acta 67(19), 3583–3594.
Koopal L.K., Nederlof M.M., van Riemsdijk W.H., and Barneveld P.A. (1997) Semianalytical
methods to determine first-order rate constant distributions. Langmuir 13, 961–969.
Kucha H. (1981) Precious metal alloys and organic matter in the Zechstein copper deposits,
Poland. Mineralogy and Petrology 28 (1), 1–16.
Kulp T.R. and Pratt L.M. (2004) Speciation and weathering of selenium in upper cretaceous
chalk and shale from South Dakota and Wyoming, USA. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta
68 (18), 3687–3701. doi:10.1016/j.gca.2004.03.008.
Ladrière Jean (1969) Etude de quelques réactions d'oxydo-réduction intervenant en
électrolyse du cuivre. Université Catholique de Louvain (UCL). SC/Laboratoire de Chimie
Minérale. Thèse de doctorat. Promoteur R. Breckpot. Collation 109. Communication
personnelle: le sélénite est un poison pour l’électro-affinage du cuivre.
109/328
Ladrière J., Dussart F., Dabi J., Haulotte O., Verhaeghe S., and Regout J. (2009) Mössbauer
study of the Boom clay, a geological formation for the storage of radioactive wastes in
Belgium. Hyperfine Interactions 191 (1-3), 1–9. doi:10.1007/s10751-009-9977-9.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/0575157242196551/.
Laenen B. (1997) The geochemical signature of relative sea-level cycles recognized in the
Boom Clay. Thesis of the Catholic University of Louvain (KULeuven), 396 pp.
Lakshtanov L.Z. and Stipp S.L.S. (2004) Experimental study of europium(III) coprecipitation
with calcite. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 68, 819–827.
Lasaga A.C and Kirkpatrick R.J. (eds) (1981) Reviews in mineralogy. Volume 8: Kinetics of
geochemical processes. 398 pp. Series editor: Ribbe P.H., Mineralogical Society of America.
ISBN 0-939950-08-1.
Lasaga A.C (1997) Kinetic theory in the earth sciences. 811 pp. Princeton series in
geochemistry, edited by Holland H.D. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey,
USA. ISBN 0-691-03748-5.
Latimer W.M. (1952) The oxidation states of the elements and their potentials in aqueous
solutions. Prentice-Hall Inc, New York.
Lauber M., Baeyens B., and Bradbury M.H. (2000a) Physico-chemical characterisation and
sorption measurements of Cs, Sr, Ni, Eu, Th, Sn and Se on Opalinus Clay from Mont Terri.
92 pp. Waste Management Laboratory (LES) PSI, Switzerland. PSI Bericht Nr. 00-10.
December 2000. ISSN 1019-0643. See particularly: 3.11 Se(IV) Sorption data p. 68; 3.11.1
Se kinetics and isotherm results 68–72.
Lauber M., Baeyens B., and Bradbury M.H. (2000b) Physico-chemical characterisation and
sorption measurements of Cs, Sr, Ni, Eu, Th, Sn and Se on Opalinus Clay samples from Mont
Terri. Nagra Technical Report NTB 00-01, Wettingen, Switzerland.
Leckie J.O, Benjamin M.M., Hayes K.F., Kaufman G., and Altmann S. (1980)
Adsorption/coprecipitation of trace elements from water with iron oxydroxide. EPRI RP-9101. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo alto, California.
Lederer C.M., Hollander J.M., and Perlman I. (1967) Table of Isotopes, sixth edition. For 75Se
and 79Se isotopes data, see p. 30, p. 210, p. 212, p. 214, and p. 527. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York • London • Sydney.
110/328
Lefèvre G. and Fédoroff M. (2006) Sorption of sulfate ions onto hematite studied by
attenuated total reflection-infrared spectroscopy: Kinetics and competition with other ions.
Proceedings of MIGRATION 2005, the 10th International Conference on the Chemistry and
Migration of Actinides and Fission Products in the Geosphere. Physics and Chemistry of the
Earth, Parts A/B/C 31 (10-14), 499–504. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2006.04.001.
Lemly A.D. (2002) Selenium assessment in aquatic ecosystems: a guide for hazard evaluation
and water quality criteria. 161 pp. Springer, series on environmental management. New
York. ISBN 0387953469.
Levander O.A. (1997) Nutrition and newly emerging viral diseases: An overview. Journal of
Nutrition 127, 948S–950S.
Li C., Guo J., and Li D. (1997) A procedure for the separation of 79Se from fission products
and application to the determination of the 79Se half-life. Journal of Radioanalytical and
Nuclear Chemistry 220(1), 69–71.
Li Y.-H. and Gregory S. (1974) Diffusion of ions in sea water and in deep-sea sediments.
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 38, 703–714.
Lide D.R. (ed.) (1995) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Table of the isotopes, T½ of
79
Se = 6.5 × 104 years, see p. 11–53. 76th Edition (1995 – 1996). CRC Press, The Chemical
Rubber Company. Boca Raton, New York, London, Tokyo.
Lindemer T.B., Besmann T.M., and Johnson C.E. (1981) Thermodynamic review and
calculations – Alkali-metal oxides systems with nuclear fuels, fission products, and structural
materials. Key review article providing thermodynamic data on various selenium and
tellurium systems. Journal of Nuclear Materials 100, 178–226.
Liu X., Fattahi M., Montavon G., and Grambow B. (2008) Selenide retention onto pyrite
under reducing conditions. Radiochimica Acta 96 (8), 473–479. doi:10.1524/ract.2008.1514.
Longnecker M.P., Taylor P.R., Levander O.A., Howe M., Veillon C., McAdam P.A.,
Patterson K.Y., Holden J.M., Stampfer M.J., Morris J.S., Willett W.C. (1991) Selenium in
diet, blood, and toenails in relation to human health in a seleniferous area. American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition 53, 1288–1294.
Lorant F., Largeau C., Behar F., and De Cannière P. (2008) Improved kinetic modeling of the
early generation of CO2 from the Boom Clay kerogen. Implications for simulation of CO2
111/328
production upon disposal of high-activity nuclear waste. Organic Geochemistry 39(9), 12941301. doi:10.1016/j.orggeochem.2008.05.008.
Losi M.E. and Frankenberger Jr. W.T. (1997) Reduction of selenium oxyanions by
enterobacter cloacae strain sld1a-1: reduction of selenate to selenite. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 16, No. 9, 1851–1858.
doi:10.1897/1551-5028(1997)016<1851:ROSOBE>2.3.CO;2
Lovley D.R. (1993) Dissimilatory metal reduction. Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 47, 263–290.
Loyaux-Lawniczak S., Refait P., Lecomte P., Ehrhardt J.-J., and Genin J.-M.R. (1999) The
reduction of chromate ions by Fe(II) layered hydroxides. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 3, 593–599.
Loyauz-Lawniczak S., Refait P., Ehrhardt J.-J., Lecomte P., and Genin J.-M.R. (2000)
Trapping of Cr by formation of ferrihydrite during the reduction of chromate ions by Fe(II)–
Fe(III) hydroxysalt green rusts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34, 438–443.
Lu Z., Fehn U., Tomaru H., Elmore D., and Ma X. (2007) Beam Interactions with Materials
and Atoms: Reliability of 129I/I ratios produced from small sample masses. Nuclear
Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B 259 (1), 359–364.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.01.180.
Luo Shen Kai (1990) Master thesis on selenium made at SCK•CEN under the supervision of
Pierre Henrion. In some gel permeation chromatography measurements the peak of 75Se and
of OM were weakly correlated giving to think that a weak association could exist.
Luther G.W., Kostka J.E., Church T.M., Sulzberger B., and Stumm W. (1992) Seasonal iron
cycling in the salt-marsh sedimentary environment – The importance of ligand complexes
with Fe(II) and Fe(III) in the dissolution of Fe(III) minerals and pyrite, respectively. Marine
Chemistry 40(1-2), 81–103.
Luttrell G. (1959) Annotated bibliography on the geology of selenium (Geological Survey
bulletin). U.S. G.P.O. ASIN: B0007EP16M.
Macalady D.L., Ahmann D., Westall J., Garbino J., and Meyer J. (2002) Redox
transformations, complexation and soil/sediment interactions of inorganic forms of As and Se
in aquatic environments: Effects of natural organic matter. Tailings and Mine Waste ’02,
Bakema, 13–15.
112/328
Macalady D.L., Ahmann D., and Garbino J. (2003) Redox transformations, complexation and
soil/sediment interactions of inorganic forms of As and Se in aquatic environments: Effects of
natural organic matter. Mid-year report for EPA agreement number R829515C003. Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Macdonald D.D., Roberts B., and Hyne J.B. (1978a) Corrosion Science 18, 411.
Macdonald D.D., Roberts B., and Hyne J.B. (1978b) Corrosion Science 18, 499.
MacGregor R.A. (1997) The geochemistry of selenium in sedimentary environments:
examples from the UK and Jordan. University of Reading. Thesis submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in May 1997. Internet address as accessed on 2004-04-29:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/robmac/front.htm
Maes A., Bruggeman C., Van Geet M., Deniau I., and Largeau C. (2003) Topical report on
methodologies developed to identify the source of mobile Boom Clay organic matter. 29 pp.
Project Trancom-II: Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in a reducing clay
sediment. SCK•CEN-BLG-967, SCK•CEN, Mol, Belgium.
Maes A., Bruggeman C., and Vancluysen J. (2004a) Selenium behaviour in Boom Clay. First
progress report (07/2004). Work performed for ONDRAF/NIRAS under contract CCHO2004-004862. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Faculteit bio-ingenieurs-Wetenschappen,
Departement Microbiële en Moleculaire Systemen (m2s), Laboratorium voor Colloidchemie.
Maes A., Bruggeman C., and Vancluysen J. (2004b) Selenium behaviour in Boom Clay.
Second progress report (01/2005). Work performed for ONDRAF/NIRAS under contract
CCHO-2004-004862. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Faculteit bio-ingenieursWetenschappen, Departement Microbiële en Moleculaire Systemen (m2s), Laboratorium voor
Colloidchemie.
Maes A., Bruggeman C., and Vancluysen J. (2005) Selenium behaviour in Boom Clay. Third
progress report (07/2005). LCC-R.Se-07/2005. Work performed for ONDRAF/NIRAS under
contract CCHO-2004-004862. Preliminary Report. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Faculteit
bio-ingenieurs-Wetenschappen, Departement Microbiële en Moleculaire Systemen (m2s),
Laboratorium voor Colloidchemie.
Maes N. (2004c) Natural concentration of selenium measured in Boom Clay water with high
resolution ICP-MS (Royal Museum of Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium). Decrease of
selenium concentration in water after flocculation of humic acids by water acidification.
Personal Communication.
113/328
Maes N., Moors H., De Cannière P., Aertsens M., and Put M. (1998) Determination of the
diffusion coefficient of ionic species by electromigration: feasibility study. Radiochimica
Acta 82, 183–189.
Maes N., Moors H., Dierckx A., De Cannière P., and Put M. (1999) The assessment of
electromigration as a new technique to study diffusion of radionuclides in clayey soils.
Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 36 (3-4), 231–247.
Maes N., Moors H., Dierckx A., Aertsens M., Wang L., De Cannière P., and Put M. (2001)
Studying the migration behaviour of radionuclides in Boom Clay by electromigration. pp. 35–
1 to 35–31. In: EREM 2001, 3rd symposium and status report on electrokinetic remediation,
(C. Czurda et al. ed., 2001) Schriftenreihe Angewandte Geologie Karlsruhe, 63. ISSN 09332510.
Maes N., Moors H., Wang L., Delécaut G., De Cannière P., and Put M. (2002) The use of
electromigration as a qualitative technique to study the migration behaviour and speciation of
uranium in the Boom Clay. Radiochimica Acta 90, 741–746.
Maes N., De Cannière P., Sillen X., Van Ravestyn L., and Put M. (2004d) DS 2.6 Migration
of iodide in backfill materials containing an anion getter. Phase 2: Performance tests on active
carbon under geological conditions – In search of an alternative. Final Report. Restricted
SCK•CEN report R-3896 published on 2004-08-12.
Maes N., Wang L., Delécaut G., Beauwens T., Van Geet M., Put M., Weetjens E., Marivoet
J., van der Lee J., Warwick P., Hall A., Walker G., Maes A., Bruggeman C., Bennett D.,
Hicks T., Higgo J., and Galson D. (2004e) Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in
a reducing clay sediment (TRANCOM-II). Final scientific and technical report of the EC
TRANCOM-II project. SCK•CEN-BLG-988 (04/NMa/P-50). Contract N° FIKW-CT-200000008. SCK•CEN, Waste and Disposal Department – R&D Geological Disposal, Mol,
Belgium, September 2004. Natural concentration of selenium measured in Boom Clay: see
Annex 14, pp. 26 – 27 and p. 35.
Maes N., Wang L., Delécaut G., Beauwens T., Van Geet M., Put M., Weetjens E., Marivoet
J., van der Lee J., Warwick P., Hall A., Walker G., Maes A., Bruggeman C., Bennett D.,
Hicks T., Higgo J., and Galson D. (2004f) Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in
a reducing clay sediment (TRANCOM-II). Final report EUR 21022 EN. European
Commission, Nuclear Science and Technology, Luxembourg. Euratom 5th Framework
Program period (1998 – 2002). Contract N° FIKW-CT-2000-00008.
114/328
Maes N., Delécaut G., Wang L., Cachoir C., Salah S., and Lemmens K. (2005) Uranium
retention and migration behaviour in Boom Clay. Topical Report. SCK•CEN.
Malen K.A. Release of tellurium and cesium from UO2 in LWR fuel rods during irradiation.
Unreferenced report from Studsvik Energyteknik A.B., Nyköping, Sweden.
Mallants D., Sillen X., and Marivoet J. (1999) Geological disposal of conditioned high-level
and long-lived radioactive waste. Consequence analysis of the disposal of vitrified high-level
waste in the case of the normal evolution scenario. R-3383, Restricted report to
ONDRAF/NIRAS for contract CCHO-95/268 – KNT 90.94.601, Annex 6, Task 6.1. Waste
and Disposal Department SCK•CEN, Mol Belgium. December 1999. 82 pp.
Manceau A. and Charlet L. (1994) The mechanism of selenate adsorption on goethite and
hydrous ferric oxide. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 168, 87–93.
Marin L., Lhomme J., and Carignan J. (2001) Determination of selenium concentration in
sixty five reference materials for geochemical analysis by GFAAS after separation with thiol
cotton. Geostandards Newsletter, 25 (2/3), 317–324.
Marcus P. (1995) Sulfur-assisted corrosion mechanisms and the role of alloyed elements. In:
Corrosion mechanisms in theory and practice. Marcus P. and Olefjord I., eds. Marcel Dekker.
New York. p. 239.
Marivoet J. and Bonne A. (1988) PAGIS, Performance Assessment of Geological Isolation
Systems for radioactive waste. Disposal in clay formations. CEC, Luxembourg, Report EUR
11 776 EN.
Marivoet J. and Zeevaert T. (1991) PACOMA – Performance assessment of the geological
disposal of medium level and alpha waste in a clay formation in Belgium. CEC, Luxembourg,
Report EUR 13 042 EN.
Marivoet J. (1991) UPDATING 1990. Updating of the performance assessments of the
geological disposal of high-level and medium-level waste in the Boom Clay Formation.
ONDRAF/NIRAS report BLG-634.
Marivoet J., Volckaert G., Labat S., De Cannière P., Dierckx A, Kursten B., Lemmens K.,
Lolivier P., Mallants D., Sneyers A., Valcke E., Wang L., and Wemaere I. (1999a) Values for
the near-field and clay parameters used in the performance assessment of the geological
disposal of radioactive waste in the Boom Clay formation at the Mol site (volume 1 and 2).
Report to NIRAS/ONDRAF. Geological disposal of conditioned high-level and long-lived
115/328
radioactive waste. Contract CCHO-98/332 – KNT 90.98.1042 Task 6.1. SCK•CEN Report
R-3344 (July 1999).
Marivoet J. and Weetjens E. (2007) The importance of mobile fission products for long-term
safety in the case of disposal of vitrified high-level waste and spent fuel in a clay formation.
Mobile fission and activation products in nuclear waste disposal. International workshop.
L’Hermitage, La Baule – France, January 16-19, 2007. http://mofap07.in2p3.fr/. Proceedings
to appear as a Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA, OECD) publication.
Martinez M., Gimenez J., de Pablo J., Rovira, M., and Duro L. (2006) Sorption of
selenium(IV) and selenium(VI) onto magnetite. Applied Surface Science 252 (10), 3767–
3773. Unique item number: RN182415520. Shelfmark: 1580.082000. ISSN: 0169-4332.
Masscheleyn P.H., Delaune R.D., and Patrick W.H. Jr (1990) Transformations of selenium as
affected by sediment oxidation-reduction potential and pH. Environmental Science and
Technology 24(1), 91–96.
Masscheleyn P.H., Delaune R.D., and Patrick, W.H. (1991) Biogeochemical behaviour of
selenium in anoxic soils and sediments – an equilibrium thermodynamics approach. Journal
of Environmental Science and Health part A – Environmental Science and Engineering &
Toxic and Hazardous Substance Control 26(4), 555–573.
Matthiesen A. (1994) Evaluating the redox capacity and the redox potential of humic acids by
redox titrations. In: Senesi N. and Miano T.M. (Eds.) (1994) Humic substances in the global
environment and implications on human health. Amsterdam, Elsevier.
Matzke Hj. (1995) Oxygen potential measurements in high burnup LWR UO2 fuel. Journal of
Nuclear Materials 223, 1–5. (key article).
Mazurek M., Alt-Epping P., Gimmi T., Waber H.N., Bath A., Buschaert S., and Gautschi A.
(2007a) Tracer profiles across argillaceous formations: A tool to constrain transport
processes. In Proc. 12th International Symposium on Water-Rock Interaction (WRI-12) held at
Kunming (Yunnan province, Popular Republic of China) from July 31 to August 05, 2007.
http://www.wri12.org/. 4 pp.
Mazurek M., Alt-Epping P., Bath A., Buschaert S., Gautschi A., Gimmi T., and Waber H.N.
(2007b) CLAYTRAC project: evaluation of tracer profiles across argillaceous formations.
[Oral presentation: O/01/2]. In Proc. Clays in natural and engineered barriers for radioactive
waste confinement – Lille 2007 – 3rd International Meeting. Organised by Andra in Lille
(France), 17 – 20 September 2007.
116/328
Mazurek Martin, Peter Alt-Epping, Adrian Bath, Thomas Gimmi, and H. Niklaus Waber with
contributions by Stéphane Buschaert & Agnès Vinsot, Mieke De Craen, Isabelle Wemaere &
Pierre De Cannière, Andreas Gautschi, Sébastien Savoye, and Laurent Wouters (2009)
Natural tracer profiles across argillaceous formations: The CLAYTRAC project - review and
synthesis Report. NEA Report N° 6253, 362 pp. Clay Club, Radioactive Waste Management,
Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD). Publication date: 31 Mar 2009. Language: English. (OECD Code: 66 2009 02 1 P).
Price: EUR 75. ISBN 978-92-64-06047-0. N° 56717 2009. http://www.nea.fr |
http://www.oecd.org. OECD Publishing, 2 rue André-Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex 16. Printed
in France.
http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/display.asp?sf1=identifiers&st1=978-92-64-06047-0
http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/get-it.asp?REF=6609021E.PDF&TYPE=browse
McAninch J.E., Bench G.S., Freeman S.P.H.T., Roberts M.L., Southon J.R., Vogel J.S., and
Proctor I.D. (1994) PXAMS – Projectile X-ray Accelerator Mass Spectrometry: X-ray yields
and applications. 13th international conference on the application of accelerators in research
and industry; 7-10 Nov 1994; Denton, TX (United States). (Lawrence Livermore National
Lab., CA (United States). Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry). Report Number(s)
UCRL-JC-118859; CONF-941129—13. DOE Contract N° W-7405-ENG-48. See pp. 5 and 6,
the need to remeasure the half-life of 79Se. See also the citation [8] of Singh B. (1993)
Nuclear Data Sheets 70, 437. Question on the validity of the half-life of 79Se.
McKenzie R.C., Rafferty T.S., Beckett G.J. (1998) Selenium: an essential element for
immune function. Immunology Today 19, 342–345.
McKnigh, D., Cory R., Hannigan R., Dunagan S., Gilmore M., Varekamp J., et al. (2005)
Oxidation/reduction reactions involving dissolved humics as electron shuttlers in lake
sediments (p. 07). Presented at the AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts.
Mees D.R., Pysto W., and Tarcha P.J. (1995) Formation of selenium colloids using sodium
ascorbate as the reducing agent. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 170, 254–260.
Mehra O.P. and Jackson M.L. (1960) Iron oxide removal from soils and clays by a dithionitecitrate system buffered with sodium bicarbonate. Clays and Clay Minerals 7, 317–327.
Merceron T., Mossmann J.R., Neerdael B., De Cannière P., Beaucaire C., Daumas S., Bianchi
A. and Christen R. (1993) Archimedes – Clay Project: acquisition and regulation of the water
chemistry in clay environment: 4th progress report, December 1993. Work coordinated by
ANDRA in the frame of the CEC contract F12W-CT92-0117.
117/328
Merceron T. (1994) Characterisation of the geochemical environment of the Boom clay at
Mol: Archimedes – Clay Project. Paper presented at the MIRAGE meeting on the Migration of
Radionuclides in the Geosphere – Mirage project – 3rd Phase. Final meeting 1994, held in
Brussels on the 15, 16 and 17th of November 1994.
Merceron T. (1995) Archimedes-Clay project: Acquisition and regulation of water chemistry
in clay. In "Migration of radionuclides in the geosphere" (Mirage project - Third phase) Proceedings of a progress meeting (work period 1992), Brussels, 7 and 8 October 1993. EUR
15914.
Mills K.C. (1974) Thermodynamic data for inorganic sulphides, selenides and tellurides.
Butterworths London.
Mitchell J.K. (1993) Fundamentals of soil behaviour. 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
MOFAP (2007) Mobile fission and activation products in nuclear waste disposal.
International workshop. L’Hermitage, La Baule – France, January 16-19, 2007.
http://mofap07.in2p3.fr/. Proceedings to appear as a Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA, OECD)
publication.
Moffatt W.G. (1976) Binary phase diagrams handbook. See phase diagrams for the Li-S, LiSe, Li-Te and K-Se systems. General Electric, Schenectady, NY.
Molinski V.J., and Leddicotte G.W. (1965) Radiochemistry of selenium. 49 pp. (Nuclear
Science series / National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, NAS-NS 3030,
rev.). Publisher: the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information, National
Bureau of Standards, U.S. Dept. of Commerce; Rev. 1965 edition. Springfield, Va. ASIN:
B0006ETRJ0.
Mompean F., Illemassène M., and Perrone J. (2005) Chemical thermodynamics of compounds
and complexes of U, Np, Pu, Am, Tc, Se, Ni, and Zr with selected organic ligands. Chemical
Thermodynamics Series, Volume 9. Elsevier Science. ISBN: 0-444-51402-3, 1132 pp.
Montavon G. and Grambow B. (2006) Subatech (Rennes, France) Funmig EC project.
Morel F. (1983) Principles of aquatic chemistry. Wiley-Interscience, New York.
Morgenstern U., Fifield L.K., Tims S.G., and Ditchburn R.G. (n.d.) Beam interactions with
Materials and Atoms: Progress in AMS measurement of natural 32Si for glacier ice dating.
118/328
Nuclear
Instruments
and
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.019.
Methods
in
Physics
Research
Section
B.
Mukai S., Kitao H., and Kataoka S. (1998) Advective diffusion experiment using I, Se, and
Cs in fracture rocks. 1998 Fall meeting of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan 3, p. 842 (in
Japanese).
Muller John (2006) Étude du cycle biogéochimique du sélénium dans l’environnement.
Directeur de thèse: Abdelouas Abdesselam. Exposé Heures Thésards Subatech, 04/12/2006,
Ecole des Mines de Nantes.
Muller J. (2008) Étude du cycle biogéochimique du sélénium dans l’environnement. PhD
Thesis. Subatech, Ecole des Mines de Nantes.
Myneni S.C.B. and Tokunaga T.K. (1997) 213 ACS national meeting, Washington DC, P.
1077 Paper GEOC 141, 2904 pp.
Myneni S.C.B., Tokunaga T.K., and Brown G.E. (1997) Abiotic selenium redox
transformations in the presence of Fe (II, III) oxides. Science 278 (5340), 1106–1109.
Nagra (1985a) Project Gewähr 1985. Endlager für hochaktive abfälle: bautchnik und
betriebsphase. NGB 85-03. Nagra, Baden, Switzerland.
Nagra (1985b) Project Gewähr 1985. Nuclear waste management in Switzerland: feasibility
studies and safety analyses. NGB 85-09. Nagra, Baden, Switzerland.
Nagra (1994a) Kristallin-I. Geology and Hydrogeology of the Crystalline Basement of
Northern Switzerland. Nagra Technical Report, NTB 93-01. Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.
Nagra (1994b) Kristallin-I. Safety Assessment Report. Nagra Technical Report, NTB 93-22.
Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.
Nagra
(2002a)
Projekt
Opalinuston – Synthese
der
geowissenschaftlichen
untersuchungsergebnisse. Entsorgungsnachweis für abgebrannte brennelemente, verglaste
hochaktive sowie langlebige mittelaktive abfälle. Nagra Technical Report NTB 02-03. Nagra,
Wettingen, Switzerland.
Nagra (2002b) Project Opalinus Clay: Safety report. Demonstration of disposal feasibility for
spent fuel, vitrified high-level waste and long-lived intermediate-level waste
(Entsorgungsnachweis). Nagra Technical Report NTB 02-05. Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.
119/328
Nagra (2008) Bioprota workshop. International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere. 5–6 May
2008. Hosted by Nagra, Wettingen, Switzerland.
Nakayasu K., Fukushima M., Sasaki K., Tanaka S., and Nakamura H. (1999) Comparative
studies of the reduction behavior of chromium(VI) by humic substances and their precursors,
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18(6), 1085–1090.
Naveau A., Monteil-Rivera F., Guillon E., and Dumonceau J. (2007) Interactions of aqueous
selenium (−II) and (IV) with metallic sulfide surfaces. Environmental Science and
Technology 41 (15), 5376–5382. doi:10.1021/es0704481.
Newman D.K., Ahmann D., and Morel F.M.M.(1998) A brief review of microbial arsenate
respiration. Geomicrobiology Journal 15, 255–268.
Nicoll S., Matzke Hj., Grimes R.W., and Catlow C R.A. (1997) The behaviour of single
atoms of Mo in urania. Journal of Nuclear Materials. 240, 185.
Nirond (2004) A review of corrosion and material selection issues pertinent to underground
disposal of highly active nuclear waste in Belgium. A report for ONDRAF/NIRAS prepared
by the Corrosion Study Panel. Nirond (2004-02). See, Section 3.2 Sulfur-water system: p. 11–
12. See also, Section 4.2 The sulfur/water systems p. 55–56.
Noläng B. ed. (2005) In Book: Chemical thermodynamics of selenium. Chemical
Thermodynamics Series, Volume 7. Elsevier Science. ISBN: 0-444-51403-1, 851 pp. Edited
by Mompean F.J., Perrone J., and Illemassène M., OECD, Nuclear Energy Agency, Data
Bank, Issy-les-Moulineaux (France).
Nriagu J.O. (Editor) (1976) Environmental biogeochemistry: carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus,
sulfur and selenium cycles. (Volume 1). 423 pp. Ann Arbor Science. ASIN: B000I3YTLA.
NuDat 2.1 (2005) Nuclear Database version 2.1 from the US National Nuclear Data Center
(NNDC), Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). URL: http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2 as
seen on 02-Feb-2005.
Obata T., Araie H., and Shiraiwa Y. (2003) Kinetic studies on bioconcentration mechanism of
selenium by a coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi. Plant Cell Physiology 44, S43.
120/328
Obata T., Araie H., and Shiraiwa Y. (2004) Bioconcentration mechanism of selenium by a
coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi. Plant and Cell Physiology 45 (10), 1434–1441.
doi:10.1093/pcp/pch164.
Obata T. and Shiraiwa Y. (2005) A novel eukaryotic selenoprotein in the haptophyte alga
Emiliania huxleyi. Journal of Biological Chemistry 280 (18), 18462.
Ochs M., Lothenbach B., and Giffaut E. (2002) Uptake of oxo-anions by cements through
solid-solution formation: experimental evidence and modelling. Radiochimica Acta, 90 (9),
639–646. doi:10.1524/ract.2002.90.9-11_2002.639.
ODS – NIH (2004) Dietary supplement fact sheet: selenium. 9 pp., 66 references. Document
last updated: 08/01/2004. http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Selenium_pf.asp. Office of Dietary
Supplements (ODS). National Institutes of Health (NIH). Bethesda, Maryland 20892 USA.
http://ods.od.nih.gov.
OECD/NEA (1991) Review of safety assessment methods, disposal of radioactive waste. A
report of the Performance Assessment Advisory Group of the Radioactive Waste
Management Committee.
OECD/NEA (1992) Systematic approaches to scenario development. A report of the NEA
working group on the identification and selection of scenarios for performance assessment of
radioactive waste disposal.
OECD/NEA (1993) The role of conceptual models in demonstrating repository post-closure
safety. Proceedings of a NEA Workshop, Paris, 16-18 November 1993. Nuclear Energy
Agency (NEA). OECD Documents. 190 pp. ISBN 92-64-14429-3.
OECD/NEA (1997) Safety assessment of radioactive waste repositories – Systematic
approaches to scenario development – An international database of Features, Events and
Processes. Draft report (24/6/1997) of the NEA working group on development of a database
of Features, Events and Processes relevant to the assessment of post-closure safety of
radioactive waste repositories.
OECD/NEA (1999) Actinide and fission product partitioning and transmutation. status and
assessment report.
Oger P.M., Daniel I., Cournoyer B., and Simionovici A. (2004) In situ micro X-ray absorption
near-edge structure study of microbiologically reduced selenite (SeO32–). Spectrochimica Acta
Part B 59, 1681–1686.
121/328
Oldfield J.E. (1999) Selenium Se world atlas. Publisher: Selenium-Tellurium Development
Association. ASIN: B000H5RMK4.
Olin Å. (Chairman), Noläng B., Öhman L-O., Osadchii E.G., and Rosén E. (2005) Chemical
thermodynamics of selenium. Chemical Thermodynamics Series, Volume 7. Elsevier Science.
ISBN: 0-444-51403-1, 851 pp. Edited by Mompean F.J., Perrone J., and Illemassène M.,
OECD, Nuclear Energy Agency, Data Bank, Issy-les-Moulineaux (France).
Olyslaegers G. (2008) Concise mission report. SCK•CEN Report N° 125-14140 (2008-0507). Participation to the BIOPROTA International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere, 5 and 6
May 2008. Nagra, Wettingen (CH).
Olyslaegers G. (2008) In: Smith K. (Ed.) (2008) Report of Se-79 in the Biosphere.
BIOPROTA Workshop, hosted by Nagra, Wettingen (CH), 5–6 May 2008, V2.0, Final.
BIOPROTA – http://www.bioprota.com.
ONDRAF/NIRAS (2001) SAFIR 2 Report, coordinated by De Preter P., Lalieux P., and Cool
W. (eds.). Safety Assessment and Feasibility Interim Report 2. Four volumes, 13 Chapters.
ONDRAF/NIRAS, Belgian Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials.
NIROND 2001-06 E. December 2001.
ONDRAF/NIRAS (2004) Multi-criteria analysis on the selection of a reference EBS design
for vitrified high-level waste. NIROND, Brussels. Report NIROND 2004-03 E.
Oppenheimer J.A. (1984) Speciation of selenium in groundwater. 29 pp. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. ASIN:
B0006YT0T2.
Oram L.L., Strawn D.G., Marcus M.A., Fakra S.C., and Möller G. (2008) Macro- and
microscale investigation of selenium speciation in Blackfoot River, Idaho sediments.
Environmental Science and Technology 42 (18), 6830–6836. doi:10.1021/es7032229.
Oremland R.S. (1991) Selenate removal from waste water. Patent.
Oremland R.S. (1994) Biogeochemical transformations of selenium in anoxic environments.
In: Frankenberger W.T., Jr., and Benson S.N. (Eds.) (1994) Selenium in the Environment:
Marcel Dekker. New York, N.Y. pp. 389–419.
122/328
Oremland R.S., Blum J.S, Culbertson C.W., Visscher P.T., Miller L.G., Dowdle P., and
Strohmaier R.E. (1994) Isolation, growth, and metabolism of an obligately anaerobic,
selenate-respiring bacterium, strain SES-3. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 60(8),
3011–3019.
Oremland R.S., Blum J.S., Bindi A.B., Dowdle P.R., Herbel M., Stolz J.F. (1999)
Simultaneous reduction of nitrate and selenate by cell suspensions of selenium-respiring
bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 65(10), 4385–4392. Retrieved from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/65/10/4385.
Oremland R.S., Herbel M.J., Blum J.S., Langley S., Beveridge T.J., Ajayan P.M. (2004)
Structural and spectral features of selenium nanospheres produced by Se-respiring bacteria.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology 70(1), 52–60. Retrieved from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/70/1/52.
Oremland R.S., Hollibaugh J.T., Maest A.S., Presser T.S., Miller L.G., and Culbertson C.W.
(1989) Selenate reduction to elemental selenium by anaerobic bacteria in sediments and
culture: biogeochemical significance of a novel, sulfate-independent respiration. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 55(9), 2333–2343. Retrieved from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/55/9/2333.
Oremland R.S., Kulp T.R., Blum J.S., Hoeft S.E., Baesman S., Miller L.G., et al. (2005) A
Microbial arsenic cycle in a salt-saturated, extreme environment. Science, 308(5726), 1305–
1308. Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/308/5726/1305.
Oremland R.S., Steinberg N., Maest A., Miller L., and Hollibaugh J. (1990) Measurement of
in situ rates of selenate removal by dissimilatory bacterial reduction in sediments.
Environmental Science and Technology 24(8), 1157–1164.
Oremland R.S., Steinberg N.A., Presser T.S., and Miller L.G. (1991) In situ bacterial selenate
reduction in the agricultural drainage systems of western Nevada. Applied and Environmental
Microbiology 57(2), 615–617. Retrieved from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/2/615.
Oremland R.S. and Stolz J.F. (2003) The ecology of arsenic. Science 300(5621), 939–944.
doi:10.1126/science.1081903. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/300/5621/939.
Oremland R.S., Stolz J., and Lovley D. (1998) “Green rust” in the lab and in the soil. Science,
281(5380), 1111. Technical comment.
123/328
Oremland R.S., Stolz J., Lovley D., Myneni S.C., Tokunaga T.K., Brown G.E., et al. (1998)
“Green rust” in the lab and in the soil. Science, 281(5380), 1111. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencemag.org.
Oremland R.S., Stolz J., and Hollibaugh J. (2004) The microbial arsenic cycle in Mono Lake,
California. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 48(1), 15–27.
Oremland R.S., and Zehr J.P. (1986) Formation of methane and carbon dioxide from
dimethylselenide in anoxic sediments and by a methanogenic bacterium. Applied and
Environmental
Microbiology
52(5),
1031–1036.
Retrieved
from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/52/5/1031.
Ortiz L., Volckaert G., and Mallants D. (2002) Gas generation and migration in Boom Clay, a
potential host rock formation for nuclear waste storage. Engineering Geology 64, 2-3, 287–
296. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00107-7. See: Microbial activity in Boom Clay.
Parfitt R.L. and Smart R.S.C. (1977) Infrared spectra from binuclear bridging complexes of
sulphate adsorbed on goethite (α-FeOOH). Journal of the Chemical Society Faraday
Transaction 1, 73, 796–802.
Parfitt R.L. and Smart R.S.C. (1978) The mechanism of sulfate adsorption on iron oxides. Soil
Science Society of America Journal 42, 48–50.
Parfitt R.L. Atkinson R.J., and Smart R.S.C. (1975) The mechanism of phosphate fixation by
iron oxides. Soil Science Society of America Journal 39, 837–841.
Parfitt R.L., Russell J.D., and Farmer V.C. (1976) Confirmation of the structures of goethite
(α-FEOOH) and phosphated goethite by infrared spectroscopy. Journal of the Chemical
Society Faraday Transaction 1, 72, 1082–1087.
Parker G.W., Creek G.E., Hebert G.M., Lantz P.M., and Martin W.J. (1949) Oak Ridge
National Laboratory Classified Report ORNL-499, December 1949 (unpublished). Cited as
reference “ParkG49a”. In: Lederer C.M., Hollander J.M., and Perlman I. (1967) Table of
Isotopes, sixth edition, p. 30, p. 210, p. 212, p. 214, and p. 527. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York • London • Sydney.
Parker J. (2004) Feasibility study for the reduction of colour within the glass furnace. Written
by the Glass Technology Service (GTS) and the University of Sheffield, Engineering
Materials Department for the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP).
124/328
Project code: GLA0023. ISBN: 1-84405-090-4.
http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/ColourReduction.b4a2fccd.pdf
Parkhurst D.L. and Appelo C.A.J. (1999) User’s guide to PHREEQC (Version 2) – A
computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse
geochemical calculations. U.S. Geological Survey Water-resources Investigations Report 994259.
United States Geological Survey website as viewed on 23 September 2004:
http://wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/GWC_coupled/phreeqc/index.html,
Note: “wwwbrr”, without a dot after www, is exactly written as displayed on the USGS web
site. With a dot, the IP address of the web site cannot be found.
Parrington J.R., Knox H.D., Breneman S.L., Baum E.M., and Feiner F. (1996) Nuclides and
isotopes. Fifteenth edition. Chart of the nuclides. Revised 1996 Courtesy of Knolls Atomic
Power Laboratory (KAPL Inc.) a Lockheed Martin Company – General Electric Nuclear
Energy. T½ = 6.5 × 105 years for 79Se. 79Se: Z = 34 protons; N = 45 neutrons. See top of p. 26.
Pascal P. et Lumbroso H. (1977) Nouveau traité de chimie minérale. Compléments 7.
Selenium. Par H. Lumbroso. XII, 290. Masson, Paris. ISBN 2-225-42988-X.
Patai S. and Rappoport Z. (1986) The chemistry of organic selenium and tellurium
compounds. Wiley, Chichester. ISBN: 0471904252.
Pauwels H., Dictor M.-C., et Garrido F. (2009) Etude expérimentale du comportement
biogéochimique des nitrates – Essais en présence d’échantillons du site du Mont Terri (projet
BN-nitrates). Rapport final. BRGM/RP – 57387-FR. Juin 2009. 29 pp.
Pauwels H., Dictor M.-C., and Garrido F. (2010) Experimental study of the biogeochemical
behaviour of nitrates – Tests in the presence of samples from the Mont Terri site. Final report
of the lab supporting microbial tests made at BRGM for the Mont Terri Bitumen Nitrate (BN)
experiment. Mont Terri Technical Note (TN). 29 pp.
Peak D., Ford R.G., and Sparks D.L. (1999) An in situ ATR-FTIR investigation of sulfate
bonding mechanisms on goethite. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 218(1), 289–299.
Peak D., Saha U.K., and Huang P.M. (2006) Selenite adsorption mechanism on pure and
coated montmorillonite: an EXAFS and XANES spectroscopic study. Soil Science Society of
America Journal 70, 192–203.
125/328
Pearson J.F.J. and Berner U. (1991) NAGRA Thermochemical Data Base I. Core data. Nagra
Technical Report NTB 91-17. NAGRA, Wettingen.
Pearson J.F.J., Berner U., and Hummel W. (1992) NAGRA Thermochemical Data Base II.
Supplemental data 05/92. Nagra Technical Report NTB 91-18. NAGRA, Wettingen.
Pearson F.J., Scholtis A., Gautschi A., Baeyens B., Bradbury M., and Degueldre C. (1999)
Chemistry of porewater. In: Mont Terri Rock Laboratory: Results of the hydrogeological,
geochemical and geotechnical experiments performed in 1996 and 1997 (Ed. Burkhalter, R.).
Landeshydrologie und -geologie. Geologische Berichte Nr. 23. 129–147.
Pearson F.J., Arcos D., Bath A., Boisson J.-Y., Fernández A.M., Gäbler H.-E., Gaucher E.,
Gautschi A., Griffault L., Hernán P., and Waber H.N. (2003) Mont Terri Project –
Geochemistry of water in the Opalinus Clay Formation at the Mont Terri Rock Laboratory –
Synthesis Report. Berichte des BWG, Serie Geologie – Rapports de l'OFEG, Série Géologie –
Rapporti dell'UFAEG, Serie Geologica – Report of the Swiss Federal Office for Water and
Geology (FOWG), Geology Series. N°5, 319 pp. ISBN 3-906723-59-3. Bern, Switzerland.
Peitzsch Mirko and Kersten Michael (2008) Microbiological alkylation and volatilization of
inorganic selenium from Se-LDH and ferroselite. Poster presented at the 2nd International
Workshop on: Mechanisms and modelling of waste/cement interactions. October 12-16, 2008,
Le Croisic (France). http://cement08.in2p3.fr.
Pejova B. and Grozdanov I. (2001) Solution growth and characterization of amorphous
selenium thin films – Heat transformation to nanocrystalline gray selenium thin films. Applied
Surface Science 177(3), 152–157.
Perkins R. and Foster A. (n.d.) Mineral affinities and distribution of selenium and other trace
elements in black shale and phosphorite of the Phosphoria Formation. Life Cycle of the
Phosphoria Formation: From Deposition to Post-Mining Environment 251–295.
Peters M.G., Maher W.A., Barford J.P., and Gomes V.G. (1997) Selenium association in
estuarine sediments: redox effects. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 99, 275–282.
Peynet V. (2003) Rétention d’actinide et de produits de fission par des phases solides
polyminérales. 269 pp. Voir Chap. III et IV: Adsorption et rétention du césium, de
l’américium (III) et du sélénium (IV) en traces par la montmorillonite, la goethite et la calcite,
en phase pure ou en mélange. Thèse de doctorat de l’Université Paris 6, spécialité Chimie
Analytique. Thèse soutenue le 10 juillet 2003 pour l’obtention du grade de Docteur de
l’Université Paris 6.
126/328
Pfennig G., Klewe-Nebenius H., and Seelmann-Eggebert W. (1995) Karlsruher Nuklidkarte,
6. Auflage 1995. T½ < 6.5 × 104 years for 79Se. Edited by Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe
(FZK) GmbH. 79Se: Z = 34 protons; N = 45 neutrons. See 4th flaps.
Pickering I.J., Prince R.C., Salt D.E., and George G.N. (2000) Quantitative, chemically
specific imaging of selenium transformation in plants. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Science of USA 97(20), 10717–10722. Published online 2000 September 12.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=27089.
Pickering I.J., Wright C., Bubner B., Ellis D., Persans M.W., Yu E.Y., George G.N., Prince
R.C., and Salt D.E. (2003) Chemical form and distribution of selenium and sulfur in the
selenium hyperaccumulator astragalus bisulcatus. Plant Physiology 131, 1460–1467.
10.1104/pp.014787. http://www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/content/full/131/3/1460.
Pierce M.L. and Moore C.B. (1980) Adsorption of arsenite on amorphous iron hydroxide
from dilute aqueous solution. Environmental Science and Technology 14, 214–216.
Pilkington N.J. (1998) Minutes of progress meeting on radionuclide solubilities in Boom
Clay, held on 28 April 1998.
Pirlet V. (2005) Determination of the mobile leached concentrations of 79Se in near-field
conditions. In: Characterization and compatibility with the disposal medium of Cogema and
Eurochemic reprocessing waste forms (Tasks VM-6 and GV8 of NIRAS/ONDRAF contracts
CCHO-90/123-1 and CCHO-90/123-2 – vitrified waste). The importance of the glass
composition and the near-field for the mobile concentrations of radionuclides. Summary of
the topical report for WP4 of RP.WD.008 (January 2000 – June 2003).
Plant J.A., Kinniburgh D.G., Smedley P.L., Fordyce F.M., and Klinck B.A. (2004) Chap. 9.02
Arsenic and selenium, pp. 17 – 66. In Environmental Geochemistry (ed. Lollar B.S.) Vol. 9
Treatise on Geochemistry (eds. Holland H.D. and Turekian K.K., executives editors) (Vol. 9,
ISBN: 0-08-044344-3). Elsevier Pergamon Oxford. ISBN (set): 0-08-043751-6.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/referenceworks/0080437516.
Plotnikov V.I. (1958) Coprecipitation of small quantities of selenium with ferric hydroxide.
Russian Journal of Inorganic Chemistry 3(8),1761–1766 [pp. 56–64 in English translation].
Plotnikov V.I. (1960) Coprecipitation of selenium and tellurium with metal hydroxides.
Russian Journal of Inorganic Chemistry 5, 351–354.
127/328
Plotnikov V.I. (1964) Coprecipitation of small amounts of selenium and zinc with metal
hydroxides. Russian Journal of Inorganic Chemistry 9, 245–248.
PNC (1992) Research and development on geological disposal of high-level radioactive
waste, first progress report – H3. PNC TN1410 93-059.
Poinssot C., Baeyens B., and Bradbury M.H. (1999) Experimental and modelling studies of
caesium sorption on illite. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 63(19/20), 3217–3227.
Pointeau I., Hainos D., Coreau N., and Reiller P. (2006) Effect of organics on selenite uptake
by cementitious materials. Waste Management, 26 (7), 733–740.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2006.01.026.
Pointeau I., Coreau N., Hainos D., and Reiller P. (2006) Influence of organic ligands on the
radionuclides uptake [Se(IV) and U(VI)] by cementitious materials. CEA
Saclay/DEN/DANS/DPC/SECR/L3MR, lecture given to the 2006 Summer School on
Geochemistry and Migration of Actinides — Actinide Behaviour in Natural Environment
(Actinet Network of Excellence).
Pourbaix M. (1966) Atlas of electrochemical equilibria in aqueous solutions. 645 pp.
Pergamon Press. Oxford.
Pourbaix M. (1976) Atlas of electrochemical equilibria. NACE, Houston, TX.
Presser T., Piper D., Bird K., Skorupa J., Hamilton S., Detwiler S., et al. (2004) The
Phosphoria Formation: A model for forecasting global selenium sources to the environment.
Life cycle of the Phosphoria Formation: from deposition to the post-mining environment, 299.
Prussin S.G., Olander D.R., Lau W.K., and Hansson L. (1988) Release of fission products
(Xe, I, Te, Cs, Mo, and Tc) from polycrystalline UO2. Journal of Nuclear Materials 154, 25–
37.
Put M., De Cannière P., and Moors H. (1992) Migration of radionuclides in Boom Clay.
State-of-the-art report 1992. SCK•CEN report to ONDRAF/NIRAS. See description of the
C4 type percolation experiments in Annex 1: Different types of migration experiments,
pp. 1.7, 1.8 (type C4) and Fig. 1.1.1 (type C4). See also De Preter et al. (1992) for the final
report to the European Commission (EC).
128/328
Put M., Aertsens M., De Cannière P, Dierckx A., and Moors H. et al. (1997) Geological
disposal of conditioned high-level and long-lived radioactive waste. Progress report to
NIRAS/ONDRAF for the first semester of 1997, R-3240 (Mol, April 1998).
Rajan S.S.S. (1979) Adsorption of selenite, phosphate and sulphate on hydrous alumina.
Journal of Soil Science 30, 709–718.
Reddy K.J., Zhang Z.H., Blaylock M.J., and Vance G.F. (1995) Method for detecting
selenium speciation in groundwater. Environmental Science and Technology 29(7), 1754–
1759.
Redman A.D., Macalady D.L., and Ahmann D. (2002) Natural organic matter affects arsenic
speciation and sorption onto hematite. Environmental Science and Technology 36, 2889–
2896.
Refait P., Simon L., and Génin J.-M.R. (2000) Reduction of SeO42– anions and anoxic
formation of iron(II)-iron(III) hydroxy selenate green rust. Environmental Science and
Technology 34, 819-825.
Rietra R.P.J.J., Hiemstra T., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (2001) Comparison of selenate and
sulfate adsorption on goethite. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 240, 384–390.
doi:10.1006/jcis.2001.7650.
Román-Ross G., Cuello G.J., Turrillas X., Fernández-Martínez A., and Charlet L. (2006)
Arsenite sorption and co-precipitation with calcite. Chemical Geology 233 (3-4), 328–336.
Rose A.L. and Waite T.D. (2003) Kinetics of iron complexation by dissolved natural organic
matter in coastal waters. Marine Chemistry 84(1-2), 85–103.
Rotruck J.T., Pope A.L., Ganther H.E., Swanson A.B., Hafeman D.G., and Hoekstra W.G.
(1973) Selenium: biological role as a component of glutathione peroxidase. Science 179, 588–
590.
Roussel-Debet S., Adam C., and Beaugelin-Seiller K (2005) Fiche radionucléide:
Sélénium 79 et environnement. 27 pp. IRSN, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté
Nucléaire. Direction de l’environnement et de l’intervention – Service d’étude du
comportement des radionucléides dans les écosystèmes.
129/328
Rouxel O., Ludden J., Carignan J., Marin L., and Fouquet Y. (2002) Natural variations of Se
isotopic composition determined by hydride generation multiple collector inductively coupled
plasma mass spectrometry. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 66 (18), 3191–3199.
Rouxel O., Ludden J., Fouquet Y., and Carignan J. (n.d.) Natural variations of selenium
isotopes determined by multicollector plasma source mass spectrometry: Application to
seafloor hydrothermal systems. Presented at the Journal of Conference Abstracts 5, 858.
Runchal A.K. (1997) PORFLOW, a software tool for multiphase fluid flow, heat and mass
transport in fractured porous media. User's manual, Version 3.07 (ACRi, Bel Air, California,
USA, 1997).
Rusch U., Borkovec M., Daicic J., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1997) Interpretation of
competitive adsorption isotherms in terms of affinity distributions. Journal of Colloid and
Interface Science 191, 247–255.
Ryden J.C., McLaughlin J.R. and Syers J.K. (1977a) Mechanisms of phosphate sorption by
soils and hydrous ferric oxide gel. Journal of Soil Science 28, 72–92.
Ryden J.C., McLaughlin J.R. and Syers J.K. (1977b) Time-dependent sorption of phosphate
by soils and hydrous ferric oxides. Journal of Soil Science 28, 585–595.
Ryser A.L., Strawn D.G., Marcus M.A., Johnson-Maynard J.L., Gunter M.E., and Möller G.
(2005) Micro-spectroscopic investigation of selenium-bearing minerals from the Western US
Phosphate Resource Area. Geochemical Transactions 6(1), 1–11. doi:10.1186/1467-4866-6-1.
(http://www.geochemicaltransactions.com/ published online 28 January 2005).
SAFIR 2 Report (2001) coordinated by De Preter P., Lalieux P., and Cool W. (eds.) SAFIR 2
Report, Safety Assessment and Feasibility Interim Report 2. Four volumes, 13 Chapters.
ONDRAF/NIRAS, Belgian Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials.
NIROND 2001-06 E. December 2001.
Sagoe-Crentsil K.K., and Glasser F.P (1993) “Green rust”, iron solubility and the role of
chloride in the corrosion of steel at high pH. Cement and Concrete Research 23, 785–791.
Sahin F., Volkan M., Howard A.G., and Ataman O.Y. (2003) Selective pre-concentration of
selenite from aqueous samples using mercapto-silica. Talanta 60 (5), 1003–1009.
Sarathchandra S.U. and Watkinson J.H. (1981) Oxidation of elemental selenium to selenite by
Bacillus megaterium. Science 211 (4482), 600–1.
130/328
Sato H. (1997) Diffusion behavior of Se in compacted sodium bentonite under reducing
conditions. PNC TN 8410 97-075.
Sato H., Yui M., and Yoshikawa H.(1995) Diffusion behaviour for Se and Zr in sodium
bentonite. Material Research Society Symposium Proceedings Vol 353, Materials Research
Society, pp. 269–276 (in Japanese).
Scheidegger A.M., Grolimund D., Cui D., Devoy J., Spahiu K., Wersin P., Bonhoure I., and
Janousch M. (2003) Reduction of selenite on corroded iron surfaces: a micro-spectroscopic
study. Journal de physique IV 104, 417–420. doi:10.1051/jp4:20030112.
Séby F., Potin-Gautier M., Giffaut E., and Donard O.F.X. (1998) Assessing the speciation and
the biogeochemical processes affecting the mobility of selenium from a geological repository
of radioactive wastes to the biosphere. Analusis 26, 193–198.
Seby F., Potin-Gautier M., Giffaut E., Borge G., and Donard O.F.X. (2001) A critical review
of thermodynamic data for selenium species at 25 °C. Chemical Geology 171(3), 173–194.
Selenium (2007, March 4) In: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 23:56, March 5,
2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selenium&oldid=112629566.
Shaker A.M. (1996) Kinetics of the reduction of Se(IV) to Se-sol. Journal of Colloid and
Interface Science 180, 225–231.
Sharmasarkar S. and Vance G.F. (1995) Fractional partitioning for assessing solid-phase
speciation and geochemical transformations of soil selenium. Soil Science 160(1), 43–55.
Sharmasarkar S. and Vance G.F. (2002) Selenite-selenate sorption in surface coal mine
environment. Advances in Environmental Research 7(1), 87–95.
Sheppard M.I, Beals D.I, Thibault D.H., and O'Connor P. (1984) Soil nuclide distribution
coefficients and their statistical distribution. AECL, Pinawa, Report AECL-8364.
Shrift A. (1964) A selenium cycle in nature ? Nature 201, 1304–1305 (Mar 28).
Shriver D.F., Atkins P.W., and Langford C.H. (1990) Inorganic chemistry. 706 pp. Oxford
University Press. Oxford, Melbourne, Tokyo. ISBN 0-19-855231-9. See pp. 240 – 241:
Electron transfer, atom transfer; and also p. 392: sluggish reduction of selenate and tellurate.
p. 416: aqueous solutions containing Fe2+ and ClO4– are stable for many months in the
131/328
absence of dissolved oxygen because oxyanions reduction becomes slower as the oxidation
number increases.
Shuh D.K., Kaltsoyannis N., and Bucher J.J. (1994) Environmental applications of XANES:
Speciation of Tc in cement after chemical treatment and Se after bacterial uptake.
Conference: Spring meeting of the Materials Research Society (MRS), San Francisco, CA
(United States), 4–8 Apr 1994.
Sigg L. (1999) Redox potential measurements in natural waters: Significance, concepts and
problems, in Redox: Fundamentals, processes and applications. J. Schüring, et al. Ed.,
Springer, Berlin.
Sillen X., and Marivoet J. (2002) Spent fuel performance assessment for a hypothetical
repository in the Boom Clay at the Mol site (Belgium). BLG-877. Open report to
ONDRAF/NIRAS for contract – KNT 90.95.656.02 and to the European Commission for
contract EC FI4W-CT96-0018. Waste and Disposal Department SCK•CEN, Mol Belgium.
February 2002. 138 pp.
Sindeeva N.D. (1964) Mineralogy and types of deposits of selenium and tellurium.
Interscience publishers. 1st edition. ASIN: B000CMY78M.
Singh B. (1993) Nuclear Data Sheets Update for A = 79. Compilation 79Cu, 79Zn, 79Ga, 79Ge,
79
As, 79Se, 79Br, 79Kr, 79Rb, 79Sr, 79Y; compiled, evaluated structure data. Nuclear Data Sheets
70, 437. 1993SI28. (comment: question on the validity of the half-life of 79Se), citation in
McAninch et al. (1994).
Singh B. (2002) Nuclear Data Sheets for A = 79. Compilation 79Cu, 79Zn, 79Ga, 79Ge, 79As,
79
Se, 79Br, 79Kr, 79Rb, 79Sr, 79Y, 79Zr; compiled, evaluated structure data. Nuclear Data Sheets
96(1), 1–176 (comment: see for the new half-life of 79Se = 2.95 E+5 years). NuDat 2.1:
http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/reCenter.jsp?z=34&n=45
Singh B. (2002) Nuclear Data Sheets for A = 79. Nuclear Data Sheets 96(1), 1–176.
SKB (1999) SR 97 – Post closure safety. Main Report. Volumes I & II. SKB Technical
Report TR-99-06, Stockholm, Sweden.
Skoog D.A. and West D.M. (1976) Fundamentals of analytical chemistry. Third Edition.
Holt, Rinehart and Winston. New York. ISBN 0-03-089495-6. See p. 365: sources of error in
iodometric methods: 4 I– + O2(g) + 4 H+ <=> 2 I2 + 2 H2O. In the index of keywords on page
132/328
797, see also: Iodide ion, air oxidation of, p. 58, 363, 365. See also: Iodine solution(s)
preparation and standardization of, p. 358, 360, 747.
Sladkov V., Fourest B., David F., Venault L., Lecomte M. (2003) Application of capillary
electrophoresis for inorganic selenium speciation in the frame of high-level waste
management. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 376, 455–459.
Small, J., M. Nykyri, M. Helin, U. Hovi, T. Sarlin, and M. Itävaara (2008) Experimental and
modelling investigations of the biogeochemistry of gas production from low and intermediate
level radioactive waste. Applied Geochemistry in press.
Small, J. (2008) Biogeochemical modelling of a bituminous waste storage cell and impact on
nitrate transport; Rapport Nexia Solutions N° Andra C RP FSTR 08.0008.
Smedley P.L. and Kinniburgh D.G. (2002) A review of the source, behaviour and distribution
of arsenic in natural waters, Applied Geochemistry 17, 517–568.
Smith, D.W. (2006) “Phenomenology”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
2006 Edition), Zalta Edward N. (ed.),
URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2006/entries/phenomenology/.
Smith K. (Ed.) (2008) Report of Se-79 in the Biosphere. BIOPROTA Workshop, hosted by
Nagra, Wettingen, 5–6 May 2008, V2.0, Final. BIOPROTA – http://www.bioprota.com.
Smith L. and Craig B. (2005) Practical corrosion control measures for elemental sulfur
containing environments. Paper N° 05646 submitted to NACE Corrosion 2005. 20 pp.
Song-Sheng J., Jingru G., Shan J., Chunsheng L., Anzhi C., Ming H., Shaoyong W., and
Shilin L. (1997) Determination of the half-life of 79Se with the accelerator mass spectrometry
technique. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam
Interactions with Materials and Atoms, Elsevier Science 123, 405–409.
Song-Sheng J., Ming H., Li-Jun D., Jing-Ru G., and Shao-Yong W. (2001) Remeasurement of
the Half-Life of 79Se with the Projectile X-Ray Detection Method. Chinese Physics Letters,
Institute of Physics Publishing 18, 746–749.
Spackman L., Hartman K.K.D., Harbour J.D., and Essington M.E. (1990) Adsorption of
oxyanions by spent western oil shale: II. Selenite. Environmental Geology 15(2), 93–99.
doi:10.1007/BF01705096.
133/328
Spahiu K. (2005) The effect of dissolved hydrogen on the dissolution of
high burn-up spent fuel and MOX fuel. SKB TR-05-09.
233
U doped UO2 (s),
Spahiu K., Cui D., and Lundström M. (2004) The fate of radiolytic oxidants during spent fuel
leaching in the presence of dissolved near field hydrogen. Radiochimica Acta 92 (9-11), 625–
629. doi:10.1524/ract.92.9.625.54990.
Spahiu K., Devoy J., Cui D., and Lundström M. (2004) The reduction of U(VI) by near field
hydrogen in the presence of UO2(s). Radiochimica Acta 92 (9-11), 597–601.
doi:10.1524/ract.92.9.597.54985.
Spahiu K., Werme L., and Eklund U.-B. (2000) The influence of near field hydrogen on
actinide solubilities and spent fuel leaching. Radiochimica Acta 88 (9-11), 507.
doi:10.1524/ract.2000.88.9-11.507.
Sposito G. (1981) The thermodynamics of soils solutions. 223 pp. Oxford Clarendon Press.
Oxford. ISBN 0-19-857568-8. See p. 75–77, Hard Soft Lewis Acid Base (HSAB) principle.
Sposito G. (1984) The surface chemistry of soils. Oxford University Press. New York.
Sposito G., Skipper N.T., Sutton R., Park S.-H., Soper A.K., and Greathouse J.A. (1999)
Surface geochemistry of the clay minerals. Paper presented at the National Academy of
Sciences colloquium “Geology, Mineralogy, and Human Welfare” held November 8-9, 1998
at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center in Irvine, CA. Colloquium Paper. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Science USA 96(7), 3358–3364.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/96/7/3358.
Sposito G. and Levesque C.S. (1985) Sodium-calcium-magnesium exchange on Silver Hill
Illite. Soil Science Society of America Journal 49, 1153-1159.
Stachowiak J., Gorecka D., and Zarakowska W. (2000) Sorption of selenium by selected
cereal bran. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences 9 (4), 27–30.
Steinberg N. and Oremland R. (1990) Dissimilatory selenate reduction potentials in a
diversity of sediment types. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 56(11), 3550–3557.
Steinberg N.A., Blum J.S., Hochstein L., and Oremland R.S. (1992) Nitrate is a preferred
electron acceptor for growth of freshwater selenate-respiring bacteria. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 58(1), 426–428.
134/328
Steudel R. (2002) The chemistry of organic polysulfanes R−Sn−R (n > 2). Chemical Reviews
102 (11), 3905–3946. doi:10.1021/cr010127m.
Stevenson F.J. Editor (1982) Humus chemistry: Genesis, composition, reactions. Wiley &
Sons, New York.
Stevenson F.J. (1982) Extraction, fractionation, and general chemical composition of soil
organic matter. In: Stevenson F.J., Editor (1982) Humus chemistry. Genesis, composition,
reactions. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 26–54.
Stevenson F.J. (1985) Geochemistry of soil humic substances. Humic substances in soil,
sediment, and water: geochemistry, isolation, and characterization. John Wiley & Sons, New
York. pp. 13–52, 14 Fig., 8 Table.
Stolz J., Basu P., and Oremland R. (2002) Microbial transformation of elements: the case of
arsenic and selenium. International Microbiology 5(4), 201–207.
Stolz J.F., Basu P., Santini J.M., and Oremland R.S. (2006) Arsenic and selenium in microbial
metabolism. Annual Review of Microbiology 60, 107–130. http://micro.annualreviews.org.
doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.60.080805.142053.
Stolz J.F. and Oremland R.S. (1999) Bacterial respiration of arsenic and selenium. FEMS
Microbiology Reviews 23(5), 615–627.
Stork A.W., Jury W.A., and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (1999) Accelerated volatilization rates of
selenium from different soils. Biol. Trace Elements Res. 69, 217–234.
Stroes-Gascoyne S., Schippers A., Schwyn B., Poulain S., Sergeant C., Simonoff M., Le
Marrec C., Altmann S., Nagaoka T., Mauclaire L., McKenzie J., Daumas S., Vinsot A.,
Beaucaire C., and Matray J.-M. (2007) Microbial community analysis of Opalinus Clay drill
core samples from the Mont Terri Underground Research Laboratory, Switzerland.
Geomicrobiology Journal, 24, 1–17. doi:10.1080/01490450601134275. ISSN: 0149-0451
print / 1521-0529 online.
Struyck Z. and Sposito G. (2001) Redox properties of standard humic acids. Geoderma 102,
329–346.
Stumm W. (1992) Chemistry of the solid-water interface – Processes at the mineral-water and
particle-water interface in natural systems. 428 pp. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York
(USA).
135/328
Stumm W., Kummert R., and Sigg L. (1980) A ligand exchange model for the adsorption of
inorganic and organic ligands at hydrous oxide interfaces. Croat. Chem. Acta 53, 291–312.
Stumm W. and Morgan J.J. (1996) Aquatic chemistry — Chemical equilibria and rates in
natural waters, 1022 pp. Third edition. A Wiley-Interscience publication. John Wiley & Sons
Inc. New York – Chichester – Brisbane – Toronto – Singapore. See section 15.14 The sulfur
cycle: figure 15.25, p. 932.
Su C. and Suarez D.L. (1997) In situ infrared speciation of adsorbed carbonate on aluminium
and iron oxides. Clays Clay and Minerals 45, 814–825.
Su C. and Suarez D.L. (2000) Selenate and selenite sorption on iron oxides: an infrared and
electrophoretic study. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64,101–111.
Swift R.S. (1996) Organic matter characterisation. Methods of Analysis. Part 3. Chemical
Methods. SSA and ASA, Madison, WI, pp. 1011–1069.
Switzer-Blum J., Stolz J., Oren A., and Oremland R. (2001) Selenihalanaerobacter shriftii
gen. nov., sp. nov., a halophilic anaerobe from Dead Sea sediments that respires selenate.
Archives of Microbiology 175(3), 208–219.
Swizer-Blum J., Bindi A., Buzzelli J., Stolz J., and Oremland R. (1998) Bacillus
arsenicoselenatis, sp. nov., and Bacillus selenititreducens, sp. nov.: two haloakiliphiles from
Mono Lake, California, that respire oxyanions of selenium and arsenic. Archives of
Microbiology 171(1), 19–30.
Synal H. and Wacker L. (n.d.) Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms: AMS
measurement technique after 30 years: Possibilities and limitations of low energy systems.
Nuclear
Instruments
and
Methods
in
Physics
Research
Section
B.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.009.
Tachi Y., Shibutani T., Sato H., and Yui M. (1998) Sorption and diffusion behaviour of
selenium in tuff. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 35 (1-3), 77–89.
Thomsen M., Heinemeier J., Hornshøj P., Nielsen H., and Rud N. (1988) Beam Interactions
with Materials and Atoms: Accelerator mass spectrometry applied to 32Si. Nuclear
Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B 31 (3), 425–432. doi:10.1016/0168583X(88)90342-4.
136/328
Thomson C.D. (2004) Assessment of requirements for selenium and adequacy of selenium
status: a review. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58, 391–402.
Thomson B.M., Longmire P.A., and Brookins D.G. (1986) Geochemical constraints on
underground disposal of uranium mill tailings. Journal of Applied Geochemistry 1, 335–344.
Thomson J., Nixon S., Croudace I.W., Pedersen T.F., Brown L., Cook G.T., and MacKenzie
A.B. (2001) Redox-sensitive element uptake in north-east Atlantic Ocean sediments (Benthic
Boundary Layer Experiment sites) Earth and Planetary Science Letters 184, 535–547.
Todd J. D., Rogers R., Li Y.G., Wexler M., Bond P.L., Sun L., et al. (2007) Structural and
regulatory genes required to make the gas dimethyl sulfide in bacteria. Science 315 (5812),
666–669. doi:10.1126/science.1135370.
Tokunaga T.K., Brown G.E., Pickering I.J., Sutton S.R., and Bait S. (1997) Selenium redox
reactions and transport between ponded waters and sediments. Environmental Science &
Technology 31 (5), 1419–1425.
Tournassat C. (2003) Clay Surface Chemistry of Fe(II). University of Grenoble–I, France,
Ph.D. Thesis.
Tournassat C., Ferrage E., Poinsignon C., and Charlet L. (2004) The titration of clay minerals
II. Structure-based model and implications for clay reactivity, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 273,
234–246.
Tournassat C., Gaucher E.C., Fattahi M., and Grambow B. (2006) On the mobility and
potential retention of iodine in the Callovian–Oxfordian formation. Physics and Chemistry of
the Earth, Parts A/B/C. Article in Press, Corrected Proof. Accessed online on 2006-12-02.
doi:10.1016/j.pce.2005.12.004.
Trombe J. C., Gleizes A., and Galy J. (1985) Structure of a uranyl diselenite, UO2Se2O5. Acta
Crystallographica Section C 41, 1571-1573. doi:10.1107/S0108270185008599. Acta
Crystallographica Section C, Crystal Structure Communications, Volume 41, Part 11 research
papers (inorganic compounds).
Tuniz C., and Norton G. (2008) Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms: Accelerator
mass spectrometry: New trends and applications. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in
Physics Research Section B 266 (8), 1837–1845.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.12.045.
137/328
Vandenberghe N. (1978) Sedimentology of the Boom Clay (Rupelian) in Belgium. Verhand.
Kon. Acad. Wetenschappen België, XL, 147, 137 pp.
van der Lee J. (1998) Thermodynamic and mathematical concepts of CHESS. Technical
report Nr. LHM/RD/98/39. Centre d’Informatique Géologique (CIG), Ecole des Mines de
Paris, Fontainebleau, France.
van der Lee J. (2000) CHemical Equilibrium Speciation with Surfaces (CHESS). Centre
d’Informatique Géologique, ARMINES, France. http://chess.ensmp.fr/.
van der Lee J., and Wang L. (2004) Topical report on: Speciation and solubility calculations
for uranium, plutonium, and selenium under Boom Clay conditions. SCK•CEN Restricted
Report R-3 400, 16 pp. Also available as Annex 1 to WP 1 of the extended Final Scientific
and Technical Report of the EC Trancom-II Project. In: Maes N. coordinator et al. (2004a)
Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in a reducing clay sediment (TRANCOM-II).
SCK•CEN-BLG-988 (04/NMa/P-50). see section 3.3 selenium, pp. 8 – 9.
Van Geet M., Maes N., and Dierckx A. (2003) Characteristics of the Boom Clay organic
matter, a review. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Geological Survey of Belgium,
Professional Paper 2003/1, N°298, Brussels, Belgium, 23 pp. ISSN 0378-0902.
Van Iseghem P., Lemmens K., and Pirlet V. (2007) The leaching of Se, Sn, Zr, Pd from
vitrified high-level waste in clay slurries. Mobile fission and activation products in nuclear
waste disposal. International workshop. L’Hermitage, La Baule – France, January 16-19,
2007. http://mofap07.in2p3.fr/. Proceedings to appear as a Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA,
OECD) publication.
Van Loon L.R. and Soler J.M. (2004) Diffusion of HTO, 35Cl–, 125I– and 22Na+ in Opalinus
Clay: Effect of confining pressure, sample orientation, sample depth and temperature. PSI
Report Nr. 04–03, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland.
Van Loon L.R., Wersin P., Soler J.M., Eikenberg J., Gimmi Th., Hernán P., Dewonck S. and
Matray J.-M. (2004) In-situ diffusion of HTO, 22Na+, Cs+ and I– in Opalinus Clay at the Mont
Terri underground rock laboratory. Radiochimica Acta 92, 757–763.
Van Loon L.R., Yllera A., and Hernandez A. (2006) Long-term diffusion experiment (DI-A):
through-diffusion of HTO, 36Cl-, I– and 22Na+ in Opalinus Clay parallel to the bedding plane
under laboratory conditions. Mont Terri Project Technical Report TR 2003-01.
138/328
van Riemsdijk W.H., De Wit J.C.M., Mous S.L.J., Koopal L.K., and Kinniburgh D.G. (1996)
An analytical isotherm equation (CONICA) for non-ideal mono- and bidentate competitive
ion adsorption to heterogeneous surfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 183, 35–
50.
Velinsky D.J. and Cutter G.A. (1990) Determination of elemental selenium and pyriteselenium in sediments. Analytica Chimica Acta 235(2), 419–425.
Venema P., Hiemstra T., Weidler P.G., and van Riemsdijk W.H. (1998) Intrinsic proton
affinity of reactive surface groups of metal (hydr)oxides: Application to iron (hydr)oxides.
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 198, 282–295.
Verink E.D. (1979) Simplified procedure for constructing Pourbaix diagrams. J. Educ.
Modules Mat. Sci. Eng. 1, 535–560.
Vermeer A.W.P., van Riemsdijk W.H., and Koopal L.K. (1998) Adsorption of humic acid to
mineral particles. 1. Specific and electrostatic interactions. Langmuir 14, 2810–2819.
Vieno T. and Nordman H. (1999) Safety assessment of spent fuel disposal in Hästholmen,
Kivetty, Olkiluoto and Romuvaara. TILA-99. 253 pages. Report from VTT Energy to Posiva
OY. Posiva Report. Posiva 99-07. Helsinki Finland. March 1999. ISBN 951-652-062-6. ISSN
1239-3096. See page 20: Activity inventories / Half-life of Se-79. Mention of incorrect value
commonly accepted for the half-life of 79Se.
Vila-Costa M., Simo R., Harada H., Gasol J. M., Slezak D., and Kiene R.P. (2006)
Dimethylsulfoniopropionate uptake by marine phytoplankton. Science 314 (5799), 652–654.
doi:10.1126/science.1131043.
Villalobos M. and Leckie J.O. (2001) Surface complexation modelling and FTIR study of
carbonate adsorption to goethite. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 235, 15–32.
Vochten R., Blaton N., Peeters O., and Deliens M. (1996)
Piretite, Ca(UO2)3(SeO3)2(OH)2 · 4 H2O, a new calcium uranyl selenite from Shinkolobwe,
Shaba, Zaire. Canadian Mineralogy 34, 1317–1322.
Wackett L.P. (2001) Selenium, the environment and microbes an annotated selection of world
wide web sites relevant to the topics in environmental microbiology web alert. Environmental
Microbiology 3 (9), 604–604(1).
139/328
Walker C.T., Rondinella V.V., Papaioannou D., Van Winckel S., Goll W., and Manzel R.
(2005) On the oxidation state of UO2 nuclear fuel at a burn-up of around 100 MWd/kgHM.
Journal of Nuclear Materials 345, 192–205. doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2005.05.010.
Wang L., Dierckx A., and De Cannière P. (2000a) Speciation and solubility of radionuclides
in Boom Clay: calculations performed with “The Geochemist’s Workbench-3.1” and the
database of LLNL, version 8, release 6. Technical report BLG-847, SCK•CEN, Mol,
Belgium.
Wang L., Dierckx A., and De Cannière P. (2000b) Speciation and solubility of radionuclides
in Boom Clay: calculations performed with “The Geochemist's Workbench-3.1” and the
database of LLNL, version 8, release 6. Restricted report, R-3508, SCK•CEN, Mol, Belgium.
Wang L., De Craen M., Maes N., De Cannière P., and Put M. (2001a) Determination of
natural uranium concentration in Boom Clay: Effect of different extraction techniques. In:
Geological evidence and theoretical bases for radionuclide-retention processes in
heterogeneous media. Proceedings of the OECD/NEA GEOTRAP 5 Workshop, Oskarsham,
Sweden, 7-9 May 2001, NEA/OECD, Paris, pp. 257.
Wang L., Marivoet J., De Cannière P., Sillen X., Moors H., Aertsens M., Put M., and Dierckx
A. (2001b) Data collection form: the link between migration studies and performance
assessment – Belgian Case. In: The use of thermodynamic databases in performance
assessment. Proceedings of the Workshop on the OECD/NEA Thermochemical Database
Project, Barcelona, Spain, 29-30 May 2001, NEA/OECD, Paris, p. 181.
Wang L., Dierckx A., De Cannière P., and Maes A. (2002) Uranium release from Boom Clay
in bicarbonate media. Radiochimica Acta 90, 515.
Wang L. (2004) Proposal for a study of sorption in Boom Clay: a position paper. Report in
preparation, SCK•CEN, Mol, Belgium.
Wang L., Ju Y., Liu G., Chou C., Zheng L., and Qi C. (n.d.) Selenium in Chinese coals:
distribution, occurrence, and health impact. Environmental Earth Sciences, 1–11.
Wang W., Guan Y., He M., Jiang S., Wu S., and Li C. (2009) A method for measurement of
ultratrace 79Se with accelerator mass spectrometry. Nuclear Inst. and Methods in Physics
Research, B.
Wang W., Ruan X., et al. (2009) Absolute determination of
Inst. and Methods in Physics Research, B.
140/328
79
Se/80Se with AMS. Nuclear
Wang W., Guan Y., He M., Jiang S., Wu S., and Li C. (n.d.) Beam Interactions with Materials
and Atoms: A method for measurement of ultratrace 79Se with accelerator mass spectrometry.
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B.
doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.024.
Wang W., Ruan X., et al. (n.d.) Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms: Absolute
determination of 79Se/80Se with AMS. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research
Section B. doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.025.
Weast R.C. (ed.) (1968-1969a) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Table of the
isotopes, T½ of 79Se = 7 × 104 years, see p. B-21. 49th Edition (1968 – 1969). CRC, The
Chemical Rubber Company. Cleveland, Ohio.
Weast R.C. (ed.) (1968-1969b) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. The average
amounts of the elements in Earth’s crust. Reprinted with permission of the author from
“Mason B. (1952) Principles of Geochemistry. John Wiley and Sons”. see p. F–144.
49th Edition (1968 – 1969). CRC, The Chemical Rubber Company. Cleveland, Ohio.
Weast R.C. (ed.) (1968-1969c) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Elements present
in solution in sea water excluding dissolved gases. Reprinted with permission of the authors
from “Sverdrup, Johnson, and Fleming (1942) The Oceans. Prentice-Hall, Inc.”. see p. F–145.
49th Edition (1968 – 1969). CRC, The Chemical Rubber Company. Cleveland, Ohio.
Weetjens E. (2004) Migration case study: transport of radionuclides in a reducing clay
sediment (TRANCOM-II). SCK•CEN-BLG-988. Contract N° FIKW-CT-2000-00008.
Annex 19 to WP-9. PA case study for new parameters of Se and U (03/EWe/N-21, 8 pp.
SCK•CEN, Waste and Disposal Department – R&D Geological Disposal, Mol, Belgium.
Wen H. and Carignan J. (2007) Reviews on atmospheric selenium: Emissions, speciation and
fate. Atmospheric Environment 41 (34), 7151–7165.
Wen H. and Carignan J. (2009) Ocean to continent transfer of atmospheric Se as revealed by
epiphytic lichens. Environmental Pollution 157 (10), 2790–2797.
Wen H., Carignan J., Qiu Y., and Liu S. (2006) Selenium speciation in kerogen from two
Chinese selenium deposits: environmental implications. Environmental Science and
Technology 40 (4), 1126–1132. doi:10.1021/es051688o.
141/328
Wen H., Carignan J., Hu R., Fan H., Chang B., and Yang G. (2007) Large selenium isotopic
variations and its implication in the Yutangba Se deposit, Hubei Province, China. Chinese
Science Bulletin 52 (17), 2443–2447.
Wen H. and Qiu Y. (1999) Organic and inorganic occurrence of selenium in Laerma Se-Au
deposit. Science in China Series D: Earth Sciences 42 (6), 662–669.
West J.M., Christofi N., Philp J.C., and Arme S.C. (1986) Investigations on the populations of
introduced and resident micro-organisms in deep repositories and their effects on
containment of radioactive wastes. 62 pp. Commission of the European Communities,
Nuclear Science and Technology, EUR series. Final report EUR 10405 EN. Contract N° 37683-7 WAS UK. Luxembourg. ISBN 92-825-6201-8. See specially pp. 6 and 7.
Westall J.C. (1982) FITEQL: a computer program for determination of chemical equilibrium
constants from experimental data. Report 82-01. Department of Chemistry, Oregon State
University, Corvallis.
WHO (2003) World Health Organisation, WHO/SDE/WSH/03.04/13. Selenium in drinkingwater. Background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water
Quality. Originally published in Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, 2nd ed. Vol. 2 Health
criteria and other supporting information. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 1996.
Wijnja H. and Schulthess C.P. (1999) ATR-FTIR and DRIFT spectroscopy of carbonate
species at the aged gamma-Al2O3/water interface. Spectrochimica Acta Part A 55, 861–872.
Wijnja H. and Schulthess C.P. (2000) Vibrational spectroscopic study of selenate and sulfate
adsorption mechanisms on Fe and Al(hydr)oxides surfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface
Science
229,
286–297.
doi:10.1006/jcis.2000.6960,
available
online
at
http://www.idealibrary.com.
Wijnja H. and Schulthess C.P. (2001) Carbonate adsorption mechanisms on goethite studied
with ATR-FTIR, DRIFT and proton coadsorption measurements. Soil Science Society of
America Journal 65, 324–330.
Wikipedia contributors. (2008a) Coccolithophore. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved March 21, 2008, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coccolithophore&oldid=194436315.
142/328
Wikipedia contributors. (2008c) Dimethylsulfoniopropionate. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved March 21, 2008, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimethylsulfoniopropionate&oldid=199883496.
Wikipedia contributors. (2009) Emiliania huxleyi. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved January 3, 2010, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emiliania_huxleyi&oldid=334837333.
Wittebroodt C. (2009) Transfert de l’iode dans l’argilite de Tournemire. Ph. D Thesis made
at IRSN and Montpellier University 2 (UM2). Thèse présentée le 12 mars 2009 en soutenance
devant l’Université Montpellier 2 pour l'obtention du diplôme de Doctorat Géosciences.
Wolery T. (1992) EQ3/6: A software package for geochemical modelling of aqueous systems:
Package overview and installation guide. Technical Report UCRL-MA-110662 PT, I ed.,
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA (USA).
Workman S.M. and Soltanpour P.N. (1980) Importance of prereducing selenium(VI) to
selenium(IV) and decomposing organic matter in soil extracts prior to determination of
selenium using hydride generation. Soil Science Society of America Journal 44(6), 1331–
1333.
Worsfold P.J, Townsend A., and Poole C.F. eds. (2005) Encyclopedia of Analytical Science.
Second Edition, Elsevier.
Wright W.G. (1999) Oxidation and mobilization of selenium by nitrate in irrigating drainage.
Journal of Environmental Quality 28(4), 1182–1187.
Xiang X. and Jian-qiu G. (2008) Selenium distribution and comprehensive utilization. Journal
of Yangtze University (Natural Science Edition) Sci and Eng V.
Yllera de Llano A., Bidoglio G., Avogadro A., Gibson P.N., and Rivas Romero P. (1996)
Redox reactions and transport of selenium through fractured granite. Journal of Contaminant
Hydrology 21(1-4), 129–139.
Yoshihisa Iida, Tetsuji Yamaguchi, Shinichi Nakyama, Tomoko Nakajima, and Joshiaki
Sakamoto (2001) The solubility of metallic selenium under anoxic conditions. Mat. Res. Soc.
Symp. Proc. 663, 1143–1149.
Yuan-Hui Li and Sandra Gregory (1974) Diffusion of ions in sea water and in deep-sea
sediments. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 38, 703–714.
143/328
Zehr J.P. and Oremland R.S. (1987) Reduction of selenate to selenide by sulfate-respiring
bacteria: experiments with cell suspensions and estuarine sediments. Applied and
Environmental
Microbiology
53(6),
1365–1369.
Retrieved
from
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/1365.
Zhang P.C. and Sparks D.L. (1990) Kinetics and mechanisms of sulfate adsorption/desorption
on goethite using pressure-jump relaxation. Soil Science Society of America Journal 54,
1266–1273.
Zhang P.C. and Sparks D.L. (1990) Kinetics of selenate and selenite adsorption/desorption at
the goethite/water interface. Environmental Science and Technology 24, 1848–1856.
Zhang H.Y., Hu Z.Q., and Lu K. (1995) Transformation from the amorphous to the
nanocrystalline state in pure selenium. Nanostructured Materials 5(1), 41–52.
Zhang H., Wu Z., Yang C., Xia B., Xu D., and Yuan H. (2008) Spatial distributions and
potential risk analysis of total soil selenium in Guangdong province, China. Journal of
Environmental Quality 37 (3), 780–787. doi:10.2134/jeq2007.0154.
Zhang Y. and Moore J.N. (1996) Selenium fractionation and speciation in a wetland system.
Environmental Science and Technology 30, 2613–2619.
Zhang Y. and Moore J.N. (1997) Interaction of selenate with a wetland sediment. Applied
Geochemistry 12(5), 685–691.
Zhang Y. and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2000) Formation of dimethylselenonium compounds
in soil. Environmental Science and Technology 34, 776–683.
Zhang Y. and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2003) Characterization of selenate removal from
drainage water using rice straw. Journal of Environmental Quality 32, 441–446.
Zhang Y., Amrhein C., and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2005a) Effect of arsenate and molybdate
on the removal of selenate from an aqueous solution by zerovalent iron. Science of the Total
Environment 350(1-3), 1–11.
Zhang Y., Wang J., Amrhein C., and Frankenberger W.T. Jr. (2005b) Removal of selenate
from water by zerovalent iron. Journal of Environmental Quality 34(2), 487–495.
144/328
Zhao Y.H., Lu K., and Liu T. (2004) EXAFS study of mechanical-milling-induced solid-state
amorphization of Se. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 333, 246–251.
Zhong S. and Mucci A. (1995) Partitioning of rare earth elements (REEs) between calcite and
seawater solutions at 25 °C and 1 atm., and at high dissolved REE concentrations.
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 59, 443–453.
Zhu J., Zuo W., Liang X., Li S., and Zheng B. (2004) Occurrence of native selenium in
Yutangba and its environmental implications. Applied Geochemistry 19 (3), 461–467.
Zingaro R. (Editor) (1974) Selenium. 835 pp. Krieger Pub Co. ISBN: 0442295758.
Zingaro R.A., Dufner D.C., Murphy A.P., and Moody C.D. (1997) Reduction of oxoselenium
anions by iron(II) hydroxide. Environment International 23(3), 299–304.
Zuidema P. (1993) Conceptual models: the performance assessment point of view. pp. 27–36
in: OECD (1993) The role of conceptual models in demonstrating repository post-closure
safety. Proceedings of a NEA Workshop, Paris, 16-18 November 1993. Nuclear Energy
Agency (NEA). OECD Documents. 190 pp. ISBN 92-64-14429-3.
Zuidema P., Gautschi A., Smith P., and Vomvoris S. (1993) The treatment of conceptual
model uncertainty in the Nagra programme: a few examples. pp. 39–53 in: OECD (1993) The
role of conceptual models in demonstrating repository post-closure safety. Proceedings of a
NEA Workshop, Paris, 16-18 November 1993. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). OECD
Documents. 190 pp. ISBN 92-64-14429-3.
Special workshops on selenium and mobile fission products
MOFAP (2007) Mobile fission and activation products in nuclear waste disposal.
International workshop. L’Hermitage, La Baule – France, January 16-19, 2007.
http://mofap07.in2p3.fr/. Proceedings to appear as a Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA, OECD)
publication.
BIOPROTA (2008) Key issues in biosphere aspects of assessment of the long-term impact of
contaminant releases associated with radioactive waste management. Report of an
International Forum on Se-79 in the Biosphere. 5–6 May 2008. Hosted by Nagra, Wettingen,
Switzerland. Editor: K. Smith (2008) Version 2.0, Final, June 2008.
http://www.bioprota.com. (full citation).
145/328
146/328
APPENDICES
147/328
148/328
APPENDICES
The appendices contain more detailed information on specific topics discussed in the body of
the synthesis text but which are too heavy to be easily accessible in a first reading. They are
provided hereafter for the sake of traceability and completeness.
Appendix A1: General information on selenium.
Appendix A2: Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay.
Appendix A3: Selenium speciation in the source term.
Appendix A4: Selenium speciation behaviour in Boom Clay.
Appendix A5: Immobilisation of selenium in the near-field.
Appendix A6: Selenium background concentration in bentonite buffer.
Appendix A7: Sorption behaviour of selenite, selenate, and sulfate on Fe and Al oxide
surfaces.
Appendix A8: Selenium and organic matter.
Appendix A9: Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay.
Appendix A10: Redox disequilibrium and reluctance of sulfate for reduction in deep clay
formations.
Appendix A11: Behaviour of redox-sensitive elements in a nitrate plume associated with
bituminized MLW – The selenium case study.
Appendix A12: List of abbreviations.
Appendix A13: List of symbols.
Appendix A14: List of physical constants and units.
149/328
150/328
A1. General information on selenium
151/328
152/328
A1
General information on selenium
A1.1 Overview
Selenium-79 is a long-lived radioisotope produced by the nuclear fission of 235U and 239Pu
and other fissile minor actinides. Their exist several natural and artificial selenium isotopes.
The isotopic composition of selenium present in spent fuel considerably differs from its
natural composition. Information is provided here on the main differences in Se isotopic
composition that could be needed to calculate isotopic dilution and exchange between 79Se
and the more abundant stable isotopes of selenium present in Boom Clay and in spent fuel
(SF): mainly 78Se, 80Se and 82Se. The total selenium quantity present in ~ 5 000 tons of spent
fuel generated by 40 years of nuclear electricity production in Belgium (7 power plants) is
estimated at about 400 kg. The calculated selenium inventory is about 1 mol elemental Se per
ton heavy metal (tHM). This estimation is of the same order of magnitude than for 129I. A
quantity of about one mol of selenium is expected to be disposed of per current meter of
underground gallery.
Their exist large uncertainties affecting the value of 79Se half-life. Two recent changes have
been published in the last ten years. The value of 65 000 years commonly accepted in most of
the tables of isotopes and nuclides charts since the years fifties has been discarded to adopt
recently the value of 1.1 millions years. Now this value itself is again questioned and the
present best estimate of 79Se T½ is taken as 295 000 years.
Selenium chemistry is intermediate between that of sulfur and tellurium. Basic information on
the main chemical forms of inorganic and organic selenium is also provided here to make
easier the reading on the next chapters before to provide more detailed information in further
specialised sections.
A1.2 Inventory and isotopic composition
Selenium is present in weak but ponderable amounts in the spent fuel and HLW. The total
quantity of selenium to be disposed of for the present Belgian nuclear program is about
400 kg. Table A1.2.1 presents the quantity of the various selenium isotopes calculated with
the Origen code for a spent fuel with high burn-up (50 GWd/tHM) and its isotopic
composition compared to that of selenium in the nature (Plant et al., 2004).
153/328
Table A1.2.1: Isotopic composition of selenium in nature and in spent nuclear fuel.
Selenium
Isotope
74
Se (stable)
75
Se (T½ 120 d)
76
Natural Isotope Isotope in Spent Fuel Isotope in Spent Fuel
Abundance@ (%) Abundance# (%)
Quantity# (g/tHM)
0.87 %
—
—
—
—
—
Se (stable)
9.02 %
8.86 E-03 %
7.18 E-03
77
Se (stable)
7.58 %
1.40 %
1.13
78
Se (stable)
23.52 %
4.77 %
3.86
79
Se (T½ 295 ka)
—
8.52 %
6.90
80
Se (stable)
49.82 %
25.56 %
20.70
82
Se (stable)
9.19 %
59.76 %
48.40
100.00 %
100.00 %
80.997
Sum all
@
#
From Table 1, p. 19, Chapter 9.02, Arsenic and selenium. Vol. 9 Environmental Geochemistry.
In the Treatise of Geochemistry (Plant et al., 2004).
Lionel Boucher, CEA (inventories in spent fuel with a burn-up of 50 GWd/tHM used for the
Red-Impact EC Project, Jan Marivoet, Personal Communication).
The total quantity of all selenium isotopes in the spent fuel (burn-up of 50 GWd/tHM) is
about 1 mol Se per ton heavy metal (tHM) whose 79Se represents about 8.5 %, i.e., in the
order of ~ 0.1 mol / tHM. For different geometries of disposal of vitrified HLW and spent fuel
with various burn-up, it corresponds to a quantity of 79Se / m gallery comprised between 0.1
and 1 mol 79Se per current meter of disposal gallery. This quantity expressed as
mol / m gallery is comparable to that of 129I / m gallery because both isotopes are the most
frequently produced by the fission of uranium nuclei. In other type of spent fuel, the 79Se
isotopic abundance can even be higher, up to 12 % such as in advanced reactor fuel (inventory
from the Red Impact EC project, Marivoet, 2005, Personal Communication).
A1.3 Uncertainties related to the value of selenium-79 half-life and recent changes
In most handbooks (e.g., CRC: Weast ed., 1968-1969a; Lide ed., 1995), Nuclides Charts
(Pfennig et al., 1995), and tables of isotopes (e.g., Lederer et al., 1967), the half-life of Se-79
is approximately 6.5 × 104 years. This is also the value used in all inventory calculations as
well as release and transport analyses of most of the performance assessment studies.
However, in the last decade (nineties) two very different values have also appeared in the
literature for the half-life of 79Se. The time span of the values published for 79Se half-life
spreads over nearly two orders of magnitude (the ratio between the maximum and the
minimum values is about 17). The main values available for the half-life of 79Se are the
following: 65 000 y (Parker et al., 1949; Lederer et al., 1967); 650 000 y (likely a simple
154/328
typing mistake present in the chart of the nuclides of KAPL Inc.; see Parrington et al., 1996);
1.1 My (Singh, 1993; Vieno and Nordman, 1999), and more recently 295 000 y (Jiang et al.
2001, 2002; Singh, 2002). Before the TILA-99 report in which Vieno and Nordman (1999)
put in question the commonly accepted value of 65 000 y for the 79Se half-life, all the
performance assessment calculations dealing with Boom Clay were performed with this
value. It was thus the case for the following PA studies: the PAGIS, PACOMA, Updating 90,
Everest, and SPA studies, and other performance assessment calculations results (Mallants
et al., 1999) used for the SAFIR 2 report published in 2001. After 2001, the value of 79Se
T½ = 1.1 × 106 years was used for the first time for performance assessment (PA) calculations
at the Mol site in the SPA+ report by Sillen and Marivoet (2002). From the point of view of
performance assessment, this change means that the activity inventory of 79Se would be about
a factor 17 lower than with T½ = 65 000 years because in the ORIGEN calculations the
number of atoms have been converted into Becquerels using the half-life of 6.5 × 104 years.
On the other hand, in the release and transport analyses, the decay of 79Se in the clay barrier
would, of course, be slower with the new half-life. Afterwards, and more recently, this value
has been again reassessed for performance assessment studies made in 2004 in the frame of
the European project Red Impact (Jan Marivoet, 2005, Personal Communication).
The half-life presently recommended for 79Se in the nuclear database NuDat 2.1 of the US
Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) is 2.95 × 105 years, as determined by Song-Sheng
et al. (1997; 2001) and Jiang et al. (2001, 2002), and selected in the Nuclear Data Sheets
(NDS) by Singh (2002). The same value of 2.95 × 105 years for 79Se is also chosen by Bé
et al. (2005) in the last version of the “Table of recommended values for half-lives” adopted
by the Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel (LNHB) of CEA (CEA, 2006).
The recent recognition of the importance of the mobile fission products (MFP’s) as the main
contributors to the dose-to-man for the deep disposal of HLW and SF has fostered a
reappraisal of the half-life of MFP’s and activation products: a.o., 32Si, 79Se, 93Zr, 99Tc, 126Sn.
The emergence of advanced accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) to measure with high
sensitivity and superior precision the small number of atoms present in clusters of less than
106 atoms has allowed a redetermination of the half-life of several critical MFP’s (see a
special issue (2008) of Nuclear Instruments and Methods on “Beam Interactions with
Materials and Atoms”, a.o., Tuniz and Norton, 2008; Synal and Wacker, 2008).
T½ for 79Se is trivially obtained (A = λ N; T½ = 1/λ = N/A) from the ratio of a small number of
79
Se atoms (N) to their activity (A, in Bq) by measuring by AMS a bunch of highly purified
79
Se atoms (N) and counting their activity independently with a high accuracy. The purity of
the isolated radionuclide of interest is a key factor in the determination of its T½. It is thus
necessary to extract and to separate very efficiently traces of MFP’s present in large amount
of other radionuclides obtained from spent fuel dissolution. Therefore, it is not surprising that
155/328
the same teams in charge of reassessing the 79Se inventory in spent fuel also often provide its
new T½ values (Comte 2001; Comte et al., 2001; 2002a,b; 2003; Bienvenu et al., 2007).
A new value of 377 ka for 79Se T½ has been recently determined by Bienvenu et al. (2007).
This value is ~ 25 % larger than that of 295 ka (Jiang Song-Sheng, 2001; Singh, 2002; Bé
et al., 2005). Meanwhile, it seems that the new determinations of 79Se T½ converge towards
the interval 295 – 377 ka.
The various values assigned to the half-life of 79Se, their main bibliographic sources, and the
evolution of their use in PA studies as a function of time are summarized hereafter in
Table A1.3.1. More information on the nuclear decay mode of 79Se and 75Se is also available
in Section A1.4.
Table A1.3.1: Revised values of the half-life time of 79Se available in the literature and evolution of its
use in performance assessment studies for Boom Clay. T½ values ranging on about two orders of
magnitude.
Reference on
T½ 79Se
Parker et al. (1949)
Parrington et al. (1996)
Publishing
Year
T½ Value
(year)
Used in
PA Studies
Comments
on T½ 79Se
(1949)
65 000
SAFIR 2
SPA
ancient value
accepted till ~ 2 000
(—)
650 000
never used
typing mistake ?
SPA+
Trancom-II
1st major revision
used till 2 004
Singh (NDS, 1993) in:
Vieno and Nordman (1999)
(1993)
(1999)
1 100 000
Song-Sheng et al. (1997; 2001)
Jiang et al. (2001, 2002),
Singh (2002); NuDat 2.1
(1997)
(2001)
(2002)
295 000
Red Impact 2nd major revision
used after 2 004
Bé et al. (2005), and,
LNHB, CEA (2006)
(2005)
(2006)
356 000
3rd major revision
used after 2 004
Bienvenu et al. (2007)
(2007)
377 000
—
not yet used
NuDat 2.1 (2005) Nuclear Database version 2.1 from the US National Nuclear Data Center (NNDC),
Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). URL: http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2 as seen on 02-Feb-2005.
NDS: Nuclear Data Sheets. Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel: LNHB. PA: Performance Assessment.
Because of the decrease in the activity inventory and because selenium is solubility-limited in
reducing conditions, but sorbs rather weakly and thus migrates rapidly through the geosphere,
the overall effect in most cases would be a decrease in the maximum release rates (Bq a-1) as
stated by Vieno and Nordman (1999) in TILA-99.
156/328
A1.4 Nuclear decay mode of 79Se and 75Se
The respective nuclear decay modes of the two main selenium isotopes relevant for our
studies (79Se, the long-lived radionuclide, and, 75Se, the short-lived tracer mimicking the
former behaviour for laboratory tests) are the following:
1. Selenium-79 (safety studies) to be disposed of in the Boom Clay formation:
79
34 Se
→
79
35 Br
(stable) + 1 e − ( β − decay 100 %, T½ = 295 ky )
2. Selenium-75 commonly used as a tracer in the laboratory experiments:
75
34 Se
→
75
33 As
(stable) (EC 100 %, T½ = 120 days )
One can notice that 79Se (excess of neutrons) gains a proton after its beta decay to produce the
next stable element, 79Br, while at the opposite, 75Se (deficit of neutrons) loses a proton after
an electronic capture (EC) to decay to the previous stable element: 75As. More details on the
full decay schemes of both radioisotopes and the energy of β particles and γ rays emitted are
available in the Nuclear Data Sheets, Table of Isotopes (Lederer et al., 1967), or nuclear
database (NuDat 2.1).
A1.5 Selenium inorganic and organic chemistry
Chemistry of selenium resembles that of sulfur: although the number of inorganic species
found in natural systems is relatively small, many different types of organo-selenium
compounds exist in nature. These substances are synthesized by micro-organisms,
phytoplankton, such as coccolithophores (Emiliania Huxleyi, see a.o., Obata, 2003;2004), and
many plants. The cycle of selenium in the ocean is as complex as this of sulfur and will
briefly be treated in Appendix A2 on: Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay.
Table A1.5.1 and Fig. A1.5.1 give a general overview on the main inorganic species of
selenium considered in the present study and in the thermodynamic calculations dealing with
selenium in natural aquatic systems.
157/328
Table A1.5.1: Oxidation states and chemical forms of major inorganic compounds of selenium.
Oxidation State Inorganic Compound Aqueous Species
Solid Phase
Se(VI)
Selenate
SeO42–
CaSeO4 · 2 H2O
Se(IV)
Selenite
SeO32–
CaSeO3
Se(0)
Elemental selenium
Se0
Se0
Se(-I)
Diselenide
Se–Se–
FeSe2, Fe3Se4
Se(-II)
Selenide
HSe–
FeSe
–
1.2
-
HSeO4
.8
H2 SeO3(aq)
--
SeO4
Eh (volts)
-
HSeO3
.4
Se(c)
--
0
SeO3
H2Se(aq)
HSe
-
FeSe2(c)
–.4
FeSe(c)
25°C
–.8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
pH
Figure A1.5.1: General pH–Eh diagram for selenium in water at 25 °C.
158/328
Table A1.5.2 also provides a non-exhaustive list of some organic species of selenium
commonly found in nature and produced by living organisms.
Despite the fact that the organic forms of selenium are not presently considered in our
thermodynamical speciation calculations, they are mentioned here simply to illustrate the
frequent presence of selenium in natural systems in close association with organic matter. The
reason is that selenium plays a very specific role as a micronutrient in most of the biological
systems where its enzymatic activity protects cell membranes against oxidation. This feature
must be kept in mind when discussing the relatively well documented association of selenium
with natural organic matter (NOM) (MacGregor, 1997, PhD Thesis): selenium loosely
associated with NOM in laboratory interaction batch tests must not be confused with selenium
naturally present into the chemical structure of NOM (covalent bond). Kerogen is known to
often contains selenium as it is the case in coal deposits in China (Wang et al., n.d.; Wen
et al., 2006; 2007) and in the Western US (Kulp and Pratt, 2004; Oram et al., 2008).
Table A1.5.2: Some major organic compounds of selenium commonly found in nature and whose
degradation products are incorporated in natural organic matter (NOM) by micro-organisms.
Oxidation State Organic Compound
Abbreviation
Chemical Formula
Se(-II)
Dimethylselenide
DMSe
CH3SeCH3
Se(-I)
Dimethyldiselenide
DMDSe
CH3Se–SeCH3
Se(-II)
Diallylselenide
DASe
Allyl-Se-Allyl
Se(-I)
Diallyldiselenide
DADSe
Allyl-Se–Se-Allyl
Se(-II)
Trimethylselenonium
TMSe+
(CH3)3Se+
Se(-II)
Selenomethionine
Se-meth.
H3N+CHCOO–·CH2CH2SeCH3
Se(-II)
Selenocysteine
Se-cyst.
H3N+CHCOO–·CHSeH
Se(-II)
Se-Glutathione
GSH-Px
Peroxidase enzyme (protein)
Se(-II)
Selenocyanate
—
SeCN–
Dimethylselenide (DMSe) and dimethyldiselenide (DMDSe) are volatile compounds
(Oremland and Zehr, 1986; Stork et al., 1999) that could contribute to man exposure to 79Se
via the gas route in some particular conditions if sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB) are at work
in water-containing spaces near non-closed galleries (Karsten Pedersen, Personal
Communication, May 2009) or in near surface installations (Peitzsch and Kersten, 2008).
Diallylselenide (DASe) and diallyldiselenide (DADSe) are produced by alliae plants (onions,
garlic, …) while selenomethionine and selenocysteine are selenium containing amino-acids.
159/328
These amino-acids are the building blocks of complex proteins and enzymes such as
glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), a free radical interceptor critical for cell life and preventing
cancer. It explains why selenium is bioconcentrated by many organisms, from marine
unicellular algae (coccolithophores, Emiliania Huxleyi, see a.o., Obata, 2003; 2004) to
superior plants (broccoli, mustard, Brazil nuts, …) and easily accumulate in the food web.
Although selenocyanate (analogous to thiocyanate, SCN–) is an artificial compound where
selenium is covalently bound to a nitrile (cyanide) group, it is also mentioned in Table A1.5.2
just to remind the strong tendency of selenium to be associated with organic carbon, like
sulfur does.
As concluding remark, if sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB), or other micro-organisms (such as
some yeasts) capable of metabolizing selenium, are present in the clay suspension systems
studied in the laboratory for solubility or sorption tests, the presence of organic molecules of
selenium should not be ruled out: indeed, microbial activity could bias the results of some
experiments or cause selenium loss to the atmosphere by the formation of gaseous organic
compounds. The easiest way to overcome micro-organisms growth is to limit the duration
time of the experiments to benefit of the initial time lag hindering their development (see the
Technical Note of the Mont Terri BN experiment, lab supporting microbial tests made at
BRGM by Pauwels et al., 2009). The possible presence of organic selenium in natural Boom
Clay water samples should also be carefully controlled before attempting to determine
inorganic selenium “true” solubility levels. More information is given in Appendix A2 on:
Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay.
A1.6 Chemotoxicity of selenium
Although the aspects related to the chemical toxicity of selenium are not essential in the
context of the present study, this section provides a short summary on the question of the very
particular toxicity of selenium. The aim is not only to provide the interested reader with a
general background on the subject, but also to preserve the information gathered during our
reading on selenium. So, if in the future one must address the problems dealing with the
chemo-toxicity of a deep disposal site, when stable toxic elements will be eventually released
to the biosphere, the information compiled here on selenium will remain available for further
works if needed.
Selenium is a trace mineral that is essential to good health but required only in small amounts
(ODS–NIH, 2004; Thomson, 2004; Goldhaber, 2003). Selenium is incorporated into proteins
to make selenoproteins, which are important antioxidant enzymes. The antioxidant properties
of selenoproteins help prevent cellular damage from free radicals. Free radicals are natural byproducts of oxygen metabolism that may contribute to the development of chronic diseases
such as cancer and heart disease (ATSDR, 2003; Goldhaber, 2003; Combs and Gray, 1998).
160/328
Other selenoproteins help regulate thyroid function and play a role in the immune system
(McKenzie et al., 1998; Levander, 1997; Arthur, 1991; Corvilain et al., 1993).
Selenium is an oligo-element necessary to mammals and humans in daily intake of a few
tenths of micrograms per day. Because of its large oxido-reduction reactivity, selenium is a
key player in the function of many proteins and enzymes, as, e.g. in the catalytic activity of
the glutathione peroxidase which scavenges the peroxide free radicals in the intracellular
liquid, protecting the phospholipids of the cell membranes against oxidation. It is also
involved in the metabolic processes of iodo amino-acids, as tri-iodo-thyroxin, and is
indispensable to the proper function of the thyroid gland. More than hundred different
selenium-containing enzymes have been inventoried up to now without knowing all their
functions. It could also be implied in our immune-protection and our defence against viruses.
Paradoxically, if the spectrum of activity of organo-selenium is very broad and probably
largely unexplored, its concentration range between deficiency and toxicity is very narrow as
illustrated by the values listed in Table A1.6.1. The daily selenium intake for a human adult
cannot be lower than 40 μg day-1 to prevent severe deficiency, and higher than 400 μg day-1 to
avoid its toxicity. Outside this small interval, human health is at risk. The recommended daily
selenium intake for a human adult is even in a narrower range between 55 μg day-1 and
75 μg day-1. So, to paraphrase the citation of the Swiss physician Paracelsus “Dosis sola facit
venenum”, the right dose of selenium differentiates the poison from the remedy.
Table A1.6.1: Deficiency and toxicity thresholds of selenium for human diet.
Threshold
(WHO)
Daily intake
(μg day )
-1
Daily intake
(μmol day-1)
Deficiency
< 20
0.25
Minimum
> 40
0.51
Adequate (woman)
55
0.70
Adequate (man)
75
0.95
> 400
> 5.06
> 1 000
> 12.66
Toxic
Morbid – Lethal
(source: subset of data from Table 12, p. 56 from Plant J.A. et al. (2004).
WHO: World Health Organisation (WHO, 2003).
The recommended selenium daily intake is 0.9 μg kg-1 (11 nmol kg-1 ) of body weight in
human adults (WHO, 2003). The maximum admissible dose of selenium for man per body
weight is 5 μg kg-1 day-1 (60 nmol kg-1 day-1) for the US Environmental Protection Agency
161/328
(EPA). The maximum admissible concentration of selenium in drinking water is 10 μg dm-3
(1.27 × 10-7 mol dm-3) as set by the World Health Organisation (WHO, 2003).
Selenium deficiency: severe lacks of selenium in the human diet are relatively rare but have
been reported in China where two endemic diseases affecting respectively the heart and the
bone joins have been diagnosed in remote rural areas where soils are selenium-deficient:
− the Keshan Disease (KD) is a cardiomyopathy, and;
− the Kashin-Beck Disease (KBD) is an osteoarthropathy.
These diseases can be corrected by re-equilibrating the diet of the local population and by
external supply of food.
Selenium toxicity: the human symptoms of selenosis, the poisoning by too high selenium
intakes, are hairs loss, nails deformity, and deficiency of the peripheral nervous system.
Teratogenic and carcinogenic effects have not yet been clearly reported up to now for
humans, but have been well recognised for fishes and aquatic birds whose selenium
metabolisms is known to notably differ from that of mammals (Frankenberger and Benson,
1994). Water is rarely the main source of contamination.
A1.7 References
Arthur J.R. (1991) The role of selenium in thyroid hormone metabolism. Can. J. Physiol.
Pharmacol. 69, 1648–1652.
ATSDR (2003) Toxicological profile for selenium (update September 2003). Selenium CAS #
7782-49-2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Atlanta, GA: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. ToxFAQs address:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html.
Combs G.F, Jr. and Gray W.P. (1998) Chemopreventive agents: Selenium. Pharmacol. Ther.
79, 179–92.
Corvilain B., Contempre B., Longombe A.O., Goyens P., Gervy-Decoster C., Lamy F.,
Vanderpas J.B., and Dumont J.E. (1993) Selenium and the thyroid: How the relationship was
established. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 57 (2 Suppl.), 244S–248S.
Goldhaber S.B. (2003) Trace element risk assessment: essentiality versus toxicity. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology 38, 232–242.
162/328
Levander O.A. (1997) Nutrition and newly emerging viral diseases: An overview. Journal of
Nutrition 127, 948S–950S.
Longnecker M.P., Taylor P.R., Levander O.A., Howe M., Veillon C., McAdam P.A.,
Patterson K.Y., Holden J.M., Stampfer M.J., Morris J.S., Willett W.C. (1991) Selenium in
diet, blood, and toenails in relation to human health in a seleniferous area. American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition 53, 1288–1294.
McKenzie R.C., Rafferty T.S., Beckett G.J. (1998) Selenium: an essential element for
immune function. Immunology Today 19, 342–345.
ODS – NIH (2004) Dietary supplement fact sheet: selenium. 9 pp., 66 references. Document
last updated: 08/01/2004. http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Selenium_pf.asp. Office of Dietary
Supplements (ODS). National Institutes of Health (NIH). Bethesda, Maryland 20892 USA.
http://ods.od.nih.gov.
Thomson C.D. (2004) Assessment of requirements for selenium and adequacy of selenium
status: a review. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58, 391–402.
163/328
164/328
A2. Natural selenium in the environment
and in Boom Clay
165/328
166/328
A2
Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay
A2.1 Overview
Selenium is a very ubiquitous element in Earth's crust, but at trace concentration. Its chemical
behaviour is intermediate between that of sulfur and tellurium. Selenium geochemical cycle is
similar to that of sulfur, although its abundance is much lower. As sulfur, selenium also plays
a critical role in most of the biochemical systems. This chapter first gives an overview of the
distribution of selenium in igneous and sedimentary rocks, its main natural sources on Earth,
and principal origins of man-made pollution linked to its industrial use. Then the general
occurrence of selenium in the environment and water is discussed to put in perspective the
concentration of natural selenium measured in Boom Clay and to illustrate the reasons of its
preferred association with sulfides minerals (FeS2) and organic matter.
A2.2 Primary sources of selenium in the earth crust and sediments
Although no economically viable ore deposits of selenium pure minerals are presently known,
selenium is an ubiquitous element present at trace concentrations in volcanic rocks and in
many reducing sedimentary environments.
The primary source of selenium on earth surface probably arises from the volcanic activity in
which selenium accompanies sulfur in volcanic effluents. Selenium can be found in volcanic
rocks especially in basalts where it may be dissolved in volcanic glass (possible natural
analogue of vitrified HLW). Selenium in volcanic areas can be used as a pathfinder in
prospecting for volcanogenic ore deposits. Soils in the neighbourhood of volcanoes tend to
have enriched amounts of selenium. After volcanic rocks weathering, oxidation, mobilisation,
and transport, selenium may be reduced and trapped by precipitation in sulfide minerals.
Selenium whose chemistry is very close to that of sulfur, but with a larger ionic radius is
found associated in reducing sediments and soils with heavy metal sulfides (pyrite, FeS2;
sphalerite, ZnS; galena, PbS; chalcopyrite, CuFeS2, and chalcocite, Cu2S). Selenium exists in
association with iron in two rare selenide minerals: ferroselite (FeSe2, see: Brookins, 1988)
and its polymorph variety, dzharkenite (FeSe2, see: Ryser et al., 2005). Selenium occurs also
in eucairite (CuAgSe), crooksite (CuThSe) and clausthalite (PbSe), but these minerals are too
rare to be used as a major source of selenium. Today the main source of selenium in the world
arises from the residues of the copper sulfides processing. Selenium is a by-product of copper
refineries. It is mainly recovered from the anodic mud deposited during copper electrolysis
(Coget, 1966; Ladrière, 1969; KULeuven–UCL, Laboratory of Prof. R. Breckpot, Leuven),
and also in a less manner from flue dust of pyrometallurgical treatment of Cu2S.
167/328
Being a redox-sensitive element, the mobility of selenium is also analogous to that of
uranium. Both elements are dissolved in their higher valence and very mobile when their
primary bearing minerals are undergoing oxidation and dissolution (weathering in supergene
conditions). At the opposite, they precipitate and become trapped within sediments when they
encounter strongly reducing conditions in subsurface environments, e.g., in the presence of
organic matter or sulfides. According to Deliens et al. (1981), selenium may occasionally be
found in close association with uranium in some Se-bearing sulfide minerals such as Cu9S5
(digenite). Uranyl selenites occur where uranium-bearing seleniferous sulfides undergo
oxidation, as reported by Vochten et al. (1996) who determined the structure of piretite,
Ca(UO2)3(SeO3)2(OH)2 · 4 H2O, a new calcium uranyl selenite from Shinkolobwe mine,
Shaba, Democratic Republic of Congo. Although the occurrence of such an association in
nature is not so common, it cannot be ruled out in the near-field of a repository for spent
nuclear fuel under oxidizing conditions. Indeed, the retention of 79Se on UO2 has already been
observed in spent fuel alteration products (Trombe et al., 1985; Chen et al., 1999, 2000;
Ewing, 2001) (see also Appendix A5: Immobilisation of selenium in the near-field).
Selenium is also present in coal deposits, in oil fields, and in organic matter-rich sediments
like clays and shale at the source of oil reservoir. Selenium can be chiefly associated to
inorganic or organic sulfides respectively. Two distinct routes of incorporation of selenium in
organic matter-rich sediments can be envisaged.
On one hand, selenium simply accompanies inorganic sulfur in sulfide bearing minerals.
Metallic sulfides are most frequently precipitated by sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB) in
sediments. Here, the only role of organic matter is to fuel the SRB bacteria: OM acts as
electron donor in the system, and sulfate/selenate as electron acceptor. As a result, the formed
sulfides/selenides coprecipitate with heavy metals.
On the other hand, organic matter itself can be very rich in organic-sulfur compounds
originating from the maturation/degradation of proteins and peptides containing cysteine and
methionine, the two main sulfur-based amino-acids. Selenium can take the place of sulfur in
these amino-acids giving rise to seleno-cysteine and seleno-methionine (see Table A1.5.2).
Indeed, the biochemistry of selenium present in proteins is complex and far from being
entirely explored. The first discovered Se-containing enzyme (Rotruck et al., 1973), the
glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) acts as a critical anti-oxidant catalyst essential for the
survival of living cells in mammals and humans. It protects phospholipids of the cell
membrane against aggression of free-radicals.
So, it is not surprising to find selenium incorporated in the natural organic matter and kerogen
of terrestrial and marine origins. Selenium may have been metabolised by a large variety of
168/328
organisms such as bacteria, fungi, algae, unicellular phytoplankton (coccolithophorids), or in
more evolved organisms as plants, fishes and animals, and recycled in matured organic matter
after the death of these organisms.
A2.3 Bioconcentration of selenium by a coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi, and
correlation selenium/calcium carbonate
The biochemical cycle of sulfur is very rich and can give interesting analogies and clues for
understanding the behaviour of organic selenium in nature and its accumulation and
distribution in sedimentary formations during geological ages. Beside the two sulfurcontaining amino-acids (methionine and cysteine) and related proteins, intermediate lowmolecular mass organic compounds (LMC’s) are synthesized by marine bacteria and
planktonic organisms in the oceans. LMC’s are continuously released in the ocean water,
emitted in the atmosphere (volatile compounds), or accumulated in marine sediments and
dynamically participate to the global sulfur cycle.
Two examples of LMC’s molecules playing a non-negligible role in ocean and marine
atmosphere chemistry are the dimethyl sulfide (DMS) gas and dimethylsulfoniopropionate
(DMSP); DMS (CH3SCH3), along with methanethiol (CH3SH), is itself a breakdown product
of DMSP:
•
•
The dimethyl sulfide gas is the most abundant biological sulfur compound emitted to the
atmosphere by marine organisms and one of the main components of the “smell of the
sea”. It is produced by marine bacteria carrying the appropriate regulatory genes (Todd
et al., 2007). Oceanic dimethylsulfide is also produced by phytoplankton and zooplankton
(Dacey et al., 1986). When DMS is released to the marine atmosphere, it is oxidized by
O2 and UV light in various sulfur-containing compounds, a.o., dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO), and ultimately to sulfuric acid. In their turn, sulfate aerosols above oceans act as
cloud condensation nuclei and affect global climate by different feedback mechanisms
(CLAW hypothesis proposed by Charlson et al., 1987).
Dimethylsulfoniopropionate, a secondary metabolite of many marine algae, also accounts
for most of the organic sulfur fluxes from primary to secondary producers in marine
microbial food chains (Vila-Costa et al., 2006). It also plays a role in the life of coral reef
habitats as a signalling agent between algae other reef organisms.
In addition, selenium is an essential micronutrient necessary to the growth of marine
phytoplankton and its biochemical cycle in oceans is likely governed by an even greater
complexity than that of sulfur cycle. After active uptake by planktonic algae, organic
selenium is incorporated in the soft tissues associated to their shells. After their death
planktonic shells sink at the bottom of the sea where they form marine sediment deposits
169/328
which further evolve with diagenesis. Oceans represent thus a major biogenic source of
selenium (Amouroux et al., 2001) that cannot be ignored to understand the selenium
distribution in sedimentary geological formations such as Boom Clay.
The coccolithophorids – a group of unicellular, marine, planktonic, photosynthetic algae
protected by a spherical envelop made of multiple CaCO3 disks (coccoliths) embedded in a
gelatinous sheath – not only play a major role in the global carbon cycle, but also contribute
to the selenium bioaccumulation in marine sediments. Chalk deposits not only sequesters CO2
but also selenium, a process whose importance was only recently recognised by marine
biologists and geologists.
Coccolithophorids, such as Emiliania huxleyi, one of the most abundant phytoplanktonic
species in the oceans, possess a very efficient bioconcentration metabolism of selenium to
uptake this element essential to their growth (Araie et al., 2003; Danbara and Shiraiwa, 1999,
2007). Indeed, as experimentally determined by Obata et al. (2003, 2004), 75Se-labelled
selenite is rapidly absorbed by coccolithophorids, transformed in a temporary pool of LMC’s,
and finally incorporated in seleno-proteins and organic molecules associated to their
calcareous shells.
During geological periods of hot climate, such as during the Upper Cretaceous epoch,
massive seasonal algae blooms, and the preservation of selenium in degradation-resistant
organic matter intimately associated to coccoliths, have caused the sedimentation of seleniumrich chalk and shale formations. This was particularly the case of large areas in the Rocky
Mountains (Western USA) today affected by selenium-related environmental problems
(Olivier Leupin, Nagra, personal communication, cfr., his Postdoc on Se at USGS Denver
Colorado).
Selenium is considered by Presser et al. (2004) as a geochemical exploration tool that reveals
an ancient productive biological environment.
So, in geological formations such as Boom Clay, selenium could not only be associated with
pyrite or organic matter (kerogen), but also correlated with carbonate-rich sediment layers
deposited by coccolithophorids. Such a selenium/carbonate correlation is presently search for
by Jean Garignan (Nancy University, CRPG, personal communication, 2008) on vertical
profiles in the Callovo-Oxfordian Clay formation at the Bure underground research laboratory
(GdR ForPro-II team). A similar and unexpected correlation between iodide and aragonite
shell debris has also been recently evidenced by Claret et al. (2010) (Tournassat and Gaucher,
personal communication, March 2009; Claret et al. (2009) poster presented on the topic at the
Migration’09 Conference in Kennewick, Washington, USA).
170/328
A2.4 Environmental pollutions related to natural and industrial selenium sources
Selenium main applications deal with glass industry where it is used at high concentration as
a pigment for special ruby-coloured glasses, and at low concentration (pale pink) as a
decolorizing agent for window glass to counterbalance the green colour of Fe2+.
Its sensitivity to light coupled to its p-type semi-conductor properties have promoted its used
in Xerography (charges transfer in the Xerox photocopy process), solar cells, and AC-to-DC
rectifiers (CuSe).
Most of the pollution by selenium occurs from metallic sulfides ores mining and processing,
but also from the subsequent oxidation of mine tailings, mobilising large amounts of selenate
in the run-off waters.
Oxidation also plays a key role in the natural weathering of organic-rich clay and shale such
as Cretaceous Pierre Shale in the central west America (Wyoming, Colorado and South
Dakota). When selenium occurs in alkaline soils (such as those of the Western US sites with a
recent volcanic activity) and is oxidized as selenate, selenium becomes water-soluble. This
form is highly toxic, easily leached from the soil, and available to plants. Discharge of
agricultural water run-off from seleniferous soils has caused deep damages to the ecosystems
and to wildlife (aquatic birds) as illustrated by the considerable number of studies dedicated to
the remediation of the Kesterson reservoir (San Joaquin Valley, California).
Combustion of selenium-rich fossil fuels (oil, coal, bituminized shale) can also directly
release to the atmosphere SeO2 gas similar to SO2 responsible for the acid rains, while oil
refineries are faced with selenium problems in processes where selenium intimately tracks
sulfur. Finally furnaces of glass factories may discharge significant amounts of volatile
selenium in plant waste gases and dust.
A2.5 Concentrations of natural selenium in the environment
Selenium is a trace element less abundant than uranium and thorium in the Earth’s crust.
According to the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (Weast ed., 1968-1969b,c),
selenium average abundance in Earth’s crust is ~ 0.08 mg kg-1 about 50 times less than
uranium (4 mg kg-1), and 150 less than thorium (12 mg kg-1). However, as mentioned above
for uranium, because of its great sensitivity to redox conditions, it can be reconcentrated to
very high level in reducing sedimentary rocks, especially in coal and organic-rich shale. This
may pose an important concern for human and animal health in many areas in the world.
171/328
Table A2.5.1 summarizes some data taken from Plant et al. (2004) and presents an overview
of the concentrations of natural selenium in the Earth’s crust and in various types of rocks and
fossil fuel deposits. For the sake of comparison, mean values of selenium concentrations
measured in Boom Clay by Maes et al. (2004a,b) are also reported in the same table, but will
further be discussed.
Table A2.5.1: Natural concentrations of selenium in the Earth’s crust and several
types of igneous and sedimentary rocks, oil, and coal, by increasing concentration
ranges.
Selenium
Materials
(mg kg-1)
Earth’s crust
0.05
Igneous rocks
Granite
0.01 – 0.05
Volcanic rocks
0.35
Volcanic tuffs
9.15
Sedimentary rocks
Sandstone
< 0.05
Limestone
0.03 – 0.08
Marine carbonates
0.17
Phosphate (apatite)
1 – 300
Oil
0.01 – 1.4
Coal
Black shale
(USA)
(Western USA)
0.46 – 10.7
*
1 – 675
Carbon shale (China)
206 – 280
Mudstone
0.1 – 1 500
Stone coal
(China)
up to 6 500
Boom Clay
Extracted and fractionated pyrite#
12.2 – 33.0
Calculated mean value for Boom
Clay (BC)
(considering 5 % pyrite in BC)
0.61 – 1.65
Source: Plant et al. (2004) subset of data from Table 7, p. 46, Chap 9.02, Arsenic
and selenium. In Environmental Geochemistry (ed. Lollar B.S.) Vol 9 Treatise on
Geochemistry (eds. Holland H.D. and Turekian K.K., 2004).
#
Values from Maes et al., (2004a,b), Table 4, p. 27 of Annex 14 to WP 5 & 8
Migration experiments and demonstration of model concept for trivalent
radionuclides. * Cretaceous deposits also rich in coccolithophores and affected by
volcanism.
172/328
The selenium content in pyrite extracted from Boom Clay (12.2 – 33.0 mg kg-1) is clearly
higher than in most of the igneous rocks (granite, basalt) and sedimentary rocks (sandstone,
limestone). The selenium concentration in Boom Clay pyrite is in the range of that observed
in coal and organic-rich shale: both may contain a lot of seleniferous metallic sulfides, and
also organo-selenium bound to organic matter. The mean selenium concentration calculated
for the Boom Clay as a total rock on the basis of a content of 5 % of pyrite is in the range of
0.61 – 1.65 mg kg-1, a value on the lower side for the range of mudstone.
Table A2.5.2 presents concentrations of natural selenium commonly found in various water
bodies in different regions of the world. The Se concentration range is spread on about five
orders of magnitude, from about 10-10 to 10-5 mol dm-3. The highest values are reported for the
South-West of the USA which have been extensively studied because of the weathering of the
seleniferous Pierre Shale and the following environmental problems posed by selenate in
surface water. However, most of the Se concentration values given in Table A2.5.2 lie in the
range 10-9 to 10-8 mol dm-3. Se concentrations in clay porewater are lower than these of
problematic catchments, such as these of the San Joachim Valley in California (USA), but one
order of magnitude higher than in seawater (1.14 × 10-9 – 2.15 × 10-9 mol dm-3) or estuarine
water.
The selenium concentration measured in Boom Clay porewater (2.41 × 10-8 mol dm-3) is
about 11 times higher than in seawater if one refers to the average concentration of 2.15 × 10-9
mol dm-3 estimated for seawater by Thomson et al. (2001). The reason is that an important
fraction of natural selenium in Boom Clay water is likely associated with the dissolved
organic matter (DOM), and presumably incorporated in the chemical structure of humic acids,
where it should occupy a position similar to that of sulfur.
A2.6 Concentrations of natural selenium in Boom Clay
Natural selenium concentrations have been measured by high resolution ICP-MS in pyrite
separated from Boom Clay and in porewater collected from a piezometer installed in the
HADES underground research facility (URF). A strong enrichment in selenium is observed in
pyrite whose Se concentration is about four orders of magnitude higher than that of Boom
Clay porewater. This is compatible with a redox-control of the mobility of selenium by pyrite
as also observed for uranium in Boom Clay.
173/328
Table A2.5.2: Natural concentrations ranges of selenium in various water bodies in the world: rain water, river
and lake water, seawater and estuaries, groundwater and porewater. Boom Clay porewater is given for
comparison.
Se concentration range
Se concentration range
Water body
(Country)
-3
(mol dm-3)
(μg dm )
Rain water
Polar ice
(—)
0.02
2.53 × 10-10
Various
(—)
0.04 – 1.40
5.06 × 10-10 – 1.77 × 10-8
(USA)
0.14
1.77 × 10-9
(Brazil)
0.21
2.66 × 10-9
<1 – 400
<1.27 × 10-8 – 5.06 × 10-6
(—)
0.09 – 0.17
1.14 × 10-9 – 2.15 × 10-9
(USA)
0.10 – 0.20
1.27 × 10-9 – 2.53 × 10-9
(UK)
<0.06 – 0.86
<7.59 × 10-10 – 1.09 × 10-8
<0.50
<6.33 × 10-9
avg. 62
avg. 7.85 × 10-7
River and lake water
Mississippi River
Amazon River
Colorado River !!!
(USA)
Seawater and estuaries
Seawater
San Francisco Bay
Groundwater
East Midlands Triassic Sandstone
Bengal Basin
(Bangladesh)
Punjab !!!
(Pakistan)
Colorado River catchments !!!
(USA)
up to 1 300
up to 1.65 × 10-5
San Joaquin Valley, California !!!
(USA)
<1 – 2 000
<1.27 × 10-8 – 2.53 × 10-5
<0.20
<2.53 × 10-9
0.30 – 5.00
3.8 × 10-9 – 6.33 × 10-8
1.90
2.41 × 10-8
Porewater
Baseline, Lake Macquarie
(Australia)
Smelter-impacted Lake Macquarie (Australia)
Boom Clay Porewater#
HADES EG-BS piezometer
(Mol, Belgium)
Source: Plant et al. (2004) subset of data from Table 9, p. 48, Chap 9.02, Arsenic and selenium.
In Environmental Geochemistry (ed. Lollar B.S.) Vol 9 Treatise on Geochemistry (eds. Holland H.D. and
Turekian K.K., 2004).
#
Value from Maes et al., (2004a,b).
174/328
A2.6.1 Selenium in pyrite extracted from Boom Clay
Sulfide minerals are the most common sources of selenium in shale and organic-rich clay.
Pyrite (FeS2) being present up to 1 – 5 % wt. in Boom Clay, selenium has been specifically
searched for in pyrite extracted from Boom Clay.
Natural selenium has been measured by Maes et al. (2004a, b) in pyrite extracted from Boom
Clay by Delécaut (2004). Pyrite was separated from fresh Boom Clay samples disaggregated
and dispersed in water. Suspensions of clay were wet sieved and four different fractions
between 20 and 500 μm were collected along with some fragments > 500 μm. The heavy
minerals of these fractions were extracted by sedimentation in heavy liquid (bromoform). The
characterisation by x-ray diffraction (XRD) showed that the main constituents isolated were
pyrite and quartz. Besides, minor amounts of carbonates and Ti-oxides were also present as
well as clay minerals traces. The various fractions obtained were used without further
treatment.
The selenium concentrations (mg kg-1) were measured in the different fractions of isolated
pyrite by means of high resolution ICP-MS. The analysis results are presented in
Table A2.6.1 as a function of the size fraction.
Table A2.6.1: Selenium content in different fractions of Boom Clay pyrite.
Size Fraction
(μm)
Shape
(—)
20-32
Framboïds
12.2
32-64
Framboïds
18.1
64-125
Framboïds
29.3
125-500
Aggregates
33.0
>500
Concretions
20.1
>500
Faecal pellets
17.0
Average value
—
21.6
Standard Deviation
—
± 7.9
[Se]
(mg kg-1)
The selenium content in pyrite extracted from Boom Clay is in the range 12 – 33 ppm and
exhibits a maximum for the aggregates in the size fraction between 125 – 500 μm. No clear
trend can be distinguished for the different morphologies of pyrite (framboïds, pellets,
concretions). The average value of selenium in these Boom Clay pyrites is 21.6 ± 7.9 mg kg-1.
175/328
No chemical analyses are presently available for selenium concentrations in the clay mineral
fraction cleared of pyrite.
A2.6.2 Selenium in Boom Clay water
Selenium was also measured in some water samples by means of high resolution ICP-MS at
the Museum of Central Africa (Tervuren) (Maes et al., 2004a, b). A total selenium
concentration of 1.9 μg dm-3 (1.9 ppb) was measured in water collected from the large
extension gallery bottom shaft (EG-BS) piezometer. It corresponds to a total selenium
concentration of 2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3, a value in agreement with that of groundwaters listed in
Table A2.5.2, and one order of magnitude higher than in sea water.
The selenium concentration found in the solid pyrite is about 11 400 times higher than in
Boom Clay porewater. This ratio between solid:liquid concentrations of natural selenium is
similar to the S:L ratio determined for uranium in Boom Clay, another element whose
mobility strongly depends on redox conditions.
Maes (2004, pers. comm.) observed than after acidification of the water sample and
subsequent flocculation and removal of part of the dissolved organic matter (DOM), the
selenium concentration abruptly decreased in the analysed porewater. This suggests that a
fraction of natural selenium is associated with DOM. One reason could be the presence of
natural organo-selenium covalently bound in the chemical structure of organic matter. This is
consistent with the biochemical cycle of selenium and its presence in many enzymatic sites in
proteins and could be explained by the bioconcentration of selenium by coccolithophores such
as Emiliania Huxleyi and the subsequent incorporation of organo-selenium in marine kerogen
(Amouroux et al., 2001; Araie et al., 2003; Danbara and Shiraiwa, 1999;2007; Obata et al.,
2003;2004). Recent studies also indicate that kerogen can contain high concentration of
selenium (Hanjie et al., 2006; Carignan, 2008, Personal communication).
However, up to now, no specific chemical analyses are presently available for natural
selenium concentrations in the solid and the dissolved organic matter of Boom Clay. The
presence of high amounts of pyrite intimately associated with Boom Clay kerogen (cfr.,
works made at ENSCP and IFP respectively by Deniau et al., (2007) and Lorant et al.,
(2007)) make the occurrence of selenide and organo-selenium in Boom Clay kerogen highly
probable, but this point still requires an experimental verification.
It is thus recommended to determine the natural selenium concentration, on the one hand in
purified secondary mineral fractions of Boom Clay, especially pyrite and coccolithophore-
176/328
carbonate rich layers), and on the other hand in the Boom Clay organic matter (both sulfiderich kerogen and dissolved OM).
More information on the existing correlation, or the possible association, between natural
selenium and organic matter is given in Appendix A8 (Selenium and organic matter) where it
is discussed in detail:
− to know if the solubility limit of natural inorganic selenium in Boom Clay is reached, and;
− to assess the possible interaction of long-lived selenium-79 with natural selenium
associated to the natural organic matter.
177/328
178/328
A3. Selenium speciation in the source term
179/328
180/328
A3
Selenium speciation in the source term
Two types of waste forms are presently considered: the non-reprocessed spent fuel (SF) and
the vitrified high-level waste (HLW) arising from the reprocessing of spent fuel at the
Cogema plant of La Hague (France).
The exact speciation of selenium in the nuclear waste is unclear and the redox conditions in
the different waste forms (spent fuel and HLW glass) are still debated. The difficulty to gather
information on selenium in UO2 fuel is likely related to its low abundance in the spent fuel
and also because it is not an important element for short-term nuclear accident scenario.
Almost all the chemical forms of inorganic selenium could in principle be accommodated in
both waste matrices (SF and HLW glass), from the higher valences to the lowest oxidation
state, i.e., SeO42–, SeO32–, Se0, and Se2–. Tetravalent uranium, U(IV) in UO2, the main
component of light water reactor (LWR) fuel, could still impose reducing conditions in spent
fuel, even at high burn-up, while 79Se is likely incorporated in the glass matrix under
oxidizing conditions if no reducing agent is added to the calcination stream, or to the molten
glass.
A3.1 Selenium in spent fuel
A commonly encountered idea is that in-pile fission reactions and alpha recoil create locally
oxidising conditions in the spent fuel matrix, leading to oxidation of selenium and of a
fraction of uranium. Inversely, a contradictory point of view argues that the two (or three)
fission products issued from the fragmentation of one UO2 formula unit after fission will lack
oxygen atoms and so would be implanted in a partially reduced form in the UO2 matrix.
Although it seems consistent for one single fission reaction, or for 100 % burnup, this
reasoning is no longer applicable to a small number of fission product atoms spread in the
mass of the uranium oxide matrix. There exist a sufficient quantity of oxygen atoms available
in the UO2 crystal lattice to recombine with the fission fragments. Moreover, considering a
statistically significant number of fission reactions, a mass balance budget indicates that the
number of oxygen atoms available per atom of fission product is not in deficit but at the
contrary in net excess after fission occurs.
In fact, the fission products consume less oxygen than the quantity which is liberated by the
fission of tetravalent U and Pu. Indeed, although two fission products are formed from each U
(or Pu) atom, many of the fission products are noble metals (Mo, Tc, Ru, Rh, and Pd, with
particularly high yields for fission of Pu), rare gases (Kr, Xe), and halogen elements (Cl, Br,
181/328
I), which do not combine with oxygen. In addition, many of fission and activation products
are trivalent lanthanides and actinides. The dissolution of trivalent rare earth ions (and of Pu,
Am, and Cm) in tetravalent UO2 also requires 25 % less oxygen atoms per metal atom (La2O3
= LaO1.5).
The oxygen atoms left in excess after the UO2 fission reaction are released and causes thus the
oxygen potential ΔG(O2) of the fuel to increase (in fact to become less negative) at constant
oxygen-to-metal (O/M) ratio. Therefore, UO2 fuel was commonly assumed to oxidize with
increasing burnup, in particular for Pu fission.
Changes in ΔG(O2) and in oxidation state of the fuel (its O/M ratio) affect many important
properties and influence significantly the irradiation behaviour of the fuel; examples are clad
internal corrosion, fuel thermal conductivity, creep and plasticity of the fuel. The knowledge
of the development of ΔG(O2) and of the O/M ratio of the fuel as a function of burnup was
therefore of large scientific and technological interest.
The extent of UO2 oxidation (i.e., the increase of the oxygen stoichiometric coefficient x in
UO2+x) was considered to be limited by several oxygen interception mechanisms, amongst
others, the oxidation of molybdenum, an important FP produced at high yield, and by the
reaction of oxygen with the inner wall of the zircaloy cladding of the fuel pin. The reaction
Mo + O2 = MoO2 was regarded as the main buffering mechanism of oxygen in the irradiated
fuel matrix itself, while zirconium from the cladding was seen as an effective getter
scavenging the remaining O2 inside the closed system of fuel rod. Nevertheless, oxidation of
UO2 was considered to increase at high burnup.
The question of oxygen potential (ΔGO2) in the fuel pin system is thus particularly important
to assess the degree of oxidation of uranium and fission products in UO2 fuel and was the
object of many studies. Matzke (1995) performed measurements of oxygen potential in high
burnup light water reactor (LWR) UO2 fuel. Against all expectations none of the studied fuels
showed a significant oxidation. These observations were in contrast to the commonly
accepted ideas that UO2 fuel progressively oxidize due to burnup.
More recent works (Walker et al., 2005; Ferry et al., 2006) also show that uranium in UO2
fuel appear not to oxidize even at high burnup. The oxygen potential does not increase with
burnup as previously thought. More surprisingly, according to Walker et al. (2005)
molybdenum appears also not to buffer the system and Zr to only intercept 23 % of O2. The
oxygen stoichiometry of the fuel does not evolved towards UO2+x (the oxidized form) but
remains constant, or even exhibits a negative x in the stoichiometry (UO2-x). So, uranium
remains tetravalent in the spent fuel. In these conditions, one could also in principle expect
that selenium would be present in the spent fuel at the reduced state.
182/328
However, by analogy with the behaviour of tellurium with fuel burnup, it is not evident that
selenium should only exist under a reduced form in spent fuel.
The reactivity and the chemical state of tellurium within the fuel are very complex although
the oxygen potential of the Te/TeO2 equilibrium is a great deal higher than that of U-Pu
oxides in fuel. Therefore, tellurium can form metallic phases with U, Pd and Sn, or can be
constituent of multi-component fuel-fission product oxides depending on the local oxygen
potential and can be dissolved in the oxide fuel. Tellurium has been found in the gap in
association with other fission products forming stable oxides. Tellurium chemical behaviour
is thus very versatile and both Te and BaTeO3 phases have been identified. Therefore,
according to Kleykamp (1985), the multiplicity of the tellurium containing phases prevents a
self-contained description of its chemical state in spent fuel. Quite similar conclusions can
probably be drawn for selenium.
As a conclusion, it is not because uranium does not appear to oxidize in high burnup fuel that
one can de facto conclude that selenium also does not oxidize. On the one hand, U4+ could be
considered as a major redox buffer precluding selenium oxidation, while conversely on the
other hand, oxidation of some more reactive FP, whose selenium, could help to protect U4+ if
these FP and selenium have more affinity with O2 than U4+. Thermodynamic calculations are
certainly needed to assess this question. However, no data are presently available for selenium
(Se/SeO2) in the thermodynamic database of the laboratory of high and medium activity
(LHMA) of SCK•CEN and selenium does not figure on the principal Ellingham diagrams.
Indeed, 79Se is a trace element in spent fuel and is not important in case of failed fuel pins or
for short-term consequences of major nuclear accidents. So, it remains to gather the relevant
thermodynamic data for selenium in spent fuel to perform the necessary calculations to first
theoretically address the question of selenium speciation in spent fuel before to setup a
specific experimental program in collaboration with LHMA.
A3.2 Selenium in vitrified high-level waste
During the reprocessing of spent fuel selenium is exposed to extremely oxidizing conditions.
First, during the fuel dissolution step when it enters in contact with boiling concentrated nitric
acid during a prolonged contact time. Then, during the evaporation/drying/calcination process
of the liquid HLW prior to vitrification. If elemental selenium resists to oxidation, it will
likely be rapidly volatilized and trapped in the scrubbers of the gaseous effluents of the
reprocessing plant which are diluted and discharged in sea.
183/328
The fraction of less volatile selenium subsisting under oxidized forms would easily be
incorporated in the molten silica glass. Indeed, SeO42– and SeO32– can substitute tetrahedral
silicate or trigonal borate entities respectively in the glass network.
However, reduced forms of selenium are also soluble in glass as attested by their wide
industrial use in glass decolourising process. Indeed, Se and Se2– are added to glass because
their pink colour counterbalances the green colour of Cr3+ and Fe2+ impurities to obtain flint
grey glass. It appears that in nuclear waste vitrification plants sugar is sometimes added as a
source of carbon to the HLW stream in the calcination process to reduce ruthenium as metal
in order to limit the volatile RuO2 oxide. Molten saccharose and carbon monoxide resulting
from the sugar partial combustion could also reduce selenite and selenate at high temperature
and then the incorporation of a fraction of the volatile Se and Se2– species in the glass cannot
be excluded.
A3.3 Selenium in bituminised MLW
In the case of nitrate-bearing Eurobitum waste (MLW), the presence of 79Se under the
selenate form can certainly not be ruled out because of the massive amounts of nitrate salts
(up to 25 – 30 wt. %) present in this type of waste and the oxidizing conditions of the
production process. Moreover, in the presence of nitrate, selenate reduction is drastically
hindered and likely improbable (Wright, 1999; Oremland et al., 1999; Oremland et al., 2006).
An interesting analogy with the behaviour of sulfate in petroleum geological reservoir could
also be useful: indeed, to avoid sour oil problems related to microbially-mediated sulfato
reduction, nitrate is often added to oil drilling fluids, or injected in oil fields in large amount,
to suppress sulfate reduction. On the basis of reaction free energy, a common rule used to
identify the redox reaction first involved in microbial respiration, is that the more powerful
oxidant must be first consumed by the reductant before a weaker oxidant, also available in the
system, can be used: (O2 > NO3– > Mn(IV) > Fe(III) > SO42– > SeO42– > CO2).
A3.4 Dissolution controlled by alpha radiolysis
Finally, if selenium is released from nuclear spent fuel or HLW glass by a corrosion process
controlled by alpha-radiolysis imposing locally oxidizing conditions, selenium could also
dissolve in porewater as selenate. If reduction of selenate is kinetically not possible under
Boom Clay conditions, selenium is expected to migrate as an unretarded (or a very weakly
retarded) species (1 ≤ R ≤ 3) and its concentration would not be solubility limited. In such
conditions, the amount of selenium present in the waste inventory and the corrosion rate could
be the limiting factors for the dose-to-the-man.
184/328
A4. Selenium speciation behaviour in Boom Clay
185/328
186/328
A4
Selenium speciation behaviour in Boom Clay
A4.1 Overview
Various batch experiments were independently performed by AEA Technology and
KULeuven to determine the solubility and the extent of sorption of the different aqueous
inorganic species of selenium, ranked hereafter by decreasing order of valence: selenate
(SeO42–), selenite (SeO32–), elemental selenium (Se(s)), and selenide (HSe–). In Appendix A4,
the results of these experiments obtained by both laboratories are presented for each afore
mentioned species. After a general survey of the methods used for the selenium compounds
characterisation, the selenium-75 source preparation, and the speciation techniques, the
behaviour of each species is studied by following its interaction with individual Boom Clay
components (pyrite, FeCO3, organic matter, …) and with Boom Clay suspensions in
porewater and synthetic solutions. The results of the solubility and sorption experiments are
presented along with the kinetics of reduction/precipitation when possible (case of selenite).
The possible association between selenium and Boom Clay organic matter is also studied by
means of specifically developed methods. The overall picture of the behaviour of selenium in
Boom Clay makes possible to compare the different and complementary approaches and to
draw conclusions to support the results of migration experiments and to identify the processes
and parameters relevant for performance assessment (PA) studies. Finally, the remaining
uncertainties related to the main processes involved in the retention and the transport of
selenium in Boom Clay are discussed.
A4.2 Very slow reduction kinetics and derived uncertainties affecting the solubility value
As discussed in Chapter 2 (Thermodynamic calculations), selenium is a redox-sensitive
element whose solubility essentially depends on Eh value. Therefore, the kinetics of reduction
of selenate and selenite were studied by contacting these species with undisturbed Boom Clay
and chemical reductants. Useful observations were made from batch experiments performed
with clay suspensions by KULeuven and started with Se(+VI) and Se(+IV). They can be
summarized as follows hereafter.
1. The reduction of SeO42– is extremely difficult without catalyst.
The kinetic of reduction of SeO42– in Boom Clay and the different parameters involved
were not separately investigated. However, it seems that the reduction of SeO42– does not
significantly occur at room temperature without catalyst (e.g., green rust in canister
corrosion products, Cui et al., 2006) or is extremely slow: it might depend on the
enzymatic activity of micro-organisms such as sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB) possibly
present in the clay suspensions.
187/328
2. The reduction of SeO32– occurs in Boom Clay but slowly.
When SeO32– is contacted with pyrite, a continuous decrease with time of SeO32–
concentrations is observed. Chemical reduction is the main envisaged mechanism, but
simultaneous sorption also plays a role. The reaction rate seems to be proportional to the
concentration of Se(+IV) in solution and to the quantity of pyrite engaged in the system.
The reaction rate is also inversely proportional to the square root of the pyrite (FeS2)
occupancy by selenium. It suggests that SeO32– reduction occurs through sorption onto
FeS2.
3. Elemental selenium, Se(s) can be reduced and redissolved as HSe–
Se(0) can be reduced as Se(-II) with an higher concentration when the Eh value is
sufficiently low in the presence of solid Boom Clay, or iron strip, as previously mentioned
by AEAT in his thermodynamical calculations (see Figure 2.5.2, p. 33, Chapter 2).
The amount of solid phase in the suspensions seems to be a critical parameter for the reaction
kinetics in the system. In all batch tests, 75Se concentrations in solution tended to decrease,
but the mixtures with the lowest initial Se concentration and the highest solid-to-liquid ratio
reached a plateau concentration most rapidly.
As conclusion of the overall observations, only the reduction of selenite was proven to be
significant and contributed to remove this species from solution. However this process is slow
and it seems to be more advantageous to directly start from elemental selenium, Se(s), and
iron selenide, FeSe(s), to study the solubility of the reduced forms of selenium.
Finally, a critical point related to the easy oxidation of these selenium compounds in all these
studies is certainly the chemical purity of the reagents used, as supplied by a commercial
manufacturer, or synthesised on purpose in the laboratory. The great sensitivity of the reduced
forms of selenium to oxidation should always be kept in mind. Selenite (SeO32–) is
progressively oxidised in selenate (SeO42–) in the mother solutions of 75Se because of the
oxidising species continuously produced by water radiolysis. Iron selenide (FeSe) is also
often contaminated by elemental selenium, Se(0), which can alter its apparent stoichiometry
(Fe7Se8). Moreover, if iron selenide is partly oxidized, small amounts of SeO42– may be
present at concentration far above the solubility limit of FeSe, compromising the results of
delicate solubility experiments. Therefore, the chemical purity of all reagents should be
carefully checked with the appropriate techniques (SEM/EDX, ion chromatography, …) prior
to use, and soluble oxidized species (such as SeO42–) first removed by a sufficient washing of
the poorly soluble solids (FeSe, Se0) before starting experiments for long-term equilibration
periods.
188/328
A4.3 Behaviour of selenate: SeO42–
Sodium selenate is a very soluble inorganic compound of selenium and no solubility limit is
expected for the SeO42– species in undisturbed Boom Clay porewater in the absence of heavy
metals, or large concentrations of earth-alkaline cation such as Ba2+.
In the experimental conditions and at the time scale of the experiments we have up to now
performed, we have not observed significant sorption, nor reduction/precipitation for selenate
present in synthetic Boom Clay porewater (i.e., without prior addition of organic matter in
water) contacted with pyrite and Boom Clay suspensions.
Therefore, selenate is expected to migrate in Boom Clay as a conservative tracer, i.e., without
any retention. The worst case scenario to be considered for performance assessment (PA)
studies is that all the 79Se inventory would be present in the source term as selenate and
therefore would migrate without solubility limit and non-retarded in Boom Clay, as it is the
case for another major contributor to the dose: 129I.
A4.3.1 Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite
Synthetic Boom Clay water solutions (absence of dissolved organic matter) containing high
(10-3 mol dm-3) and low (10-6 mol dm-3) concentrations of selenate were contacted with fresh
crushed pyrite. No decrease of the selenate concentrations was observed at the time scale of
the experiments for the total selenium, nor for 75Se spike.
So, two possibilities may be considered: (i) SeO42– is not sorbed onto pyrite, or (ii) the SeO42–
reduction/precipitation is extremely slow and could not be observed on the duration of
experiments (up to 13 months). The effect of dissolved organic matter (DOM) on the kinetics
of reduction of selenate by pyrite surface was not investigated in these experiments.
A4.3.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite (high concentration)
The removal of selenate from solution by crushed pyrite and pyrite coupons was measured
from a synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic material. An initial selenate
concentration of 1 × 10-3 mol dm-3 was used.
In all the experiments the total aqueous selenium concentration remained unchanged over a
period of 13 months, showing that there was no obvious reduction/surface-precipitation of
selenate at, or sorption to, the pyrite surface over this timescale in these conditions.
XRD analysis of pyrite powder from the experiments showed no bulk changes to the
mineralogy and no secondary selenium phases were found. SEM examination of a pyrite
189/328
coupon showed a region of oxidation associated with a crack in the pyrite surface but no
selenium was detected in this area, or on any other area away from the crack.
A4.3.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of SeO42– with pyrite (low concentration)
The reduction kinetics of SeO42– in the presence of crushed pyrite (FeS2) were monitored
using synthetic Boom Clay water (absence of organics) as background electrolyte. The
experiments were carried out in an oxygen-depleted glovebox and radioactive 75SeO42–
(2.6 × 10-7 mol dm-3 and 6.0 × 10-8 mol dm-3 – present as minute fractions in the 75Se spike)
were added to batch systems containing different FeS2 solution–to–pyrite ratio of 200:1 and
100:1. The selenium speciation and solution concentrations were followed as a function of
time.
No significant decrease in the stable SeO42– concentrations, nor in the active 75SeO42–
concentrations, as a function of time was observed. Both species remained in the (+VI) redox
state and in their oxy-anionic form. Concentrations in solution remained roughly equal to the
starting concentration, although there were some indications that a slight decrease might be
occurring for the lowest 75SeO42– concentrations. Therefore we concluded that:
− at pH relevant for Boom Clay (pH > 8), SeO42– is not significantly sorbed onto pyrite
(FeS2), nor onto Fe hydroxides (if present at the surface), as it is also reported in literature
by Goldberg and Glaubig (1988) and Rietra et al. (2001), and that;
− SeO42– abiotic reduction/precipitation by pyrite surface is very slow and has not been
observed at the time scale of our experiments.
The possible interaction of SeO42– with dissolved Boom Clay organic matter was not
specifically verified in independent tests, but batch interaction experiments carried out with
Boom Clay suspensions suggest it is not detectable or insignificant in Boom Clay conditions.
A4.3.2 Interaction of SeO42– with Boom Clay – KULeuven
The possible adsorption and reduction/precipitation of Se(+VI) in the presence of Boom Clay
used as solid phase and Boom Clay organic matter was investigated. Batch experiments with
selenate were performed on Boom Clay suspensions at a liquid-to-solid ratio of 4.18:1. Boom
Clay batches with different stable SeO42– concentrations (10-6 mol dm-3, 5 × 10-7 mol dm-3,
and 10-7 mol dm-3) were measured as a function of time in an oxygen-depleted glovebox.
Since only inactive selenate was used in this set-up, the qualitative and quantitative
determinations of SeO42– was only done by ion chromatography (IC).
190/328
No really convincing proof of reduction of SeO42– was observed in Boom Clay suspensions.
Indeed, after long equilibration times the systems were not yet in equilibrium and SeO42–
species were still detected in solution.
The reduction of SeO42– at the clay minerals surface seems very difficult and kinetically
hindered. Indeed, by comparing the adsorption of selenate and sulfate on the surface of
goethite (Rietra, 2001), it is likely that at pH above 8, selenate only forms very weak
outer-sphere complexes with the sorption sites available in the clay matrix (silanol, aluminol,
or ferrol, groups only accessible on the lateral edges of the clay platelets). It would thereby be
subjected to a quite extensive competition with the other anions present in the system and
would thus not significantly sorb (particularly compared to SeO32–).
The association of SeO42– with dissolved Boom Clay organic matter was not explicitly
investigated (e.g. by gel permeation chromatography, GPC).
A4.3.3 Kinetics of reduction of SeO42– – KULeuven
As no convincing evidence of selenate reduction could be obtained in the present works, the
kinetics of reduction of SeO42– in Boom Clay and the different related parameters were not
separately investigated.
We do not presently dispose on specific information on the reduction kinetics of selenate in
Boom Clay. We ignore if this reduction is possible without the assistance of a catalyst: e.g.,
the surface of an active solid phase, such as green rust, a corrosion products of metallic iron,
as suggested by the works of Cui et al. (2006), or the enzymatic activity of some biochemical
processes.
However, we cannot rule out that the reduction of SeO42– might proceed extremely slowly,
and could depend on the activity of micro-organisms developing with time in the clay
suspensions, such as Sulfato-Reducing Bacteria (SRB).
The kinetics of reduction of SeO42– in Boom Clay is one of the major uncertainties that still
deserves further experimental investigation.
A4.3.4 Solubility of SeO42– – KULeuven
The limit of solubility is far from being reached for the SeO42– concentrations range used in
the Boom Clay experimental observation window. Indeed, according to Weast (1968), the
Na2SeO4 solubility is about 84 g dm-3 (0.445 mol dm-3) in pure water.
191/328
A4.3.5 Conclusions for SeO42–
After addition of high and low concentrations of SeO42– to suspensions of pure pyrite or fresh
Boom Clay, no significant sorption could be evidenced over periods of a few months. This is
consistent with the very weak interactions expected at pH > 8 for the outer-sphere complexes
between selenate and the surface of pyrite and clay minerals.
However, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions for a possible very slow and
progressive reduction of selenate followed by the precipitation of a poorly soluble phase such
as, e.g., elemental Se(0) or FeSe. The results of interaction tests between selenate and pyrite
and Boom Clay suspensions can be interpreted in two opposite ways:
1. on the one hand, when selenate is contacted with FeS2, no rapid sorption is observed at
low or high SeO42– concentration, and we cannot obtain a clear indication of a slow
reduction/precipitation at the time scale of these experiments;
2. on the other hand, when selenate is let to interact with Boom Clay suspensions, no
sorption is a priori expected onto clay minerals at pH > 8, but on the long-term, some
progressive removal of selenate from solution could be interpreted as a tiny indication for
a very slow reduction/precipitation. However, this reduction could be microbiallymediated if micro-organisms develop in the clay suspensions with time.
Because selenate sorption is likely very limited (if existent) in the pH range 8 – 10 in Boom
Clay, we therefore conclude that SeO42– would diffuse almost unretarded through the clay
layer.
The abiotic selenate reduction/precipitation is likely kinetically hindered. Selenate might
subsist for an undetermined period of time under compact in situ Boom Clay conditions, if no
microbial activity can develop to facilitate its reduction.
The association of selenate with Boom Clay organic matter has not yet been specifically
studied but is presently considered as relatively unlikely. Indeed, the interaction of SeO42–
with OM is expected to be low because selenate reduction is kinetically hindered and that
selenate does not form inner-sphere complexes to establish chemical bonds with OM (such as,
e.g., iron bridges). Finally, the non-specific electrostatic repulsion forces between negatively
charged entities (SeO42– and OM polyelectrolyte) is also a priori not quite favourable to their
association.
In conclusion, because of the remaining large uncertainty on the kinetics of reduction of
selenate onto pyrite and Boom Clay, we cannot presently proof a significant retention (by
reduction/precipitation mechanisms) for selenate in undisturbed and compact Boom Clay.
192/328
Thus, we cannot presently consider the reduction/precipitation of selenate as an established
mechanism that could be taken into account in safety studies for the removal of selenate from
Boom Clay porewater. This point is also further discussed in Section A9.3.2 dealing with the
results and interpretation of electromigration experiments with oxidized Se sources (SeO42–
and SeO32–).
So, the kinetics of reduction of SeO42– in Boom Clay is one of the major uncertainties that still
deserves further experimental investigation. This is important if a large fraction of the 79Se
inventory present in the source term would occur under the form of free selenate because of
the radiolysis effects affecting the spent fuels and the vitrified HLW.
A4.4 Behaviour of selenite: SeO32–
Selenite (SeO32–) in its stable form, or as tracer labelled with 75Se, was certainly the selenium
species studied into the most details in the frame of the present work. Because its great
sensitivity to experimental redox conditions, selenite has exhibited an intricate behaviour with
results often contradictory and difficult to decipher.
The SeO32– concentration introduced as sodium salt in Boom Clay interstitial water is not
solubility limited. The poorly soluble calcium selenite (CaSeO3), which could be formed in
the near-field environment in the presence of cement, is not expected in situ in Boom Clay
under undisturbed conditions.
However, when SeO32– is added to systems containing fresh Boom Clay suspensions, or
chemical reductants, SeO32– can be reduced (e.g. by adsorption onto FeS2) and poorly soluble
selenium (0) or (-II) phases precipitate. After complete disappearance of SeO32–, the selenium
solution concentration is controlled by the solubility of the resulting selenium solid phases:
elemental Se(s), iron selenides such as FeSe, or FeSe2, or solid solutions with iron sulfides
such as [FeS2-×(Se)×].
Selenite is an oxy-anion known to be able to chemically sorb onto iron(III) oxy-hydroxides by
a mechanism of ligand exchange. A strong inner-sphere complex may easily be formed
between the oxygen atoms of selenite and an oxide surface bearing exchangeable hydroxyl
groups. A bidentate bond would be stronger than mono-dentate link. In case of even partial
oxidation of pyrite surface, the newly formed hydrous ferric oxides would be particularly
favourable sorption sites for selenite. However, under undisturbed in situ condition, iron(III)
oxides are not expected to be present in Boom Clay, and up to now have not yet been detected
as far as we know. Under reducing conditions in marine sediments, Fe(III) is converted in
Fe(II), and the most common thermodynamically stable phases of iron(II) identified in Boom
193/328
Clay are pyrite and siderite. Nevertheless, hydroxyl groups are present on the edges of clay
mineral platelets, a.o, as aluminol groups on the lateral edges of the gibbsite layers. So,
sorption sites might be available in undisturbed clay in octahedral aluminium side positions to
form inner-sphere complex with SeO32–.
Two main mechanisms could be at work to remove selenite from Boom Clay porewater: on
one hand, sorption of SeO32– onto pyrite surface or broken edges of clay minerals, and on the
other hand, a slow chemical reduction of Se(IV) at pyrite interface, followed by the
precipitation of elemental selenium, Se(0). Kinetic results are available for the reduction of
SeO32– at the surface of pyrite. The reduction rate appears to be directly dependent on the
amount of solid FeS2 present in the system and inversely proportional to the concentration of
selenite in water. The system with the highest pyrite-to-solution ratio and the lowest selenite
concentration evolve the fastest. The reduction of selenite at the surface of pyrite seems to be
retarded if clay minerals are also present in the system. This could be tentatively explained by
the competitive sorption of SeO32– between antagonist sites present on pyrite surface and clay
platelet edges. The desorption of selenite from clay minerals has first to occur before that
selenite can migrate to pyrite to accept electrons from its surface.
Sorption of selenite seems to occur first at the time scale of one month, followed by a slow
and progressive move from sorption to a reduction/precipitation mechanism after more than
one year. Some experiments indicate only linear sorption isotherms as observed by AEAT
with pure pyrite, while others tend to give arguments in favour of a final solubility control
(KULeuven experiments with clay suspensions).
However, the interpretation of the first series of experiments made with 75Se have been often
obscured by the initially unexpected contamination of selenate (75SeO42–) produced by
oxidising free-radicals in the concentrated spiking solutions because of intense water
radiolysis.
Finally, it is worth to note that SeO32– is the only species of selenium for which an association
with Boom Clay dissolved organic matter (OM) has been clearly established by gel
permeation chromatography (GPC) and removal of OM from solution by La3+ precipitation.
Such an association could not be evidenced for the other selenium species studied, i.e., SeO42–
, Se(0) and HSe– (from FeSe), after a prolonged contact time with Boom Clay porewater
containing dissolved organic matter (DOM).
The exact interaction mechanism of SeO32– with OM remains unclear, but two routes could be
first envisaged. On one hand, SeO32– could form inner-sphere complexes with Fe(III) groups
present in the complex structure of humic substances: e.g., OM—Fe—SeO32–. It is the
hypothesis of the so-dubbed “iron bridges”, a concept also introduced to explain the sorption
194/328
of humic acids onto the surface of iron oxides and clay minerals edges. On the other hand,
SeO32– could be reduced as colloidal elemental Se(0) which in his turn could interact with
organic colloids. This is the assumption of weak hydrophobic interactions between colloids of
different nature. However, presently we have no experimental evidence, nor even a clue, to
identify the exact mechanism. This association Se–OM is also likely very different from that
implied in the chemical binding of natural selenium in organic matter of shale and mudrocks
(see Appendix A2 on Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay, and
Appendix A8 on Selenium and organic matter). There, complicated biochemical pathways are
probably involved in the incorporation of organo-selenium molecules in the degradation
products of complex enzymatic structures where selenium occupies the position of a sulfur
atom.
A4.4.1 Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
Batch sorption tests with selenite in contact with main Boom Clay components (pyrite and
organic matter, OM) have been performed independently by AEA Technology and
KULeuven on a range of selenite concentrations spreading on about 5 orders of magnitude
(10-8 – 10-3 mol dm-3).
AEA Technology worked with inactive SeO32– at relatively high concentration (3.4 × 10-4 up
to 1.3 × 10-3 mol dm-3) while KULeuven used labelled 75SeO32– at much lower concentration
(2 × 10-8 up to 5 × 10-6 mol dm-3).
A common and general trend comes clearly out of all the experimental results:
the extent of selenite removal from solution is directly dependent on the mass of pyrite
available (and hence, indirectly on the number of available sites on the pyrite surface) and is
inversely related to the initial amount of selenite: RD ~ pyrite mass / [SeO32–]. The distribution
ratio RD values calculated from the loss of selenium in solution show a general increasing
trend with decreasing solution:pyrite ratio in synthetic Boom Clay water.
For the sorption experiments performed by AEA Technology onto pyrite with an initial
selenite concentration of 1 × 10-3 mol dm-3 in synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of
organic matter, a simple surface complexation model provides a reasonable fit to the
experimental data, reproducing the observed decrease in the concentration of sorbed material
at lower aqueous selenium concentrations, and at higher water:pyrite ratios. This is in
contrast to a solubility-controlled mechanism for selenium removal. If solubility control was
to operate, the final selenium concentration would be expected to be independent of the initial
concentration, and of the water:pyrite ratio. In this case the experimental data would be
expected to lie on a vertical line in plots. Clearly the experimental data of AEA Technology
195/328
do not show such a trend and therefore solubility control is considered unlikely in these
experiments. From the surface analysis data it is likely that sorption of selenite to pyrite
occurs in oxidised areas.
A simple linear distribution (KD) mechanism was also observed from the sorption
experiments performed by KULeuven with an initial selenite concentration of 1 × 10-6
mol dm-3 in synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic matter (OM). A good
consistency is observed between the results of sorption experiments at low and high
concentration of selenite in synthetic water in the absence of OM.
The effect of OM on the sorption of selenite onto pyrite is less clear. Indeed, different effects
are observed according to the origin and the preparation procedure of the extracted OM. On
one hand, dissolved organic matter concentrated under oxidizing conditions seems to slow
down the removal of selenite from solution in contrast to the absence of OM. On the other
hand, Boom Clay organic matter extracted from the solid clay under anoxic conditions has no
effect on the removal rate compared to the sorption tests made in the absence of OM. After
90 days, up to 25 % of the total selenium concentration in solution was observed to be
associated with organic matter.
However, some of the long-term results of KULeuven obtained in the presence of organic
matter (OM) seem to conflict with these of AEA Technology experiments made without OM.
Indeed, the mechanism of selenium removal from solution seems to apparently evolve as a
function of time from a simple sorption behaviour to a solubility control as suggested by the
overview plots shown by KULeuven. After a few days contact time, the selenium removal
seems to follow a simple linear distribution KD mechanism. Then, the slope of the isotherm
gradually increases as a function of time until the selenium concentrations converge towards
two different values depending on the initial concentration and represented by vertical lines in
the KULeuven plots. It seems to suggest that a solubility control could be at work on the long
term after ageing of the pyrite suspensions in contact with 75SeO32–. However, the two values
of the final selenium concentrations (2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 and 1.35 × 10-7 mol dm-3
respectively) still depend on the initial concentrations and are about 40 times lower than these
initial concentrations (1 × 10-6 mol dm-3 and 5 × 10-6 mol dm-3). This point is precisely in
disagreement with a solubility control and represents a strong argument in favour of a
sorption mechanism.
A4.4.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite)
The removal of selenite from solution by crushed pyrite and pyrite coupons was first
measured from a synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic material. An initial
196/328
selenite concentration of 1 × 10-3 mol dm-3 was used at a solution–to–pyrite ratio of 50:1, in a
similar manner to the experiments with selenate described above in Subsection A4.3.1.1.
In the presence of crushed pyrite at pH 10 and pH 8 there was evidence for the removal of up
to approximately 10 % of the selenite from solution. At pH 10, concentrations of between
8.9 × 10-4 and 9.3 × 10-4 mol dm-3 were measured after 377 days’ equilibration compared to
an initial concentration of 1.0 × 10-3 mol dm-3. At pH 8, the starting concentration of selenite
was 9.3 × 10-4 mol dm-3 and this fell to between 8.4 × 10-4 and 8.5 × 10-4 mol dm-3 after
380 days. Although all the concentrations were within the ± 10 % uncertainty of the
analytical measurements, the consistency of the decrease in concentration across all the
experiments suggested it was genuine. The trend of the results with time tended to support
the postulation that there is an initial fast removal process (probably sorption) within
100 days, followed by the achievement of a ‘steady-state’ aqueous selenium concentration.
The results from the experiments gave distribution ratios (RD values) of 4 to 6 dm3 kg-1, if it
was assumed that sorption was the only process to remove selenite from solution. No
appreciable loss of selenium from solution could be established reliably in the experiments
with pyrite coupons with the total selenium concentrations after 406 to 469 days being
9 × 10-4 to 1 × 10-3 mol dm-3. This would also be consistent with removal of selenite through
sorption, as the available surface area is far less in the coupon experiments than in those with
crushed pyrite.
Further experiments with crushed pyrite at solution-to-pyrite ratios of 50:1 and 5:1 and initial
selenite concentrations of 1 × 10-3 to 3 × 10-4 mol dm-3 confirmed the removal of selenite from
solution by pyrite in both synthetic Boom Clay water and in interstitial Boom Clay water.
The results showed that there was an initial fast removal of aqueous selenite from solution
within 1 month in both the synthetic Boom Clay water (no OM) and the interstitial Boom
Clay water (with OM). Within this time, there also appeared to be dissolution of a
surface-oxidised sulfur layer from the pyrite. The extent of selenium removal from solution
was dependent directly on the mass of pyrite available (and hence, indirectly on the number of
available sites on the pyrite surface) and the initial amount of selenite. RD values calculated
from the loss of selenium for solution show a general increasing trend with decreasing
solution:pyrite ratio in synthetic Boom Clay water (Table A4.4.1, AEAT).
197/328
Table A4.4.1 (AEAT): RD values for selenite (SeO32–) sorption onto crushed
pyrite in synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic matter.
Initial Selenite Solution:Pyrite Equilibration
Concentration
Time
(mol dm-3)
(days)
ratio
RD
(dm3 kg-1)
Synthetic Boom Clay Water (no DOM)
1.0 × 10-3
50:1
377
4 ± 11
6 ± 11
6 ± 11
9.3 × 10-4
50:1
380
5 ± 11
5 ± 11
5 ± 11
1.3 × 10-3
5:1
31
93
154
26 ± 6
21 ± 5
94 ± 20
6.5 × 10-4
5:1
31
93
154
180 ± 40
4 100 ± 820
1 100 ± 220
6.5 × 10-4
50:1
30
92
154
16 ± 13
22 ± 15
27 ± 16
3.4 × 10-4
5:1
31
93
154
4 900 ± 1 000
≥ 3 000
570 ± 110
3.4 × 10-4
50:1
30
92
154
21 ± 14
27 ± 16
31 ± 16
Interstitial Boom Clay Water (with DOM)
4.9 × 10-4
5:1
29
91
145
470 ± 100
58 ± 13
14 ± 4
4.9 × 10-4
50:1
29
91
145
86 ± 27
41 ± 18
110 ± 30
RD: Distribution ratio.
DOM: Dissolved Organic Matter.
198/328
XRD analysis of pyrite powder from the experiments showed no bulk changes to the
mineralogy and no secondary selenium phases were found. Coupons recovered after
equilibration with selenite solution for 13 months and for 23 months showed regions of
oxidation associated with cracks in the surfaces. These oxidised areas contained significant
concentrations of selenium as shown in Figure A4.4.1 (AEAT) for the coupon examined after
13 months. In contrast, the pyrite surfaces away from the cracks were found to have no
associated selenium. For the coupon examined after 23 months, Figure A4.4.2 (AEAT) and
Table A4.4.2 (AEAT) show that, at a short distance from a crack (spectrum 4), the surface was
predominantly pyrite with a small amount of oxidation evident. As a grey peripheral
alteration zone (spectrum 3) is traversed towards a dark central alteration zone adjacent to a
crack (spectrum 2), O, Na, Si, Ca, and Se all increase significantly, while Fe and S
simultaneously decrease.
Table A4.4.2 (AEAT): Elemental weight % analysis of spectra 2 to 4, surface of pyrite coupon exposed to
selenite solution for 23 months.
Spectrum
O
Na
Al
Si
S
Ca
Fe
Se
Total
2
23.18
0.42
0.45
0.32
34.90
0.33
39.47
0.93
100
3
11.90
0.10
0.43
0.14
45.60
0.05
41.66
0.13
100
4
3.79
0.00
0.17
0.00
51.66
0.05
44.29
0.05
100
All results expressed as weight %.
All elements analysed (normalised).
199/328
Pycoup Se4
Figure 13.4.1 (AEAT): scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a pyrite coupon examined after 13 months
equilibration with selenite solution.
Figure A4.4.1 (AEAT): Oxidised part of surface of pyrite coupon from experiment
with selenite. EDAX spectrum from area of particle on surface.
200/328
08/10/2003 09:42:48
Py Coup Se4A - 4
Spectrum
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Figure A4.4.2 (AEAT): Surface of pyrite coupon in selenite experiment. EDAX
spectrum from area of crack (spectrum 2).
201/328
A sorption model was developed to test whether the experimental observations were
consistent with a sorption mechanism for selenite. Given the lack of data characterising the
pyrite surface and the narrow pH range of the experimental data, it was decided that a simple
sorption model would be most appropriate. This model was based on the surface
complexation approach, with sorption represented by the surface complexation reaction and
equilibrium constant (KS):
≡Site + SeO32–
<==>
≡Site-SeO32–
(eq. A4.4.1)
where ≡Site represents a sorption site on the pyrite or oxidised pyrite surface.
Neglecting activity corrections:
=
Ks
Csor
CaqC (site )
(eq. A4.4.2)
where: Csor is the concentration of selenium associated with the solid;
Caq is the concentration of selenium in solution, and;
C(site) is the concentration of uncomplexed sorption sites.
In such a system with a single type of sorption site, the sorbing species can be sorbed up to a
maximum concentration corresponding to the total concentration of sorption sites, Ctot(site).
Substituting for C(site) (equal to Ctot(site) - Csor) and rearranging gives:
Caq
Csor
=
1
Ctot ( site )KS
+C
Caq
tot ( site )
(eq. A4.4.3)
The concentration of sorption sites and the equilibrium constant can then be estimated from a
plot of Caq/Csor versus Caq. From the experimental data obtained after three months for the
two water:pyrite ratios, the fit parameters Ctot(site) and Ks, (together with the sorption site
density determined from the fits) given in Table A4.4.3, were obtained.
Table A4.4.3 (AEAT): Sorption model parameters derived from simple surface complexation
model fits to the three-month experimental data for selenite removal by pyrite (AEAT).
Experimental data sets fitted
Concentration of sorption sites Log10Ks Site density
(—)
(mol dm-3)
(—)
(mol g-1)
5 cm3 g-1 water:pyrite data
1.1 × 10-3
6.1
5.3 × 10-6
50 cm3 g-1 water:pyrite data
5.5 × 10-4
3.1
2.8 × 10-5
202/328
The site density values determined in each case should, in principle, be equal. However, a
lower site density value was determined for the lower water:pyrite ratio (5 cm3 g-1) data. This
might be explained by a decrease in the accessibility of sorption sites at lower water:pyrite
ratio data or, more likely, due to scatter in the experimental data.
Figure A4.4.3 (AEAT) shows that a reasonable overall fit to the data obtained after three
months’ equilibration can be made using a site density of 7.0 × 10-6 mol g-1 and a log10Ks
value of 5.9. Although the experimental data at a water:pyrite ratio of 50:1 indicate a
dependence of Csor on Caq, the model suggests that these values lie in the plateau region, in
which sorbing species occupy all the available sorption sites, and that the apparent
dependence of Csor on Caq is an artefact due to experimental scatter. Figure A4.4.3 also shows
the data from experiments after a five months’ equilibration. Whilst these data show
reasonable agreement with the overall fits determined for the three-month equilibration data,
two of the experiments performed at a water:pyrite ratio of 5:1 show a significant increase in
the final aqueous selenium concentration at longer times (from approximately
6 × 10-6 mol dm-3 to around 3 × 10-5 mol dm-3). This may be due to scatter or may indicate
some release back into solution at longer times. Such behaviour would be difficult to explain
although any oxidation of selenite to selenate would be expected to reduce the extent of
sorption. An increase in the measured redox potential was observed in each case between the
three-month and five-month measurements but it is not known whether this would have
resulted in oxidation of selenite.
1.0E-02
-3
prediction for Ci = 1.3 x 10 mol dm
-3
Csor/ mol dm-3
1.0E-03
-3
expt at Ci = 1.3 x 10 mol dm
Expt. 5:1 data (3 months)
Expt. 50:1 data (3 months)
5:1 overall model fit
50:1 overall model fit
Expt. 5:1 data (5 months)
Expt. 50:1 data (5 months)
-3
1.0E-04
Overall fit:
-6
-1
site density = 7.0 x 10 mol g
log10 K = 5.90
1.0E-05
1.0E-07
1.0E-06
1.0E-05
1.0E-04
1.0E-03
Cf/ mol dm-3
Figure A4.4.3 (AEAT): Overall surface complexation model fit to experimental three-month data for selenite
removal by pyrite in synthetic Boom Clay Water (SBCW).
203/328
The experimental data for an initial aqueous selenium concentration of 1.3 × 10-3 mol dm-3
and at a 5:1 water:pyrite ratio are highlighted in Figure A4.4.3. Although these data lie close
to the model curve, the calculated final aqueous concentration of selenite (also shown on
Figure A4.4.3) is significantly lower than the experimentally-determined values. The
decrease in the final concentration between three-month and five-month determinations is
towards the model value so this may reflect a slow approach to equilibrium.
Despite these discrepancies the simple surface complexation model provides a reasonable fit
to the experimental data, reproducing the observed decrease in the concentration of sorbed
material at lower aqueous selenium concentrations, and at higher water:pyrite ratios. This is
in contrast to a solubility-controlled mechanism for selenium removal. If solubility control
was to operate, the final selenium concentration would be expected to be independent of the
initial concentration, and of the water:pyrite ratio. In this case the experimental data would be
expected to lie on a vertical line in plots such as Figure A4.4.3. Clearly the experimental data
do not show such a trend and therefore solubility control is considered unlikely. From the
surface analysis data it is likely that sorption of selenite to pyrite occurs in oxidised areas.
Other studies have shown that oxidation of pyrite in such systems can give rise to an iron(III)
oxide or hydroxide surface (Gillespie, 2001), which is known to sorb selenite in this pH
region (Hayes, 1997; Hayes et al., 1987).
A4.4.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
Interactions of selenite with main Boom Clay components (pyrite, organic matter, and Fe2+)
have been studied by KULeuven in several phases in the different Framework Programs (FP
4th, 5th, 6th) of the European Commission (EC). Results have been obtained for the
TRANCOM-I and II projects dealing with the Transport of radionuclide by Complexation by
Organic Matter.
TRANCOM-I project (FP-4)
In the framework of the TRANCOM-I European project (FP-4), several systems were set up
in order to study the interaction of selenium with pyrite, both in the absence and the presence
of Boom Clay organic matter, and with or without addition of Fe2+.
Three different crushed pyrite samples from two origins were used after sieving.
75
Se (T½ = 120 days) was used as tracer to study all the considered systems. 75Se was initially
expected to be in the 75SeO32– form as announced on the data sheet from the supplier, but this
204/328
was not verified. However, afterwards, we realised that oxidation reactions induced by water
radiolysis products might have converted a fraction of selenite in selenate (75SeO42–).
75
Se was added to three different systems: (i) pure pyrite only, (ii) pyrite with organic matter
extracted from Boom Clay, and (iii) pyrite with addition of Fe2+ to precipitate iron(II)
carbonate.
1.
75
SeO32– + pyrite system
The interaction of selenite with pyrite was initially studied as a function of time in order to
evaluate eventual kinetic effects. FeS2 was equilibrated for different periods of time with a
synthetic clay water (SCW) solution containing 9 × 10-8 mol dm-3 of 75Se. After equilibration,
the systems were centrifuged and the supernatants were used for measuring the 75Se activity,
pH, and occasionally Eh. All the experiments were carried out under anaerobic conditions.
Between 7 days and 104 days of contact time, 75Se concentration remained constant around
4.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3, and no measurable concentration changes were observed. So, from these
experimental results, in contrast to some literature data (Chao and Sanzolone, 1989), we
conclude that the equilibrium concentration was reached after one week. A constant KD of
about 100 dm3 kg-1 was obtained for six experimental durations.
2.
75
SeO32– + pyrite + organic matter system
The influence of Boom Clay organic matter was investigated by pre-equilibrating pyrite with
synthetic clay water (SCW) or with a Boom Clay extract (BCE). The overall starting
concentration was 2.17 × 10-8 mol dm-3. The systems were allow to equilibrate for different
time periods before phase separation and sampling.
No significant effect of the presence of humic substances on the “steady-state” selenium
concentration (2 - 4 × 10-9 mol dm-3) was observed. Therefore, it was first considered that
selenium was likely not associated with humic substances, in contrast to the frequent
mentions in soil science literature (Christensen et al., 1989; Abrams et al., 1990; Fio and
Fujii, 1990). This was also verified by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) of the
supernatant solutions. However, the possible contamination of the 75SeO32– spike by an
undetermined fraction of 75SeO42– could also explain these results.
The KD values observed in this experiment (2 000 – 4 000 dm3 kg-1) are higher than in the
experiment on kinetic effects with pyrite only. It is not excluded that adsorption occurred onto
the FeS2 surface irrespectively of the presence, or the absence, of Boom Clay organic matter.
The higher KD value can be ascribed to the higher specific surface area of the sample used in
205/328
this experiment (< 100 µm) compared to the kinetic experiments with pyrite only
(> 0.84 mm).
3.
75
SeO32– + pyrite + [Fe2+ / FeCO3 or Fe(OH)2] system
Since both pyrite and siderite are present in the Boom Clay, it would be worth to study the
interaction of selenium with both of them present at the same time. Pyrite was therefore
contacted with synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW) to which different Fe2+ concentrations were
added with the intention to precipitate increasing amounts of FeCO3 in the system. The
purpose was to prepare a synthetic solution as close as possible to the interstitial water which
is also at equilibrium with siderite (FeCO3) in situ in Boom Clay. After addition of Fe2+ a
precipitate was well visually observed, but unfortunately it was not analysed by XRD. It is
therefore not possible to formally conclude that it was really FeCO3. The presence of a
hydrated ferrous hydroxide, or green rust (mixed double layer) cannot be excluded.
The overall initial Se concentration was 4.97 × 10-7 mol dm-3. However, quite unexpectedly,
the final selenium concentration was much higher than the predicted solubility of FeSe2.
Despite the fact that the pyrite sample used in this experiment had a higher specific surface
than the sample used to study the influence of Boom Clay organic matter the observed KD
value (150 dm3 kg-1) was much smaller. Here again, the possible contamination of the
75
SeO32– spike by an undetermined fraction of 75SeO42– (water radiolysis) could also explain
these results.
4. Possible interferences due to the presence of 75SeO42– in the three studied systems
The above-mentioned experiments seem thus to suggest that the interaction between SeO32–
and FeS2 is dominated by adsorption effects, with no significant influence of organic matter.
However, the KD values observed in the experiments, are not in line with each other.
Therefore, other unexpected mechanisms might be at hand. A first explanation of these results
could be searched for in the poorly characterized chemical composition of the 75Se spike used:
another selenium species than selenite might be present in the spike. The constant
concentration of selenium (over time periods up to 100 days) observed in each experiment,
could be due to the presence of 75SeO42–, which is neither reduced nor adsorbed by the FeS2
surface (see Subsection A4.3.1). The difference in KD values observed could then entirely be
attributable to the different amounts of 75SeO42– initially present in the 75Se spiking solution.
Therefore, in the further experiments, an extensive use was made of the speciation techniques
presented in Section A4.4 to discriminate selenite from selenate.
206/328
TRANCOM-II project (FP-5)
In the framework of the TRANCOM-II European project (FP-5), different sorption tests with
75
SeO32– were carried out by KULeuven on pyrite, used as a sorbent, in the presence and the
absence of Boom Clay organic matter (OM).
1.
75
SeO32– + pyrite system
Different amounts of ground pyrite (solution-to-pyrite ratios: 400:1 and 100:1 respectively)
were contacted with synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW) in the absence of organic matter and
spiked with different total concentrations (5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 and 10-6 mol dm-3) of 75Se (+ cold
carrier included) supposed to be in the form of 75SeO32–. The batches were allowed to
equilibrate over different time periods up to two months before analysing. The selenium
speciation and solution concentrations were measured over time.
A decrease in time of SeO32– concentrations was observed, depending mostly on the amount
of FeS2 present. Higher concentrations of SeO32– and lower solid-to-solution ratios of FeS2
resulted in higher end concentrations of SeO32– after a certain time. After relatively short
equilibration times (up to one week), the systems follow a simple linear distribution
mechanism with a log KD of about 1.6 ± 0.2 dm3 kg-1 (KD ~ 40 dm3 kg-1). In two systems
(containing the highest amounts of FeS2), a final dissolved selenium concentration of about
3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 was reached; in the other systems (containing the lowest amounts of FeS2),
equilibrium was not attained after two months. No other selenium species in solution apart
from SeO32– were detected, indicating that:
− SeO32– was merely sorbed and that no other species were formed, or;
− selenium reaction products in solution (SeO42– or HSe–, respectively left by oxidation or
reduction reactions) were only present in minute concentrations below limit of detection.
So, these results summarised at Figure A4.4.4 suggest that one, or several, of the following
reactions might have occurred at the pyrite surface:
− SeO32– is directly sorbed onto FeS2 surface, and/or;
− SeO32– is sorbed onto newly formed Fe-hydrous oxides, and/or;
− SeO32– is progressively reduced and precipitated as elemental Se(0), and/or;
− SeO32– is progressively reduced in HSe–, and that FeSe2 is then slowly precipitated in
contact with Fe2+.
207/328
[Se] FeS2 solid phase (mol/g)
1.4E-06
1.2E-06
1.0E-06
1E-06 M Se
2,5 g/l FeS2
3x10-9 M
5E-06 M Se
2,5 g/l FeS2
8.0E-07
6.0E-07
4.0E-07
2.0E-07
KD
1E-06 M Se
10 g/l FeS2
0.0E+00
-1.0E-06
0.0E+00
5E-06 M Se
10 g/l FeS2
1.0E-06
2.0E-06
3.0E-06
4.0E-06
5.0E-06
[Se(+IV)] solution phase (mol/l)
3 days
7 days
21 days
64 days
Linear (3 days)
Linear (7 days)
Linear (21 days)
Linear (64 days)
Figure A4.4.4 (KUL): Batch tests with SeO32– in contact with pure pyrite (FeS2) in synthetic Boom Clay
water (in the absence of organic matter). Selenium sorbed/reduced/precipitated onto the FeS2 solid phase
(mol g-1) as a function of SeO32– concentration in solution (mol dm-3) for two initial selenite
concentrations, two amounts of pyrite and different contact times. For short contact times (3 and 7 days) a
simple linear distribution ratio (KD) is observed. For longer contact time the selenium concentration in
solution progressively decreases in all tubes to converge to the value of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3.
XRD measurements on similar systems containing SeO32– and FeS, and a final selenium
concentration in solution of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 observed in systems with different initial Se
concentrations, suggest that a crystalline elemental Se(s) precipitate could also have formed in
the present tests.
2.
75
SeO32– + pyrite + organic matter system
The afore-mentioned method was then extended to similar FeS2 (10 g dm-3; solution-to-pyrite
ratio 100:1) containing systems, but now contacted with synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW) in
the presence of added organic matter (OM).
Two sets of experiments were made with Boom Clay organic matter extracted in two different
ways:
− The first one was prepared with 100 ppm of OM from the TROM29 batch (dissolved OM
concentrated from large volumes of Boom Clay porewater under air in the frame of the
Trancom-II project, see Maes et al. (2004a,b) for more details). The TROM29 batch only
contained mobile dissolved OM and was exposed to oxygen from air;
208/328
− The second set was prepared with better preserved OM from solid Boom Clay Extracts1
(BCE, 100 ppm) and a dilution of these extracts (30 ppm). The BCE batch also contained
immobile OM from the solid and was always preserved under anoxic conditions.
Two initial 75SeO32– concentrations were added (5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 and 1 × 10-6 mol dm-3).
Gel permeation chromatograms (GPC) were performed from the BCE samples to study the
Se-OM interaction.
The following results were obtained: in all the batches a fraction of the added organic matter
was sorbed onto the solid FeS2 phase following a linear sorption isotherm
(log KD OM = 4.26 ± 0.05 dm3 kg-1) (KD OM = 18 200 dm3 kg-1).
In the TROM29 batches (positive Eh values measured, indicating a possible oxidation), the
decrease in total Se concentrations with time is smaller with respect to the results obtained in
the absence of organic matter. After 320 days, total selenium concentrations of the order of
1 - 2 × 10-7 mol dm-3 were measured, indicating that SeO32– reduction was probably restricted.
In the BCE batches (negative Eh values measured, indicating still reducing conditions), total
selenium concentrations decreased with time with the same rate as if no organic matter was
present, but remained constant after 14 days equilibration time (Figure A4.4.5). At this point,
a small fraction of the total selenium in solution (< 10 %) was associated with the organic
matter. This “steady-state” condition corresponded to a sorption mechanism for SeO32– with a
log KD value of 3.49 ± 0.01 dm3 kg-1 (KD = 3 090 dm3 kg-1). After the setting of this sorption
“equilibrium”, SeO32– concentrations decreased only at a very slow rate, while selenium
concentrations associated with organic matter remained constant or even slightly increased.
After 90 days in the systems with initial SeO32– concentration of 10-6 mol dm-3, up to 25 % of
total selenium in solution was observed to be associated with organic matter, while in the
systems with initial SeO32– concentration of 5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 this percentage was only 2 % –
17 %. At the end constant KD values were obtained for free selenium
(log KD = 3.57 ± 0.01 dm3 kg-1) (KD = 3 715 dm3 kg-1) in solution.
The SeO32– concentrations in solution rapidly decrease with time towards two constant values
(indicated in Figure A4.4.5 by vertical lines drawn at 1.35 × 10-7 mol dm-3 and
2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 respectively), after which an apparent “equilibrium” is achieved. These
two concentrations are about forty times lower than the two initial SeO32– concentrations
respectively introduced in the systems.
1
(KULeuven) Boom Clay extract was prepared by mixing 50 g of Boom Clay with 200 mL synthetic Boom
Clay water (SCW) (liquid:solid ratio = 4:1). After 2 weeks equilibration time, samples were centrifuged
(Beckman J2-21, rotor JA-14, ? RPM, 2 h), the supernatant was decanted and centrifuged again (same
conditions). The liquid phase was then used as a Boom Clay extract (BCE). (KULeuven)
209/328
Up to this point, the specific interaction mechanism of selenium with dissolved Boom Clay
organic matter observed in experiments starting from SeO32–, remains unclear. We might
envisage two possible explanations, but others could still exist:
1. SeO32– anions could directly interact (e.g. through a ligand exchange mechanism) with
dissolved natural organic matter (NOM). Such behaviour is already known and
documented for phosphorus (Hens and Merckx, 2002) and arsenic (Smedley and
Kinniburgh, 2002), or;
2. SeO32– could be reduced to elemental Se(s) (e.g. through an adsorption-reduction reaction
at the FeS2 surface, or possibly on Fe(II)-bearing groups within the organic matter itself),
and subsequently, the formed elemental Se(s) colloids could interact with the organic
matter colloids.
[Se] FeS2 solid phase vs. [Se (IV)] solution phase
Boom Clay extract
[Se] FeS2 solid phase (mol/g)
5.0E-07
4.0E-07
3.0E-07
30 ppm BCE
1E-06 M Se
10 g/l FeS2
30 ppm BCE
5E-06 M Se
10 g/l FeS2
100 ppm BCE
5E-06 M Se
10 g/l FeS2
"free"[Se]sol = 1.35x10-7 M
2.0E-07
"free"[Se]sol = 2.4x10-8 M
100 ppm BCE
1E-06 M Se 10
g/l FeS2
1.0E-07
0.0E+00
-1.0E-07
0.0E+00
1.0E-07
2.0E-07
3.0E-07
4.0E-07
5.0E-07
6.0E-07
7.0E-07
8.0E-07
[Se(+IV)] solution phase (mol/l)
8 days
15 days
37 days
92 days
Figure A4.4.5 (KUL): Batch tests with SeO32– in contact with 10 g dm-3 FeS2 in the presence of Boom
Clay organic matter Extract (BCE). Selenium associated with the FeS2 solid phase (mol g-1) as a function
of the SeO32– concentration in solution (mol dm-3) for two initial selenite concentrations, two
concentrations of BCE, and different contact times. SeO32– concentrations in solution rapidly decrease
with time towards two constant values (indicated by vertical lines drawn at 1.35 × 10-7 mol dm-3 and
2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 respectively), after which an apparent equilibrium is achieved.
To conclude on the interactions of selenite with Boom Clay components (pyrite and OM), it
seems that in the absence of organic matter, selenite removal follows a simple linear
distribution coefficient (KD). In the presence of OM, for short contact times, selenite also
initially exhibits a sorption (KD) behaviour, but at long-term, the situation becomes more
210/328
complex and the removal of selenite from solution could perhaps still be attributed to
sorption, or to another mechanisms such as reduction / precipitation occurring during the
ageing of the suspensions. Then, elemental Se(0) is suspected by KULeuven to be formed in
colloidal suspension and to become weakly associated with the organic colloids.
A4.4.2 Interaction of SeO32– with Boom Clay – KULeuven
The adsorption and reduction of Se(+IV) in the presence of solid Boom Clay and Boom Clay
organic matter was investigated by KULeuven only.
In the framework of the TRANCOM–I European project (FP 4), numerous experiments with
75
Se spikes were performed, starting mainly from conditions of oversaturation. At this time, it
was thought that the 75Se spike used consisted solely of Na275SeO3. The general set-up of the
experiments was performed as follows. In short centrifuge tubes a weighted amount of Boom
Clay was first allowed to equilibrate with synthetic clay water (SCW). Then a small amount
of SCW stock solution spiked with 75Se was added and the tubes were shaken for a chosen
equilibration period. Phase separation was made by centrifugation. Measurements of pH, Eh,
75
Se count rate and optical density (280 nm) were made on the supernatant solutions. A gel
permeation chromatogram (GPC) of the supernatant was occasionally taken.
The results of these experiments with 75SeO32– and Boom Clay suspensions can be described
by three main observations on the behaviour of selenium. (1) Unexpectedly, and contrary to
the data from literature, the selenium removal from solution in contact with Boom Clay
reached very quickly a steady-state. (2) In a series of experiments, the equilibrium selenium
solution concentrations in all batches were about identical and independent of the liquid–to–
solid ratio and of the equilibration time. This suggested that the final selenium concentration
was solubility controlled. (3) In another series of experiments, different starting 75Se
concentrations resulted in different equilibrium concentrations, the isotherms exhibiting a
typical sorption mechanism with constant KD value. Moreover, in these experiments, gel
permeation chromatograms made on supernatant solutions did not provide arguments
indicating an association between selenium and organic matter.
1. Fast steady states
Since selenium is known to show slow redox-reaction equilibria (Chao and Sanzolone, 1989),
the interaction of selenite with Boom Clay was firstly studied over an extra long time period
of up to about one year. Experimentally the interaction of selenite with Boom Clay was
studied at only one SCW solution:Boom Clay ratio of ~ 3.9:1 and for a starting selenite
concentration of 4.69 × 10-8 mol dm-3 Se. Six identical systems were set up. The observed
selenium concentrations in the “equilibrium” solutions after one week and up to 43 weeks of
equilibration were identical (3.9 × 10-9 mol dm-3) indicating that a steady-state was reached
211/328
within the short time period of one week in contrast to some literature data (Chao and
Sanzolone, 1989). This rather quick reaction equilibrium was confirmed in experiments at
different liquid–to–solid ratios with Boom Clay and also in experiments with pyrite. The gel
permeation chromatograms taken on the extracts show one larger and one smaller UV peaks.
The position of 75Se in the activity patterns coinciding with that of the second UV peak in the
optical density pattern, suggests the presence of (small size) selenium oxyanions. Since the
first large organic matter peak did not contain selenium, the initial working assumption was
that selenium was not associated with organic matter in these experiments, in contrast to
literature data (Abrams et al., 1990). Afterwards, the presence of 75SeO42– was suspected in
the 75Se spiking solution because of oxidation reactions induced by the water radiolysis. So,
the observed 75Se behaviour was at least partly, if not entirely, imposed by selenate.
2. Indications of a solubility control
In a second experiment, the distribution of 75Se was measured at different SCW
solution:Boom Clay ratios and for different equilibration times using a starting concentration
of 1.66 × 10-8 mol dm-3 Se. The equilibrium selenium solution concentrations in all
experiments were about identical (6.8 × 10-9 mol dm-3) which is independent of the liquid–to–
solid ratio and independent of the equilibration period. These results confirm the previous
observations that equilibrium was reached after 7 days of contact time. The constant solution
concentration of selenium versus an increasing concentration of removed Se per g clay at
different liquid–to–solid ratio suggested that the selenium concentration was solubility
controlled. Suspending Boom Clay at different liquid–to–solid ratios leads to different organic
matter concentrations in the supernatant solutions. The constant value of the Se
concentrations suggested (deduction) that selenium was not associated with organic matter
since the presence of different humic substance concentrations in the supernatant solutions
had no influence on the equilibrium Se concentration. The former conclusion was
underpinned by a gel permeation chromatogram of the equilibrium solutions. Again, the large
organic matter peak did not contain 75Se: this observation seemed to support the independence
of the selenium level on the overall humic substance concentration. However, due to the
initially undetected presence of 75SeO42– in the spiking solutions submitted to an intense
γ -radiolysis, the first interpretations of these experiments were inappropriate and had to be
revised.
3. Indications of a sorption mechanism
The solubility of selenium in the presence of Boom Clay was checked by contacting different
75
Se concentrations (from 3.7 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to 3.7 × 10-7 mol dm-3) in synthetic clay water
(SCW) with Boom Clay at a liquid–to–solid ratio of about 4:1. The systems were allowed to
equilibrate for 1 week by end-over-end shaking. Different starting concentrations were used
corresponding to different degrees of oversaturation. Unexpectedly, the observed equilibrium
212/328
selenium concentrations were different from each other (ranging from 3.75 × 10-10 mol dm-3
to 3.95 × 10-8 mol dm-3) and thus did not correspond to a precipitation mechanism. On the
contrary, a plot of the selenium adsorption isotherm exhibits a typical sorption mechanism
with a constant KD of about 34 dm3 kg-1.
The previous experiment (at different liquid–to–solid ratios) and the present data (constant
liquid–to–solid ratio) thus each correspond to a different behaviour of selenium in the
presence of Boom Clay. The first interpretation coming to the mind is that a precipitation and
a sorption mechanism could maybe explain respectively the results of these two series of
experiments.
In the final report of the TRANCOM-I European project (FP 4) (Dierckx et al., 1999), the
discrepancy in the interaction mechanism (precipitation versus adsorption) observed in the
different series of experiments with 75Se and Boom Clay, was attributed to the chemical
composition of the two different batches of 75Se used as stock solution. However, since no
clear difference between the two batches could be traced back with the techniques then
applied, no answer to the problems was found. Since then, it became evident that an
undetermined fraction of 75Se in the two stock solutions could have been present as selenate
(75SeO42–) because of the progressive oxidation of selenite by the water radiolysis products.
Selenate is not expected to react with any of the Boom Clay components at relatively short
time scale. Therefore, the main results from the afore-mentioned TRANCOM-I experiments
(both in the presence of Boom Clay and/or pyrite) are recapitulated hereafter in Table A4.4.4
for reassessment.
213/328
Table A4.4.4 (KUL): Overview of the main results of the different experiments with 75Se
frame of the TRANCOM-I European project.
Batch
Liq/Sol
Glove
Initial Se
Equil. Se
Equil. Se conc.
Log KD
N°
ratio
box
conc.
conc.
as % of initial
(—)
(dm3 kg-1) (mol dm-3)
(dm3 kg-1)
(atm.)
(mol dm-3)
Se conc.
performed in the
Type of
experiment
(—)
1
3.9
6.30 × 10-8
2.80 × 10-8
~ 44 %
0.69
N2/CO2
1
3.9
1.66 × 10-8
6.80 × 10-9
~ 41 %
0.72
N2/H2/
CO2
2
3.9
4.70 × 10-8
3.90 × 10-9
~8%
1.60
N2/CO2
2
4.0
3.70 × 10-7
3.95 × 10-8
~ 11 %
1.55
N2/H2
2
4.0
3.70 × 10-9
3.70 × 10-10
~ 10 %
1.55
N2/H2
Differ. Conc.
Boom Clay
1
100
4.97 × 10-7
1.92 × 10-7
~ 39 %
2.20
N2/H2
Pyrite +
Siderite
1
100
9.20 × 10-8
4.30 × 10-8
~ 48 %
2.04
N2/H2/
CO2
Kin. Effects
Pyrite
2
400
2.17 × 10-8
2.51 × 10-8
~ 11 %
3.50
N2/H2
Absence of
OM Pyrite
2
400
2.17 × 10-8
2.64 × 10-8
~ 12 %
3.50
N2/H2
Presence of
OM Pyrite
Succes.
Extract. Boom
Clay
Differ. L/S
Boom Clay
Long time
exp. Boom
Clay
Differ. Conc.
Boom Clay
OM: organic matter.
From data of Table A4.4.4, especially the ratio (%) given in the 5th column, it becomes now
clear that, irrespective of the liquid–to–solid ratio, the nature of the solid, the presence of
dissolved organic matter, and the type of glovebox used, a very characteristic feature emerges
for all experiments after one week contact time: the fraction (expressed as %) of the initial Se
concentration remaining in solution systematically corresponds to one of the two following
values: ~ 44 % for batch 1 and ~ 10 % for batch 2. So, it appears that the selenium proportion
left in solution at the end of the experiment was only dependent on the 75Se batch used, and
did not decrease over longer contact times. Thus, the 75Se concentrations measured on the
long term could no longer be considered as the result of an equilibrium situation, but rather as
a simple steady-state.
Therefore, to explain this unforeseen finding, it was postulated that the selenium percentage
remaining in solution correspond to the SeO42– fraction present in the original 75Se batch. For
the 75Se batch 1, this Se(+VI) fraction amounts to about 44 ± 4 %, while for the 75Se batch 2
the Se(+VI) fraction is about 10 ±2 %. This SeO42– fraction is not adsorbed, nor reduced, nor
214/328
associated to organic matter, and thus rapidly dominates the total selenium concentration in
solution while the SeO32– fraction is either adsorbed, or reduced and precipitated (see
Subsections A4.4.1 and later).
As a consequence, it is essential to control the selenium aqueous speciation in the initial 75Se
spiking solution and in the final supernatants. A clear distinction between selenite and
selenate is required to correctly interpret the experimental.
The KD values listed in Table A4.4.4 spread on three orders of magnitude and are comprised
in the range 5 to 3160 dm3 kg-1. The KD obtained from the 75Se batch N°1 (richest in 75SeO42–)
lie in the lowest part of the range: from 5 to 160 dm3 kg-1. These from the 75Se batch N° 2
(with less 75SeO42–) are the highest: from 40 to 3160 dm3 kg-1. This is consistent with the
absence of sorption observed for SeO42– in the conditions and at the time scale of these
experiments.
In a new set of experiments, Boom Clay batches (Boom Clay + synthetic Boom Clay water,
SCW) with three 75Se concentrations (1 × 10-6 mol dm-3, 5 × 10-7 mol dm-3, and
1 × 10-7 mol dm-3) were measured as a function of time. The speciation techniques described
in Section A4.4 were used to distinguish the different selenium species in solution. Results
from this set of experiments showed that the 75Se spike used was composed of both Se(+IV)
and Se(+VI) species.
It was observed that selenite (SeO32–) ions were removed from solution on a relatively short
time scale. However, equilibrium was not attained in less than one month. Selenate (SeO42–)
ions clearly remained in solution.
This confirms thus the hypothesis postulated to account for the contradictory results obtained
in the experiments carried out for the TRANCOM-I project. It also shows the slow kinetics of
75
SeO32– interaction with Boom Clay: selenite can be reduced, but a constant concentration
was not reached in less than one month.
In a last, long-term experiment, the speciation of selenium in the presence of Boom Clay was
studied starting again from oversaturation with 75SeO32–. Systems were prepared using two
liquid-to-solid ratios (20:1 and 4.76:1), as well as two 75SeO32– concentrations
(5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 and 1 × 10-6 mol dm-3). These systems were allowed to equilibrate up to
9 months. The supernatant of the samples was analysed for total dissolved 75Se concentration,
75
Se concentration left in solution after La3+ precipitation of dissolved humic substance (HS),
optical density (OD) at 280 nm, Eh and pH. The solutions were also analysed by anion and
gel permeation chromatography.
215/328
The experimental results indicated that the speciation procedures used were sufficiently
accurate for identifying the different 75Se species in the Boom Clay suspensions: SeO42–,
SeO32– and Se associated to the organic matter were readily determined. However, selenide
(HSe–) could not be directly detected. It is also not excluded that dissolved selenide could
have been immediately oxidised upon injection in the column of anion chromatography or gel
permeation chromatography, and so, were perhaps measured as SeO32–. The pH and Eh
measurements indicated that the expected geochemical conditions were likely met for the
reduction of the spike of 75SeO32– in the Boom Clay suspensions.
Upon addition of 75SeO32– to the Boom Clay systems, a distribution of selenium between the
liquid and the solid phases was first observed. Selenite sorption could be attributed to the
formation of inner-sphere complexes at the surface of broken edges of the clay particles (also
known as ligand exchange mechanism).
As presented on Figure A4.4.6, after a certain time (depending on the system studied) two
“stable” concentrations of 75SeO32– were observed at respectively 1.4 (± 0.2) × 10-7 mol dm-3
and 2.4 (± 0.2) × 10-8 mol dm-3. These two concentrations coincide remarkably with the
constant values of 75Se measured in the experiments made with FeS2 and Boom Clay extract
(BCE), whose description is given in Figure A4.4.5.
Afterwards, in some systems 75SeO32– concentrations in solution decreased again towards
3 × 10-9 mol dm-3, the experimental “solubility” value observed in experiments made with
FeS2 as a reductant. As already previously observed on pure pyrite systems, the amount of
solid phase in the systems seems to be a critical parameter for the reaction kinetics. In all
systems 75Se concentrations in solution tended to decrease, but the system with the lowest
initial Se concentration and the largest solid–to–liquid ratio attained equilibrium most rapidly.
In other words, the redox-systems evolution seems to follow the offer and demand in electron:
when the number of sites (from the solid) giving electrons largely exceeds that of electron
acceptors in solution, the redox-reaction rate considerably increases. The offer must be larger
than the demand to accelerate the reaction rate.
Finally, in all the new systems, 75Se was also found to be associated with dissolved organic
matter. This fraction was initially low (10 % – 30 %) relative to the total dissolved selenium
concentration, but remained quite constant (although sometimes even slightly decreasing)
throughout the experiment. However, after nine months, in some samples it increased and in
these systems most of selenium in solution (40 % – 75 %) became associated with organic
matter.
216/328
[Se] Boom Clay solid phase (mol/g)
1.4E-07
5E-06 M Se
0,05 kg/L BC
1.2E-07
[Se]solution = 3x10-9 M
1.0E-07
8.0E-08
[Se]solution = 2.4x10-8 M
[Se]solution = 1.35x10-7 M
6.0E-08
4.0E-08 1E-06 M Se
1E-06 M Se
0,05 kg/L BC
0,21 kg/L BC
5E-06 M Se
0,21 kg/L BC
2.0E-08
0.0E+00
-5.0E-08
0.0E+00
5.0E-08
1.0E-07
1.5E-07
2.0E-07
2.5E-07
[Se(+IV)] Boom Clay solution phase (mol/l)
1 week
2 weeks
1 month
3 months
9 months
Figure A4.4.6 (KUL): Long-term batch experiments with SeO32– in contact with Boom Clay
suspensions. Selenium associated with the Boom Clay solid phase (mol g-1) as a function of the
SeO32– concentration in solution (mol dm-3) for two initial selenite concentrations, two Boom
Clay solid-to-liquid ratios and different contact times. SeO32– concentrations in solution rapidly
decrease towards two “constant” values (of 1.35 × 10-7 mol dm-3 and 2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 as
represented by vertical lines). After three months’ equilibration time, SeO32– concentrations in
the two systems with the highest solid-to-liquid ratio again decreased towards the previously
observed experimental selenium “solubility” value of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3.
A4.4.3 Kinetic of reduction of SeO32– onto pyrite – KULeuven
Upon contacting SeO32– with pure pyrite (FeS2), a steady decrease in time of SeO32–
concentrations was observed, until a final concentration in solution of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 was
reached. All investigated systems appear to follow a same rate law. According to Bruggeman
et al., (2005), the decrease in Se(IV) concentration as a function of time seems proportional to
the concentration of dissolved selenite and to the amount of solid FeS2 present in the system,
and inversely proportional to the square root of the FeS2 occupancy by selenite. These
observations suggest that SeO32– reduction takes place through sorption onto FeS2 and that a
selenium precipitate with a solubility of 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3 was formed. Based on a fit of the
experimental data the following rate law is proposed:
d [Se(+ IV )]
= −k [Se(+ IV )][FeS2 ]0
dt
[FeS2 ]0
[Se(+ IV )]0
(eq. A4.4.4)
One also observes that the Se(IV) reduction rate slows down when clay minerals and
dissolved Boom Clay organic matter are present in the system.
217/328
The competitive chemisorption of SeO32– onto the broken edges of clay minerals could be a
possible explanation of the decrease of the selenite reduction rate in the presence of clay.
Indeed, if, on one hand, selenite can distribute freely between the solution and the clay
minerals edges, and, on the other hand, can sorb on pyrite surface, the adsorption of SeO32–
onto the clay minerals could compete with that of pyrite, and so contribute to retard the
reduction of SeO32– by the FeS2 surface. This competition between two solid phases for
selenite sorption is illustrated by the following combination of exchange reactions:
Clay edge—SeO32– (ads.) <=> Clay edge + free SeO32–
free SeO32– + Pyrite <=> (ads.) SeO32– — Pyrite
Clay edge—SeO32– (ads.) <=> free SeO32– <=> (ads.) SeO32– — Pyrite
The effect of dissolved Boom Clay organic matter on the decrease of the selenite reduction
rate is much less clear and remains presently not understood.
A4.4.4 Solubility of SeO32– – KULeuven
The SeO32– concentrations in Boom Clay are not limited by the solubility of metal selenite
precipitates, as e.g. CaSeO3, a solid phase expected to be formed when selenite reacts with
Ca2+ from cement. It could be worth to study more into detail the coprecipitation of SeO32–
with calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) phases, CaCO3 (calcite), and FeCO3 (siderite), in
cementitious environments as these expected for the SuperContainer concept, or the buffer to
be used as backfill material for galleries of intermediate level waste.
However, when SeO32– is added to systems containing fresh Boom Clay suspensions, or
chemical reductants, SeO32– is reduced (e.g. by adsorption onto FeS2) and poorly soluble
selenium (0) or (-II) phases can precipitate. After complete disappearance of SeO32–, the
selenium solution concentration is controlled by the solubility of the resulting selenium solid
phases: elemental Se(s), iron selenides such as FeSe, or FeSe2, or solid solutions with iron
sulfides such as [FeS2-×(Se)×].
A4.4.5 Conclusions for SeO32–
The different systems studied with selenite in prolonged contact with suspensions of Boom
Clay, or its different components, appear to be relatively complex and very sensitive to
218/328
experimental artefacts such as auto-oxidation. This makes interpretation of some results
particularly difficult. However, one of the main cause of artefacts with 75Se radio-labelled
selenium has been now clearly identified and is due to the progressive oxidation of 75SeO32–
in the spiking solution due to the intense water radiolysis. To avoid the interference of
75
SeO42– in the spike, the purity of the reagents has to be checked prior to experiments and
speciation techniques are also mandatory to follow the evolution of 75Se in the supernatants
after equilibration.
The removal of SeO32– from solution appears first to start as a linear sorption isotherm (KD
approach), then, it seems to progressively evolve with time as a slow reduction/precipitation
and the selenium concentration in solution converges towards a solubility limit (3 × 10-9
mol dm-3). The KD obtained so far are in the range 5 to 5 000 dm-3 kg-1, but the extrapolation
towards in situ conditions is not straightforward. The main uncertainty resides in the still poor
knowledge of the retention mechanism and how to translate the obtained laboratory results in
term of performance assessment (PA) calculations. Two options could be first envisaged:
− SeO32– simply sorbs without any reduction: pure KD approach without solubility limit, or;
− Se(0) is the immobilised species after a complex combination of sorption/reduction.
Sorption is not taken into account in the calculations and one should consider that the
mobile species under reducing conditions is HSe– which is supposed to migrate without
retardation (R = 1) but is solubility limited (S = 3 × 10-9 mol dm-3).
In other words, considering the thermodynamic calculations presented by AEA Technology at
Figure 2.5.2 (p. 33, Chapter 2), if one assumes that the selenium species in equilibrium with
Boom Clay is the elemental Se(0), its solubility strongly depends on the Eh value. The
dissolved selenium concentration as a function of Eh presents a clear V-profile with a shape of
young valley. If Eh increases towards less reducing conditions, SeO32– is expected to be the
dominant aqueous species, that would migrate retarded (KD approach) but without solubility
control. At the contrary, if Eh decreases towards more reducing conditions, HSe– is the species
expected to dominate in solution and would migrate unretarded with a solubility limit. The
same reasoning could be done for FeSe if necessary.
The reduction kinetics of SeO32– seems also to be proportional to the amount of pyrite
introduced in the system and to the total selenite concentration present in solution. It is also
inversely dependent on the square root of the selenite occupancy onto the FeS2 surface
(Bruggeman et al., 2005).
A clear association of SeO32– with OM has been observed in contrast to all other selenium
species studied in the present work.
219/328
A4.5 Behaviour of elemental Se(s)
The solubility of elemental Se(0) has been studied independently by AEA Technology and
KULeuven in synthetic and interstitial clay water, and in the presence of pyrite, iron strips,
and with solid Boom Clay to vary Eh values and to see its influence on the Se(0) solubility.
Ultrafiltration tests and gel permeation chromatography are also performed to observe a
possible association between Se and organic matter.
A4.5.1 Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
A4.5.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
The interaction of elemental selenium with crushed pyrite and pyrite coupons was first
examined in a synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic material. Sufficient
selenium solid was added to give a selenium concentration of 5 × 10-4 mol dm-3 if dissolved
completely. The solution–to–pyrite ratio was 50:1 in the experiments with crushed pyrite.
Although selenium concentrations of 1 × 10-5 mol dm-3 were measured in solution after one
month’s equilibration, these concentrations decreased over the one year duration of the
experiment. After 371 to 379 days’ equilibration, dissolved selenium concentrations were
close to or below a detection limit of 1 × 10-7 mol dm-3 in these experiments at pH 8.3
(Eh = -100 mV) and 9.9 (Eh = -280 mV) respectively. Sampling of undisturbed experiments
after 371 to 379 days’ equilibration gave selenium concentrations of 5 × 10-7 to
8 × 10-7 mol dm-3 at pH 9.9 (Eh = -220 to -240 mV) and ≤ 1 × 10-7 to 4 × 10-7 mol dm-3 at
pH 8.4 to 8.5 (Eh = -100 to -120 mV) in the presence of crushed pyrite. Concentrations of
≤ 4 × 10-7 and ≤ 7 × 10-7 mol dm-3 were measured in the presence of the pyrite coupons.
XRD analysis of pyrite powder from the experiments showed no bulk changes to the
mineralogy and no secondary selenium phases were found. Interestingly, XRD only
identified pyrite, washing of the pyrite during sampling had separated the pyrite from the
majority of the elemental selenium. Visual inspection of the coupon recovered from the
experiment after 13 months’ equilibration prior to carbon coating for SEM showed the surface
had a greenish coloration; this was not due to surface oxidation and may have been due to a
very thin carbonate layer. Analysis revealed the surface to be coated with 1 to 5 µm crystal
aggregates of selenium metal, individual selenium needles and circular oxidised areas
(associated with drying spots from the evaporation of droplets of residual washing solution).
Some of these oxidised areas had crystals of elemental selenium associated with them. No
iron-selenium compounds (formed by reaction of selenium with the pyrite surface) were
observed.
220/328
The dissolution of elemental selenium in interstitial Boom Clay water and 10 % interstitial
Boom Clay water (obtained by diluting interstitial Boom Clay water with synthetic Boom
Clay water) in the absence of Boom Clay, was examined. A mass of 1 g of elemental
selenium was contacted with 50 cm3 of water. The individual experiments were then sampled
after approximately 1, 2 or 3 months’ equilibration and filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000
NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters (Nominal Molecular Weight Cut-off).
In both waters the selenium concentrations in solution showed an increase with time but there
were no discernible trends with the pore size of the filter. The selenium concentration in the
10 000 NMWCO filtrate of interstitial Boom Clay water rose from 7 × 10-7 mol dm-3 after
33 days (pH = 9.5), to 2 × 10-6 mol dm-3 after 68 days (pH = 9.4), and 6 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after
96 days (pH = 9.0). Measured redox potentials fell from -180 mV vs SHE after 33 days
to -260 mV vs SHE after 68 days and 96 days. The overall trend in selenium concentration in
10 % interstitial Boom Clay water was similar. After 42 days (pH = 9.4, Eh = -230 mV) the
selenium
concentration
ranged
from
2 × 10-7 mol dm-3
(10 000
NMWCO)
to
7 × 10 mol dm (0.22 µm).
However, after 66 days (pH = 9.4, Eh = -210 mV), the
concentrations in solution (for all filter sizes) were below the detection limit of
-7
-3
3 × 10-7 mol dm-3.
These may be anomalous results because selenium concentrations of
4 × 10 mol dm were measured after 95 days equilibration (pH = 9.5, Eh = -210 mV).
Although the results after 42 days’ equilibration might suggest some increase in selenium
concentration with increasing filter pore size, this is not seen for the 95 day results.
-6
-3
After the initial sampling the three experiments in interstitial Boom Clay water were
‘re-started’. All the remaining solution was removed and the solids washed with deionised
water. Fresh interstitial Boom Clay water was then added to each experiment. In addition, an
iron strip (10 mm × 50 mm × 0.25 mm) was placed in two of the experiments. Within 2 to
4 days’ equilibration it was noted that the solutions in the experiments containing iron strips
were black and opaque and a fine precipitate had also formed. The experiments were sampled
after 18 to 61 days equilibration and the samples filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO
and 10 000 NMWCO filters. The experiment containing no iron strip was then ‘re-started’ for
a further equilibration in the same manner as before and sampled after 45 days’ equilibration.
Iron strips and selenium solids were recovered from the experiments for analysis by SEM and
EDX.
Selenium concentrations of 4 × 10-6 mol dm-3 after 0.22 µm filtration, 4 × 10-6 mol dm-3 after
100 000 NMWCO filtration and 1 × 10-6 mol dm-3 after 10 000 NMWCO filtration were
measured after re-equilibration with fresh interstitial Boom Clay water for 18 days in the
absence of an iron strip (pH = 9.4, Eh = -210 mV). The subsequent re-equilibration with
further fresh interstitial Boom Clay water for 45 days gave selenium concentrations of
3 × 10-4 mol dm-3 (pH = 9.8, Eh = -220 mV). The selenium concentrations above elemental
221/328
selenium re-equilibrated with fresh interstitial Boom Clay water and an iron strip for 44 and
61 days showed no effect of filter pore size and were 3 × 10-4 to 7 × 10-4 mol dm-3 at a redox
potential of –290 to -330 mV and pH of 8.7 to 9.2. These latter concentrations are much
higher than measured in the first initial equilibrations with interstitial Boom Clay water or
synthetic Boom Clay water. It suggests that interaction with iron may result in increased
concentrations of selenium in solution above elemental selenium. It is possible that this is due
to more reducing conditions achieved in the presence of corroding iron (see Subsection 2.4).
EDX analysis of particles recovered from the experiments containing iron strips
(Figure A4.5.1, AEAT) showed them to be mostly Fe, Se phases with small bright spots on the
surface of the particles which were unreacted selenium. In addition, the presence of a coating
on the iron strips was evident to the naked eye. After 40 days, this had the appearance of a
uniform porous crust consisting of Fe, Se and O, with occasional trace Na and P. Upon
magnification, the coating was seen to consist of equal-sized spheres embedded in a crystal
matrix. The spheres were shown by EDX to be more oxidised and iron-rich than the crust
which, although still Fe-rich, contained more selenium. In areas where the coating was
absent, the surface of the iron strip was corroded. In comparison, iron strips from the iron
selenide experiments showed no comparable corrosion (Figure A4.5.2, AEAT).
An additional type of coating was observed on the iron strip examined after 60 days’
exposure. This had the appearance of a dehydrated gel sitting directly on the iron surface, and
due to the relationship to the other coating types, appeared to be the first coating to form.
EDX showed that this was an iron oxide gel, with a high carbon content possibly from the
organic content of the Boom Clay water, containing some phosphorus and sulfur. The
oxidised porous crust containing spheres sat on top of this and was, as after 40 days, iron
oxide spheres in a selenium-rich matrix. Adhering to this were large particles which are the
most selenium–rich (Figure A4.5.3, AEAT). The solid analyses provide qualitative evidence
that Fe/Se-containing phases may have been formed through the reaction of selenium with
iron.
It is worth to note here that the reaction of elemental Se(0) with metallic iron might have
potential implications for the corrosion of the metallic canisters and iron overpacks used to
contain the high level waste. It is observed by AEA Technology that elemental Se(0) induces
a general corrosion of iron strips surface immersed in interstitial Boom Clay water under
reducing conditions. This mechanism should be related to the well known detrimental effect
of elemental sulfur on iron corrosion (MacDonald D. et al., 1978; Marcus, 1995; Nirond,
2004). So, a new question arises: could the quantity of selenium present in the high-level
waste (typically ~ 1 mol Se per meter current gallery) be a concern for the long-term
corrosion resistance of the metallic barriers ?
222/328
Se0 + Fe strip 40 days solid – 1
Figure A4.5.1 (AEAT): Fe, Se solids recovered from elemental selenium + iron strip experiments after 40 days.
EDAX from recovered solids after 60 days.
223/328
Fe strip 60 days in FeSe - 1
Fe strip 40 days in Se0 - 12
Figure A4.5.2 (AEAT): Comparison of iron strips showing surface etching in strip exposed to elemental
selenium (lower figure) compared to that from iron selenide experiment.
224/328
13/10/2003 11:56:57
Fe strip 60 days in Se0 - 6
Processing option : All elements analyzed (Normalised).
Spectrum 1
Spectrum 2
Spectrum 3
Spectrum 4
O
Na
P
S
Fe
Se
Total
75.24
50.35
59.51
14.39
0.59
0.36
0.26
2.15
0.32
21.52
39.07
37.35
30.65
2.03
10.59
0.67
54.96
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
All results in Atomic Percent.
Figure A4.5.3 (AEAT): Coating on iron strip after 60 days’ exposure to solution in contact with elemental
selenium and EDAX results from selected areas.
225/328
A4.5.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay components
(pyrite, OM)
As laid out in Section A4.2, reduced 75Se solid phases were prepared artificially. Chemical
reduction systems provided amorphous red and crystalline grey-black elemental, Se(s), using
hydrazine (H4N2) and sodium sulfide (Na2S). Electro-reduction of SeO32– using a galvanopotentiostat was also used. Solid Se phases were precipitated on the surface of metallic (Pt,
Ni) scraps. Amorphous and crystalline Se(s) solid phases were again identified.
The red amorphous 75Se0 and grey hexagonal 75Se0 phases from chemical reduction
experiments were first contacted with synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW)
(+ 2.37 × 10-5 mol dm-3 Fe2+) to measure the solubility of the prepared 75Se reduced solid
phases. The solubility was found to be dependent on the reducing system and the solid phase.
75
Se concentrations in solution fell in three solubility ranges, consistent with different solid
phases i.e. amorphous Se(s) (2.2 × 10-8 mol dm-3 – 9.1 × 10-8 mol dm-3), and crystalline Se(s)
(1.5 × 10-9 mol dm-3 – 8.1 × 10-9 mol dm-3). After removal of the supernatant SCW solution,
half of each solid phase was re-contacted with SCW (+ 2.37 × 10-5 mol dm-3 Fe2+) and the
other half was contacted with organic matter from Boom Clay Extract (BCE).
The systems were allowed to equilibrate for 2 months and then were analysed for:
− total 75Se concentration in solution;
−
75
Se concentration in solution after precipitation of dissolved humic substances using
La3+;
− Optical density in ultra-violet at 280 nm, and;
− Eh and pH.
The total final 75Se concentrations ranged from 5.5 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to 2.0 × 10-7 mol dm-3.
The results showed no direct relationship between the total 75Se concentration in solution and
the dissolved humic substances. After addition of La3+ and removal of the precipitate, the
75
Se concentration ranged from 1.5 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to 2.1 × 10-8 mol dm-3. In the presence
and the absence of dissolved humic substances, the addition of La3+ resulted generally in the
loss of 60 - 90 % of Se from solution, suggesting that Se colloids were present but not
particularly associated with OM.
Equilibration of the electro-reduced 75Se0 with synthetic clay water (SCW, no OM) confirmed
amorphous and crystalline Se solid phases. Equilibration of the metal scraps coated with
electro-deposited 75Se in SCW showed indeed the formation of 2 different solid phases,
having measured solubility ranges (after 12 days, centrifugation cut-off ~ 20 nm)
approximately from 8.0 × 10-8 mol dm-3 to 2.0 × 10-7 mol dm-3 and from 4.0 × 10-9 mol dm-3
to 5.3 × 10-9 mol dm-3. Hereafter and similarly to the chemically reduced Se phases, half of
the electro-reduced Se solid phases were contacted with SCW (+ 2.37 × 10-5 mol dm-3 Fe2+)
226/328
and the other half with organic matter from Boom Clay extract (BCE). Systems were allowed
to equilibrate for 2 months before analysing.
Total 75Se concentration in solution, 75Se concentration in solution after 0.01 mol dm-3 La3+
precipitation of dissolved humic substances, optical density (OD) at 280 nm, Eh and pH were
measured. The results again showed no important interaction of Se with dissolved humic
substances, and concentrations in solution ranged from 3.1 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to
3.1 × 10-8 mol dm-3. After addition of La3+ and centrifugation, the concentrations lowered to
the range of 1.2 – 3.3 × 10-9 mol dm-3. Filtration over a 0.02 µm filter yielded a similar low
concentration range. The above results indicated again the existence of Se colloids.
A4.5.2 Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay
The solubility of elemental Se(0) has been study in synthetic and interstitial clay water, and in
the presence of pyrite, iron strips, and with solid Boom Clay to vary Eh values and to see its
influence on the Se(0) solubility.
A4.5.2.1 AEAT: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay
The dissolution of elemental selenium in interstitial Boom Clay water in the presence of
Boom Clay was examined. A mass of 1 g of elemental selenium was contacted with 50 cm3
of interstitial Boom Clay water and 2 g portions of Boom Clay. The individual experiments
were then sampled after approximately 1, 2 or 3 months’ equilibration and filtered through
0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters. After 35 days the measured
selenium concentrations were 2 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after 0.22 µm filtration, 4 × 10-6 mol dm-3
after 100 000 NMWCO filtration and 2 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after 10 000 NMWCO filtration.
These increased further to 3 × 10-4, 8 × 10-5 and 2 × 10-4 mol dm-3, respectively, after 75 days
and 1 × 10-4, 1 × 10-4 and 9 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after 112 days. Redox potentials were in the
range -240 to -290 mV vs SHE and the measured pH values were 9.3 to 9.4.
Thus, the presence of Boom Clay solids has a marked impact on the concentration of
selenium in solution compared to the concentrations above elemental selenium in the initial
equilibrations in interstitial Boom Clay water (Subsection A4.4.1). This is most pronounced
after equilibration for one and two months where the concentrations are one to two orders of
magnitude higher in the presence of the clay solids. After three months the difference is only
a factor of two. This may suggest that the presence of Boom Clay, or a component thereof,
enhances the rate of dissolution of selenium. The selenium concentrations in the presence of
Boom Clay are similar to those in the second re-equilibration with interstitial Boom Clay
(3 × 10-4 mol dm-3) and in the presence of metallic iron (3 × 10-4 to 7 × 10-4 mol dm-3).
Figure 2.5.2 (p. 33, characteristic V-shape curve for the Se(s) solubility) and the discussion in
227/328
Subsection 2.5 showed that the concentration of selenium in solution above elemental
selenium may be expected to be very sensitive to redox potential. This may be an explanation
for the elevated concentrations found, especially because of the difficulty in measuring redox
potentials in poorly-poised laboratory experiments and the possibility of redox disequilibrium.
A4.5.2.2 KULeuven: Interaction of elemental Se(s) with Boom Clay
Reduced 75Se solid phases – prepared beforehand – were contacted with solid Boom Clay in
order to study the Se behaviour starting from undersaturation. The same systems as described
previously (on one hand different chemically reduced 75Se solid phases, on the other hand
electro-deposited 75Se) were added to Boom Clay suspensions (two liquid-to-solid ratios of
20:1 and 4.76:1 respectively) and allowed to equilibrate up to two months. The supernatant of
the samples was analysed for total 75Se concentration in solution, 75Se concentration in
solution after La3+ precipitation of dissolved humic substances, optical density (OD) at
280 nm, Eh and pH.
75
Se concentrations in solution ranged from 1.7 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to 8.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3, which
was overall lower than the concentrations observed in batch experiments where the same 75Se
solid phases were contacted with synthetic clay water (SCW, no OM) and Boom Clay Extract
(BCE, with OM). This probably means that either reduced 75Se species interact with the
Boom Clay solid phase (and systems are not yet in equilibrium because of kinetic limitations),
or that during centrifugation, the reduced-Se colloids were carried away together with the clay
particles present in the samples. However, no relation with the organic matter concentration
was found, thus providing no evidence for HSe– complexation with Boom Clay humic
substances. No extra 75Se removal was observed for increasing amount of solid Boom Clay
giving no evidence of sorption.
A4.5.3 Kinetic of reduction of elemental Se(s)
The kinetic of reduction/dissolution of elemental Se(0) into HSe– has not been studied in
detail. The reduction of Se(0) probably occurred at low Eh values in solubility tests when iron
strips were added to the system to lower the redox potential. The HSe– ions released by the
reduction/dissolution of Se(0) are expected to precipitate with Fe2+ to form FeSe. This
precipitation of a less soluble phase simultaneously increases the dissolution of elemental
selenium and the corrosion of metallic iron in the tests of AEAT with iron strips.
A4.5.4 Solubility of elemental Se(s) – AEAT
Solubility experiments were made with elemental selenium in synthetic Boom Clay water in
the absence of pyrite to evaluate whether the presence of pyrite (Subsection A4.5.1) had any
effect on the selenium concentration in solution. In the initial experiment, 1 dm3 of synthetic
Boom Clay water was equilibrated with 0.8 g elemental selenium and sampled after one, four,
228/328
eleven and twelve months. Samples taken after one month and four months were filtered
through 30 000 NMWCO filters (Nominal Molecular Weight Cut-Off), later samples were
filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters. The volume of
solution removed at each sampling was not replaced.
The concentration of selenium in solution at all samplings was ≤ 1 × 10-7 to 3 × 10-7 mol dm-3
(10 000 and 30 000 NMWCO filtered results) (pH 8.8 to 9.0, Eh = +360 to –230 mV).
Because the determinations after one month and three months were below detection limits it
was not possible to say definitely that the selenium concentration had reached a steady-state
value within one month. However, there was no change in selenium concentration between
samples taken after eleven and after twelve months. Filtration through 0.22 µm and
100 000 NMWCO pore filters had no effect on the selenium concentration.
It was thought possible that the surface of the selenium may have been oxidised and that such
a layer might determine the concentrations of selenium in solution. To investigate this, the
selenium solid was recovered from the experiment, washed and contacted with 40 cm3 of
fresh synthetic Boom Clay water in triplicate. After 18 days’ equilibration, the concentrations
of selenium in solution were 4 × 10-8 to 3 × 10-7 mol dm-3 (pH 9.1 to 9.3, Eh = +360 to
+410 mV). These are similar to the concentrations of ≤ 1 × 10-7 to 4 × 10-7 mol dm-3
measured in the presence of crushed pyrite. Comparison with Figure 2.5.2 (p. 33, Chapter 2)
suggests redox disequilibrium and poorly-poised experiments. It seems that the presence of
pyrite has no effect on the dissolved concentration of selenium above elemental selenium over
a timescale of one year. The concentrations measured are in the upper region of the range
determined by KULeuven for amorphous elemental selenium.
From these results, a best estimate of the concentration of selenium in solution above
elemental selenium would be 4 × 10-8 to 3 × 10-7 mol dm-3 at approximately pH 8 to 9 and
under reducing conditions. It is also apparent that filtration in the range 10 000 NMWCO to
0.22 µm has no consistent effect on the concentration of selenium in the aqueous phase. This
suggests that any selenium-containing colloids would be > 0.22 µm.
A4.5.5 Conclusions for elemental Se(s)
The solubility of elemental Se(0) has been study in synthetic and interstitial clay water, and in
the presence of pyrite, iron strips, and with solid Boom Clay to vary Eh values and to see its
influence on the Se(0) solubility.
The solubility values determined by AEA Technology with commercial stable elemental
selenium appear to be in general one order of magnitude higher than these determined by
KULeuven using its own synthesised 75Se labelled Se(0). The Se(0) solubility range of AEAT
229/328
extents from 4 × 10-8 to 3 × 10-7 mol dm-3 while the solubility values determined by
KULeuven vary from 1.7 × 10-9 to 8 × 10-8 mol dm-3.
Se(0) solubility value appears not to be influenced by the presence of organic matter. Indeed,
no filtration effect is observed by AEAT using different NMWCO ultrafilters. No association
Se(0) is also observed by KULeuven using gel permeation chromatography and La3+
precipitation.
The main observation is that the Se(0) solubility appears to increase in the presence of Boom
Clay components or iron strips because it makes the Eh value more negative and Se(0)
dissolves as HSe– under strongly reducing conditions as illustrated by the characteristic
V-shaped curves on Figure 2.5.2. (See p. 33, Chapter 2: Thermodynamic calculations). The
effect of iron is particularly spectacular and SEM examinations have also revealed an
important corrosion rate of the iron strip surface in the presence of Se(0) in contrast to FeSe.
It appears that elemental Se(0) strongly increases the corrosion rate of iron and vice et versa,
according to the following redox reaction:
Fe(0) —> Fe2+ + 2 e–
Se(0) + 2 e– —> Se2–
Fe + Se —> FeSe
A4.6 Behaviour of selenide: HSe–
The solubility of iron selenide (FeSe) has been studied independently by AEA Technology
and KULeuven in synthetic and interstitial clay water, and in the presence of pyrite, iron
strips, and with solid Boom Clay. Ultrafiltration tests and gel permeation chromatography are
also performed to observe a possible association between HSe– and organic matter.
Iron sulfide (FeSe) appears to be very sensitive to oxidation, as iron sulfide in general. As a
consequence, highly soluble oxidation products can interfere with the solubility
measurements. Therefore, it is important to first control the purity of the reagents used and to
wash FeSe prior to use to remove possible small amounts of very soluble oxidation products.
A4.6.1 Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
A4.6.1.1 AEAT: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
The interaction of iron selenide (FeSe) with crushed pyrite and pyrite coupons was first
examined in a synthetic Boom Clay water in the absence of organic material. Sufficient iron
230/328
selenide solid was added to give a selenium concentration of 5 × 10-4 mol dm-3 if dissolved
completely. The solution–to–pyrite ratio was 50:1 in the experiments with crushed pyrite.
The concentrations of dissolved selenium above iron selenide in the presence of crushed
pyrite were 3 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after one month, 1 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after three months and seven
months, and 1 × 10-5 to 3 × 10-5 mol dm-3 after one year at pH 10 and at pH 8. These
concentrations were similar to those measured above samples of crushed pyrite equilibrated
with synthetic Boom Clay water at pH 10. Sampling of undisturbed experiments after 376 to
379 days equilibration gave selenium concentrations of 9 × 10-6 to 3 × 10-5 mol dm-3 at pH 9.9
and 8 × 10-6 to 1 × 10-5 mol dm-3 at pH 8.6 to 8.7. The concentrations of dissolved selenium
in the two experiments with pyrite coupons after 406 days’ equilibration were
1 × 10-5 mol dm-3
(re-sampling
after
469 days
gave
a
selenium concentration
of
1 × 10 mol dm ) and 6 × 10 mol dm . Therefore, the aqueous selenium concentrations
above iron selenide in the presence of pyrite at pH 8 and 10 remained fairly constant over one
-6
-3
-6
-3
year and were in the approximate range 1 × 10-5 to 3 × 10-5 mol dm-3. However, later results
(see below Subsection A4.6.4) indicated that these concentrations were controlled by the
dissolution of an oxidised layer on the surface of the iron selenide.
XRD analysis of pyrite powder from the experiments showed no bulk changes to the
mineralogy and no secondary selenium phases were found. As in samples from the
corresponding selenium experiments with crushed pyrite, XRD only identified pyrite.
Washing of the pyrite during sampling had separated the pyrite from the majority of the iron
selenide. Analysis of a sample of powder recovered from a coupon experiment showed the
presence of Fe7Se8 and a trace of elemental selenium. These were also found to be present in
the sample of FeSe as supplied and were not formed through interaction with the pyrite.
SEM/EDX analysis of a coupon from these experiments showed the surface to be
predominantly pyrite with smaller primary (natural) inclusions of alumino-silicate minerals.
Some alumina deposits from polishing of the coupon prior to the experiment were also
observed. The surface of the pyrite was not oxidised and looked ‘fresh’, no oxygen was seen
in EDX spectra. Small particles of FeSe adhering to the surface of the coupon were seen in
the BSEM images (Back scattering Scanning Electron Microscopy), no other selenium
compounds were observed.
The dissolution of iron selenide in interstitial Boom Clay water and 10 % interstitial Boom
Clay water (obtained by diluting interstitial Boom Clay water with synthetic Boom Clay
water) in the absence of Boom Clay, was also examined. A mass of 1 g of iron selenide was
contacted with 50 cm3 of water. The individual experiments were then sampled after
approximately 1, 2 or 3 months’ equilibration and filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000
NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters.
231/328
In interstitial Boom Clay water the dissolved concentration of selenium decreased from
5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 after 33 days’ equilibration to 6 × 10-7 mol dm-3 after 96 days with no effect
of filter pore size. Redox potentials achieved –220 mV vs SHE in 33 days and decreased
further to –300 mV vs SHE by the time of the final sampling with pH values of 9.3 to 9.4.
The selenium concentrations in 10 % interstitial Boom Clay water were slightly lower than
those measured in interstitial Boom Clay water, again with no effect of filter pore size. After
42 days, the concentration of selenium in solution was 1 × 10-6 mol dm-3, decreasing to
≤ 3 × 10-7 mol dm-3 after 66 days and 5 × 10-8 to 9 × 10-8 mol dm-3 after 95 days. The redox
potentials in these experiments were –200 to –220 mV and the pH values were 8.9 to 9.4.
After the initial sampling the experiments in interstitial Boom Clay water were ‘re-started’.
The remaining solution was removed and the solids washed with deionised water. Fresh
interstitial Boom Clay water was then added. An iron strip was placed in two experiments.
The black solution and fine precipitate observed in the ‘re-started’ selenium experiments
containing iron strips were not seen in the equivalent iron selenide experiments. The
experiments were sampled after 18 to 61 days equilibration and the samples filtered through
0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters. The experiment containing no iron
strip was then ‘re-started’ for a further equilibration in the same manner as before and
sampled after 45 days’ equilibration.
After re-equilibration with fresh interstitial Boom Clay water, iron selenide gave selenium
concentrations of ≤ 3 × 10-7 to 4 × 10-7 mol dm-3 at -200 mV vs SHE after 18 days and
5 × 10-7 to 9 × 10-7 mol dm-3 at -270 mV vs SHE after 45 days. There was no effect of filter
pore size. These concentrations are similar to those measured after 96 days’ equilibration in
the initial experiments. The selenium concentrations above iron selenide re-equilibrated with
fresh interstitial Boom Clay water and an iron strip also showed no effect of filter pore size
and were 3 × 10-7 to 1 × 10-6 mol dm-3 at –210 to -250 mV vs SHE. These concentrations are
also similar to those measured after 68 to 96 days’ equilibration in the initial experiments.
SEM showed that iron selenide removed at the end of the experiments with the iron strips had
a similar appearance to ‘as-supplied’ iron selenide analysed at the same time, both showed
some evidence of oxidation, with Fe, Se and O present. However, in addition, the
‘as-supplied’ iron selenide showed a small amount of small highly-oxidised needle crystals,
which were not present in the recovered iron selenide. The iron strips from the experiments
showed no surface coating and EDX only showed the presence of iron.
232/328
A4.6.1.2 KULeuven: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay components (pyrite, OM)
Reduced metal – 75selenide solid phases were synthesised using Na2S + Fe(II), Fe0 and Zn0 as
chemical reductants.
The iron-selenide precipitates were first contacted with synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW)
(+ 2.37 × 10-5 mol dm-3 Fe2+) to measure the solubility of the prepared 75Se reduced solid
phases. The solubility was found to be dependent on the reducing system and the solid phase.
75
Se concentrations in solution were spread in general in a lower range than the solubilities
measured above 75Se0 precipitates, i.e. 4.5 × 10-10 mol dm-3 – 4.3 × 10-9 mol dm-3. After
removal of the supernatant SCW solution, half of each solid phase was re-contacted with
fresh SCW (no OM) (+ 2.37 × 10-5 mol dm-3 Fe2+) and the other half was contacted with
Boom Clay extract (BCE) containing OM. The systems were allowed to equilibrate for
2 months and were then analysed for: total 75Se concentration in solution; 75Se concentration
in solution after precipitation of dissolved humic substances using La3+; optical density (OD)
at 280 nm; Eh and pH. The total final 75se concentrations ranged from 1.1 × 10-9 mol dm-3 to
1.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3. The results showed no direct relationship between the total 75Se
concentration in solution and the dissolved humic substances. After addition of La3+ and
removal of the precipitate, the 75Se concentration ranged from 5.4 × 10-10 mol dm-3 to
4.0 × 10-9 mol dm-3. In the presence and the absence of dissolved humic substances, the
addition of La3+ resulted generally in the loss of 70 - 95 % of Se from solution, suggesting
that Se colloids were present but not particularly associated with OM.
A4.6.2 Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay
A4.6.2.1 AEAT: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay
The dissolution of iron selenide in interstitial Boom Clay water in the presence of Boom Clay
was examined in a similar manner to elemental selenium (Subsection A4.5.2). A mass of 1 g
of iron selenide was contacted with 50 cm3 of interstitial Boom Clay water and 2 g portions of
Boom Clay. The individual experiments were then sampled after approximately 1, 2 or
3 months’ equilibration and filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO and 10 000
NMWCO filters. After 36, 74 and 112 days the selenium concentrations in solution were
1 × 10-6 to 2 × 10-6 mol dm-3 with no significant trend with the pore size of the filters. The
measured redox potentials were –220 to –240 mV. It is noted that these concentrations may
be determined by the presence of a soluble surface layer on the iron selenide and lie within
the range 6 × 10-7 to 5 × 10-6 mol dm-3 measured in the experiments in interstitial Boom Clay
water.
233/328
A4.6.2.2 KULeuven: Interaction of HSe– with Boom Clay
Reduced 75Se solid phases – prepared beforehand – were contacted with solid Boom Clay in
order to study the selenium behaviour starting from undersaturation. The same systems as
described previously (different chemically reduced 75Se solid phases) were added to Boom
Clay suspensions (two liquid-to-solid ratios of 20:1 and 4.76:1 respectively) and allowed to
equilibrate up to two months. The supernatant of the samples was analysed for total 75Se
concentration in solution, 75Se concentration in solution after La3+ precipitation of dissolved
humic substances, optical density (OD) at 280 nm, Eh and pH.
75
Se concentrations in solution ranged from 8.2 × 10-10 mol dm-3 to 1.9 × 10-9 mol dm-3, which
was overall lower than the concentrations observed in batch experiments where the same 75Se
solid phases were contacted with synthetic clay water (SCW, no OM) and Boom Clay Extract
(BCE, with OM). This probably means that either reduced 75Se species interact with the
Boom Clay solid phase (and systems are not yet in equilibrium because of kinetic limitations),
or that during centrifugation, the reduced-Se colloids were carried away together with the clay
particles present in the samples. However, no relation with the organic matter concentration
was found, thus providing no evidence for HSe– complexation with Boom Clay humic
substances. No extra 75Se removal was observed for increasing amount of solid Boom Clay
giving no evidence of sorption.
A4.6.3 Solubility of HSe– – AEAT
Solubility experiments were made with iron selenide in synthetic Boom Clay water in the
absence of pyrite to evaluate whether the presence of pyrite (Subsection A4.6.1) had any
effect on the selenium concentration in solution. In the initial experiment, 1 dm3 of synthetic
Boom Clay water was equilibrated with 1.34 g iron selenide and sampled after one, four,
eleven and twelve months. Samples taken after one month and four months were filtered
through 30 000 NMWCO filters (Nominal Molecular Weight Cut-Off), later samples were
filtered through 0.22 µm, 100 000 NMWCO and 10 000 NMWCO filters. The volume of
solution removed at each sampling was not replaced.
Over the whole duration of the experiment the concentration of selenium in solution was
8 × 10-6 to 2 × 10-5 mol dm-3 with no trend with time. Results for the later filtrations showed
that filter pore size had no effect on the selenium concentration. These results are consistent
with the data obtained in the presence of crushed pyrite (Subsection A4.6.1).
It was thought possible that the surface of the iron selenide may have been oxidised and that
such a layer might determine the concentrations of selenium in solution. To investigate this,
the iron selenide solid was recovered from the experiment, washed (the solid is thus
‘pre-leached’) and contacted with 40 cm3 of fresh synthetic Boom Clay water in triplicate.
234/328
Solution samples taken after 21 days’ equilibration gave concentrations of selenium in
solution of ≤ 3 × 10-8 to 5 × 10-8 mol dm-3 (pH = 9.1, Eh = –220 to –270 mV). Thus, it seems
that there was a trace of a soluble (probably oxidised) layer on the surface of the iron selenide
as supplied and that this was responsible for the initial measured selenium concentrations. It
should be noted that the XRD of the iron selenide solid recovered from the coupon
experiment showed the presence of Fe7Se8 and a trace of elemental selenium. It is possible
that these phases could remain in the ‘pre-leached’ solid and may control the aqueous
selenium concentration. In such a case, the ‘true’ solubility of FeSe could be lower than that
measured here.
At present the best estimate of the concentration of selenium in solution above FeSe from
these results is ≤ 3 × 10-8 to 5 × 10-8 mol dm-3 at pH 9 and –200 to –300 mV. Although such
values are consistent with Figure 2.5.1 (p. 32, Chapter 2), they are above the range of values
measured by KULeuven (4.5 × 10-10 to 1.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 in synthetic clay water (SCW, no
OM) and Boom Clay Extract (BCE, with OM), including possible colloidal contribution).
A4.6.4 Conclusions for HSe–
The solubility of FeSe has been study in synthetic and interstitial clay water, and in the
presence of pyrite, iron strips, and with solid Boom Clay to vary Eh values and to see its
influence on the FeSe solubility.
The first solubility values determined by AEA Technology with commercial FeSe appeared to
be very high: 8 × 10-6 to 2 × 10-5 mol dm-3. The reason was that the surface of iron selenide
was oxidised and that the resulting soluble layer determined the concentration of selenium in
solution.
Therefore, the FeSe precipitate was pre-leached to remove the soluble impurities and the
solubility experiments restarted with the washed samples. The new FeSe solubility
measurements ranged then two or three orders of magnitude lower: from 3 × 10-8 to
5 × 10-8 mol dm-3. The solubility values determined independently by KULeuven were even
lower and varied from 4.5 × 10-10 to 1.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3.
FeSe solubility value appeared not to be influenced by the presence of organic matter (OM).
Indeed, no filtration effect was observed by AEAT using different NMWCO ultrafilters. No
association between HSe– and OM was observed by KULeuven using gel permeation
chromatography and La3+ precipitation.
As a conclusion, it is mandatory to check the purity of FeSe to avoid oxidation artefacts,
leading to the presence of soluble salts imposing a selenium concentration well above the true
235/328
solubility limit. SEM images are also useful to control the presence of small amounts of
contaminants below the limit of detection of XRD.
236/328
A5. Immobilisation of selenium in the near-field
237/328
238/328
A5
Immobilisation of selenium in the near-field
A5.1 Immobilisation of selenium in cementitious buffer
In the present Belgian concept for deep disposal of high-level waste, spent fuel elements and
HLW glass canisters are surrounded by carbon steel overpacks protected against corrosion by
high pH of cement (SuperContainer concept: ONDRAF/NIRAS, 2002). Because the thickness
of the SuperContainer (~ 0.7 m) is small with respect to that of the clay formation (30 to 50 m
according to the selected scenario), the contribution of the SuperContainer to the retention of
selenium is presently not considered.
Several authors (Ochs et al., 2002; Baur I., 2002; Baur and Johnson, 2003a,b; Bonhoure et al.,
2006) describe the immobilisation of selenite and selenate along with different cement phases
(CSH, ettringite, AFt, AFm, carbonate, …) by coprecipitation, formation of solid solutions
and sorption. Formation of solid solutions of poorly soluble selenate phases (selenate taking
the place normally occupied by sulfate in ettringite, AFt and AFm), or sorption of selenite
(inner-sphere complex) on various cement minerals (layered double hydroxides, LDH’s, e.g.,
hydrotalcite, bearing positively charged sites) are important processes for the immobilisation
of selenium in cement. Calcium carbonate and calcium silicate hydrates (CSH) can also
scavenge selenite as they do with nitrate a planar trigonal oxyanion isoelectronic with
bicarbonate and of about the same ionic radius (De Cannière, 1989, Ph.D. Thesis). Similarly,
selenate can exchange with sulfate or silicate and be incorporated in the crystal lattice of
ettringite, AFt, AFm and residual gypsum during recrystallisation and ageing of cement.
A5.2 Immobilisation of selenium by alteration and corrosion products
A5.2.1 Uptake of selenium by spent fuel degradation products
Finally, in the near-field of a repository, corrosion and alteration products of spent fuel
matrix, metal containers, and altered minerals in the oxidized zone could also contribute to
somewhat delay the release of selenium towards the far-field. Indeed, the retention of 79Se on
UO2 is observed in spent fuel alteration products (Trombe et al., 1985; Chen et al., 1999,
2000; Ewing, 2001). This is corroborated by the natural association between uranium and
selenium occasionally found by Deliens et al. (1981) in some uranium-bearing seleniferous
copper sulfide. Vochten et al. (1996) also discovered and first determined the structure of
piretite, Ca(UO2)3(SeO3)2(OH)2 · 4 H2O, a new calcium uranyl selenite found in oxidized
uranium ores collected in a weathered zone of the Shinkolobwe mine (Katanga, Congo) (see
also Appendix A2 on Natural selenium in the environment and in Boom Clay).
239/328
A5.2.2 Sorption of selenium by iron oxy-hydroxides
Furthermore, the sorption and reduction of selenite could occur onto corrosion products and
green rust (or fougerite, a recently discovered LDH mineral) in the presence of hydrogen
produced by iron anaerobic corrosion (Spahiu et al., 2000; Scheidegger et al., 2003; Cui
et al., 2006). Sorption of selenite is also possible onto iron oxy-hydroxide produced by pyrite
oxidation in the excavation disturbed zone (EDZ) around the galleries during the construction,
operation and ventilation phases of the repository. Then, the main uncertainty concerns the
nature of the redox-controlling phases in the near-field which could be reducing or locally
oxidizing depending on the geochemical processes at work or the repository concept
(ventilated galleries, or not; post-closure phase history, …).
240/328
A6. Selenium background in bentonite buffer
materials
241/328
242/328
A6
Selenium background concentration in bentonite buffer materials
A6.1 Introduction
The studies of the leaching behaviour of radionuclides in backfill materials has been extended
to 79Se, considered now as a mobile fission product critical for safety calculations, with the
aim to determine 79Se steady-state concentration under near-field conditions. In the past, no
attention was given to selenium in previous glass compatibility programmes.
A6.2 Experimental
The experimental programme consisted of leaching tests with SON68 and SM539 glasses
doped with inactive Se. Leaching tests were performed at a temperature of 40 °C with glass
powder with a surface area to volume ratio (SA/V) equal to 2 500 m-1 in order to increase the
build-up of selenium concentration in the leachate. The glass was added as powder
(125 - 250 µm fraction). The test medium ('Int-RIC') was a mixture with nominally 712.5 g
(wet) Boom Clay, 712.5 g (air-dry) M2 backfill mixture, 37.5 g (air-dry) Fe3O4 powder, and
37.5 g (air-dry) AISI 316 L stainless steel powder per litre of Boom Clay porewater. The M2
backfill mixture consists of 65 % FoCa-Clay, 30 % quartz sand and 5 % graphite (Timrex).
The durations of the tests were 90, 180, 365, 540 and 720 days. The leaching tests were
performed in duplicate.
Analyses and interpretation focus on the determination of the mobile Se concentration in the
leachates obtained after ultrafiltration over membranes of 10 000 and 100 000 MWCO. The
Se concentrations in the leachate after ultrafiltration were analysed by ICP-MS (analytical
service of SCK•CEN). Because of difficulties to detect Se in the 540 days sample, highresolution ICP-MS was used for the 720 days sample (Royal Museum of Central Africa,
department of geology at Tervuren, Belgium).
A6.3 Results
The pH of the leachates slightly increases as a function of time from 7.9 to 8.3. The redox
potential (Eh) measured while gently stirring the solution was negative varying from -41
to -268 mV (SHE) as expected from the characteristics of the reducing medium.
Using inactive isotopes of Se for practical reasons, no distinction is possible between the
amount of Se leached from glass and selenium already present in the medium before
dissolution of glass. An analysis of the initial medium was necessary to determine the
243/328
background concentration of Se in the solid and the liquid fractions of the medium (without
glass addition). However, the determination of the background concentrations of selenium
was done on an equivalent medium called Int-SIC2 and not on Int-RIC. The Se concentration
in the solid fraction is given in the third column of Table A6.3.1. We assumed that the amount
of Se measured in Int-SIC was representative of this present in Int-RIC. For the liquid fraction
consisting of synthetic clay water, the result of the analysis is only indicative. Nevertheless,
the Se concentration was also measured in the liquid fraction of Int-RIC by means of two
blank tests (Table A6.3.2). Table A6.3.2 also gives the amount of Se in glass per g of the
medium allowing a comparison of the amount of Se present already in the medium and the
maximal amount which could be leached from glass. The amount of Se is higher in the
background medium than in the whole glass.
Table A6.3.1: Background concentrations of Se in Int-SIC (mol dm-3).
[Se]
Solid clay medium
μg Se in the glass
Int-SIC*
per g Int-SIC#
-3
(mol dm )
(μg Se/g Int-SIC)
(µg/g Int-SIC)
< 6.33 × 10-7
< 50
7.96
the uncertainty on the result is about 20 %.
* the solutions were only filtered with a filter of 0.45 µm.
# this amount is obtained by multiplying the amount of selenium as determined by ICP-MS
after dissolution of the glass in µg/g glass by the amount of glass added in the experiment (g)
and dividing then this value by the number of g of Int-SIC added.
Table A6.3.2: Background concentrations of Se in Int-RIC (mol dm-3) after 365 and
720 days in blank tests for two filtered fractions.
Solution (blank:
Solution
Initial [Se] (Int- Solution (blank: Solution (blank:
365 d)
365 d)
720 d)
(blank: 720 d)
SIC)
(YM10)
(YM10)
(0.45 μm)
(0.45 μm)
(0.45 μm)
(mol dm-3)
(mol dm-3)
(mol dm-3)
(mol dm-3)
(mol dm-3)
< 6.33 × 10-7
3.17 × 10-7
< 2.53 × 10-7
1.13 × 10-8
0.45 μm: after micro-filtration through a 0.45 μm membrane.
YM 10: ultrafiltration through 10 000 MWCO membrane.
4.43 × 10-8
There is no tendency in the evolution of the Se concentrations as a function of time for the
blanks. Because there is no simple way to select the background Se concentration in the
starting medium, we decided to consider a range of concentrations taking the lowest and the
highest value obtained after ultrafiltration through 10 000 MWCO membranes. This range of
concentrations is used for comparison with the leachates concentrations of Se.
2
712.5 g (wet) Boom Clay, 712.5 g (air-dry) M2 backfill mixture, 37.5 g (air-dry) Fe3O4 powder, and 37.5 g
(air-dry) AISI 316 L stainless steel powder per liter Synthetic Clay Water.
244/328
1E-6
1E-6
1E-7
1E-7
[Se] (m ol/l)
[Se] (mol/l)
The Se concentration is stable with time as illustrated in Figure A6.3.1, around 2 × 10-7M for
both types of glasses. The two glasses have a different behaviour regarding their boron release
but the type of glass has obviously no influence on the Se concentrations measured in the
leachates. There is no difference in concentration level before and after ultrafiltration through
10 000 or 100 000 MWCO membranes. The Se concentration measured in the leaching tests
is in the range of the background concentrations measured in the initial backfill medium (red
dashed line). So, the small amount of Se leached out of the glass cannot be easily
distinguished from the total amount of Se already present in the near-field medium in contact
with the glass. The Se speciation in the medium was not measured.
1E-8
1E-9
1E-8
1E-9
SM539
SON68
1E-10
1E-10
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
Duration (days)
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Duration (days)
Figure A6.3.1: Concentration of Se in the leachates after ultrafiltration for different test durations for the SON68
and SM539 glasses. The background Se concentration in the medium is represented by dashed lines.
A6.4 Comparison of Se concentrations in near-field and far-field conditions
The values of the Se concentrations measured in the leaching tests (near-field) are higher than
the Se concentrations measured in Boom Clay in percolation tests (far-field) and
thermodynamical solubility values used in performance assessment (PA) for the selenium in
the far-field (Table A6.4.1). The high Se concentration in the leaching tests is due to the Se
content of the medium representing the near-field.
Selenium is a redox-sensitive element whose behaviour under reducing conditions can be
difficult to interpret because of redox-disequilibrium. The Se speciation in the source term,
i.e. in the glass, is unknown. If, in the far-field, the expected thermodynamic stable phases are
elemental Se0, FeSe, FeSe2, in the HLW glass and in our laboratory tests, a mixture of SeO42–,
SeO32– are likely to be present, increasing the total Se concentration measured in solution. The
near-field Se concentrations are indeed higher that what we should expect from the solubility
245/328
of the reduced forms of Se. The selenate, SeO42–, does not easily reduce to selenite and is
unretarded and not solubility-limited in Boom Clay. The kinetics of reduction are extremely
slow for SeO42– which could also be present in the waste form and so selenate might remained
unreduced in Boom Clay. The measured Se concentrations being higher than the solubility
value used by PA or the Se concentration determined in the Boom Clay water ([Se] =
2.4 × 10-8 mol dm-3 measured by high resolution ICP-MS) and through percolation tests, it is
possible that Se speciation in the leaching tests was dominated by SeO42–. However, Se
speciation measurements were performed, so no conclusions can be drawn.
Table A6.4.1: Comparison of selenium concentrations obtained from these glass
leaching tests with values measured in the Boom Clay water, or used in PA calculations.
Type of study (+ reference)
[Se]
(—)
(mol dm-3)
Near-field medium (these leaching tests)
2.53 × 10-7
Thermodynamic calculations with:
Se (0) as solubility limiting solid phase
5.50 × 10-8
– Best estimate PA values (DCF)
Marivoet et al., (1999)
– PSI calculations: Berner (2002)
5.30 × 10-9
Far-field: Boom Clay Migration experiments
5.00 × 10-9
A6.5 Conclusions
We conclude that the Se concentrations leached from glass powders are rather low ([Se] =
2.5 × 10-7 mol dm-3) and not significantly higher than Se background concentrations in the
simulated near-field medium. Selenium concentration has likely reached a steady-state
concentration in the near-field medium. The small selenium amount released by glass
dissolution does not significantly increase the overall Se concentration already present in the
near-field medium. Furthermore, there is no difference in Se concentration level after
different types of filtrations.
Due to the great sensitivity of selenium on redox conditions and view the uncertainty on
selenium redox state in our tests, it is difficult to give any conclusion for the selenium
behaviour and its final concentration in the near-field medium. It is rather clear that
information on the Se speciation in the glass would be worthy to study as Se is a relevant and
sensitive element for PA.
246/328
A6.6 References
Berner U. (2002) Project Opalinus Clay: radionuclides limits in the near-field of a repository
for spent fuel and vitrified HLW. PSI Report (PSI Bericht Nr 02-22, ISSN 1019-0643)
(December 2002).
Marivoet J., Volckaert G., Labat S., De Cannière P., Dierckx A, Kursten B., Lemmens K.,
Lolivier P., Mallants D., Sneyers A., Valcke E., Wang L., and Wemaere I. (1999a) Values for
the near-field and clay parameters used in the performance assessment of the geological
disposal of radioactive waste in the Boom Clay formation at the Mol site (volume 1 and 2).
Report to NIRAS/ONDRAF. Geological disposal of conditioned high-level and long-lived
radioactive waste. Contract CCHO-98/332 – KNT 90.98.1042 Task 6.1. SCK•CEN Report
R-3344 (July 1999).
Pirlet V. (2005) Determination of the mobile leached concentrations of 79Se in near-field
conditions. In: Characterization and compatibility with the disposal medium of Cogema and
Eurochemic reprocessing waste forms (Tasks VM-6 and GV8 of NIRAS/ONDRAF contracts
CCHO-90/123-1 and CCHO-90/123-2 – vitrified waste). The importance of the glass
composition and the near-field for the mobile concentrations of radionuclides. Summary of
the topical report for WP4 of RP.WD.008 (January 2000 – June 2003).
247/328
248/328
A7. Sorption behaviour of selenite, selenate and
sulfate on Fe and Al oxide surfaces
249/328
250/328
A7
Sorption behaviour of selenite, selenate and sulfate on Fe and Al oxide
surfaces
The aim of this section is to discuss the general sorption mechanism of selenium oxyanion
and sulfate at the water-oxide interface to explain and to predict their behaviour under natural
conditions in clay. No pure iron and aluminium oxides are observed in Boom Clay, but it
contains a large proportion of illite and interstratified illite/smectite clay minerals. Aluminium
hydroxyl groups present in the octahedral layer are accessible on the surface of the lateral
edges of these clay minerals. These groups are Lewis acid sites as those found in pure
aluminium oxides, so they could be sorbent sites for oxyanions (Lewis bases).
The selenate anion (SeO42–) is the thermodynamically stable selenium species under oxidizing
conditions and adsorbs very weakly, or even not, to metal oxide surfaces, depending on pH
conditions. In contrast, the selenite anion (SeO32–) is stable under slightly suboxic conditions
and binds strongly to metal oxide surfaces.
Solid-water partitioning reactions on the iron oxide-water system are very well studied
because iron oxyhydroxide is a very effective sorbent for many cations and anions and it is a
relatively simple and convenient system for experimental and modelling works (Dzombak
and Morel, 1990). Selenium oxyanions are good example of contrasted sorbing species.
Indeed, selenite and selenate sorbed to iron oxide respond quite differently to changes in the
ionic strength of the aqueous phase over a wide range of pH values. The selenite ion belongs
to the general class of adsorbing ions that have a strong affinity for oxide surface hydroxyl
sites and whose adsorption is relatively unaffected by changes in ionic strength. The selenate
ion is a representative of the second class of adsorbing ions that bond weakly to such sites and
whose adsorption is markedly reduced by increasing ionic strength. These ionic strength
effects suggest that strongly bonded ions form inner-sphere coordination complexes with
oxide surface oxygen's, whereas the more weakly bonded ions form outer-sphere, ion-pair
complexes that retain their primary hydration sphere upon adsorption.
A strict definition and a clear distinction between inner- and outer-sphere surface complexes
is important, particularly in the case of the adsorption mechanism of the weakly sorbing
selenate which will be discussed later in the text. Sposito et al., (1999) give the following
definition in a review on the surface geochemistry of the clay minerals: “An inner-sphere
surface complex has no water molecule interposed between the surface functional group and
the ion or molecule it binds whereas an outer-sphere surface complex has at least one such
interposed water molecule. Outer-sphere surface complexes thus comprise solvated adsorbed
ions”.
251/328
A7.1 EXAFS studies of selenite and selenate adsorption on goethite
X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) provides direct structural information for adsorbed
species at solid-liquid interfaces. Unlike infrared and Raman spectroscopy, XAS yields
relatively accurate, direct measurements of average interatomic distance, coordination
number, and the type of coordinating ligand for the nearest neighbours of the x-ray absorbing
atom.
A7.1.1 Classical view of inner-sphere and outer-sphere surface complexes
Hayes et al. (1987) have performed in situ extended x-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS)
measurements of adsorbed selenate and selenite ions at the α-FeO(OH) (goethite) – water
interface. Their observations indicate that selenate behaves as a weakly bonded, outer-sphere
complex while selenite forms a strongly bonded, inner-sphere complex. The selenite ion is
bonded directly to the goethite surface and creates a bidentate bridge with two iron atoms as
illustrated on Figure A7.1.1 reprinted from Hayes (1987). Adsorbed selenate has no iron atom
in the second coordination shell of selenium, which indicates that selenate retains its
hydration sphere upon sorption.
Figure A7.1.1: Possible molecular structures for selenite (SeO32–) coordinated with Fe atoms at
the goethite surface: (a) bidentate chelating a single Fe nucleus; (b) monodentate mononuclear
Fe association; (c) bidentate bridging two Fe nuclei (bidentate, binuclear complex). Reprinted
from Hayes (1987) Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University; figure taken from Davis and Kent (1990).
252/328
A7.1.2 Evidence of inner-sphere complexes also implied for weakly sorbing species
Surprisingly Manceau and Charlet (1994) observed with EXAFS spectroscopy in their pH
conditions that the weakly sorbing selenate ion forms a binuclear bidentate inner-sphere
surface complexes on goethite and hydrous ferric oxide (HFO). This unexpected finding is in
total contrast with the results of Hayes et al. (1987) indicating that selenate keeps its primary
hydration shell when sorbed onto goethite and forms an outer-sphere (OS) surface complex.
This observation also put in question the relevance of the ionic strength dependence of
sorption isotherms as a criterion used to support the formation of outer-sphere surface
complexes. Indeed, the effect of ionic strength on cation and anion adsorption on oxide
surfaces does not provide reliable information on the exact way they are bound to mineral
surfaces, but it certainly remains a good indication of their relative bonding affinity for
surface hydroxyl groups.
How to explain this paradox observation affecting the sorption mechanism of a weakly
sorbing species as selenate and how to reconcile the results of Hayes et al. (1987) with these
of Manceau and Charlet (1994) ? Sposito (1984) previously yet suggested that anions with
weak sorption affinity, such as SeO42– and SO42–, sometimes sorb as an outer-sphere complex
but occasionally also as an inner-sphere complex on soil mineral surfaces. The key for
understanding the sorption mechanism of weakly sorbing species likely resides in the pH
effect in the formation of inner-sphere complexes. It will be discussed hereafter at the light of
recent results of Raman and infrared spectroscopy with selenate and sulfate on Fe and Aloxides.
A7.2 ATR-FTIR studies of selenate and sulfate adsorption on Fe and Al (hydr)oxide
The in situ vibrational spectroscopy studies of SeO42– and SO42– adsorbed on Fe and Al
(hydr)oxides provides also valuable information for the identification of the types of surface
complexes of these anions on these minerals. The combined Raman and attenuated total
reflectance Fourier-transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectral data show that SeO42– and SO42–
have intermediate complexation behaviour of forming both inner- and outer-sphere surface
complexes. The relative importance of the type of surface complex depends on the pH and
type of mineral.
A7.2.1 Sulfate adsorption on Fe oxyhydroxide
The mechanism of sulfate adsorption on aqueous interface of various iron oxides was studied
in situ at different pH and ionic strength by several authors using attenuated total reflectance
253/328
Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy. Hug (1997) investigated the sulfate
adsorption on hematite (α-Fe2O3) in the presence of an aqueous phase between pH 3 and 5.
He obtained infrared spectra consistent with the formation of a monodentate sulfate innersphere complexes on the wet hematite surface. However, spectral data suggest that after
drying of the samples a bidentate inner-sphere complexes could also be formed with the
surface Fe(III) sites. Peak et al. (1999) examined the mechanism of sulfate adsorption on
goethite (α-FeOOH). They concluded that sulfate forms both outer-sphere and weak innersphere surface complexes on goethite at pH less than 6. At pH values greater than 6, sulfate
adsorbs on the goethite only as an outer-sphere complex. The relative amount of outer-sphere
sulfate surface complexation also increased with decreasing ionic strength.
A7.2.2 Selenate and sulfate adsorption on Fe and Al (hydr)oxide
The coordination and speciation of selenate (SeO42–) and sulfate (SO42–) on goethite and Al
oxide were studied by Wijnja and Schulthess (2000) using Raman and ATR-FTIR
spectroscopy. This study also indicates that both inner- and outer-sphere surface complexes of
SeO42– and SO42– occur on these metal (hydr)oxide surfaces. The spectral data show that
SeO42– and SO42– have a similar complexation behaviour on the same adsorbent. On goethite,
these oxyanions predominantly form weak monodentate inner-sphere surface complexes at
pH < 6, while at pH > 6 they are essentially present as outer-sphere surface complexes. In
contrast, on Al oxide, these anions exist mainly as weaker outer-sphere surface complexes,
but a small fraction is also present as inner-sphere complex at pH < 6. A comparison of the
spectral intensities of these anions on goethite and Al oxide shows that complexation of these
anions with Al oxide is weaker than with Fe oxide.
Controversy still exists about the molecular structure of SeO42– surface complexes formed on
hydrous metal oxides. Sposito (1984) already indicated that anions with a weak sorption
affinity, such as SO42– and SeO42–, could exhibit a versatile behaviour between outer- and
inner-sphere complexes on mineral surfaces. The macroscopic observation of decreasing
SeO42– and SO42– adsorption on metal oxides with increasing concentration of the background
electrolyte has commonly been interpreted as an indication for the formation of an outersphere surface complex of these anions (Hayes et al., 1987). However, the macroscopic nature
of the ionic strength effects on anion adsorption is only an indirect technique for evaluation of
sorption mechanisms at mineral surfaces. Conversely, the absence, or the presence, of a water
molecule in the coordination shell of a surface complex is likely also not an entirely sufficient
argument to conclude on the strength, or at the contrary the weakness, of the character of the
bonding of a weakly sorbing species to a mineral surface.
254/328
Figure A7.2.1 taken from Hayes et al. (1988) and reprinted by Davis and Kent (1990) shows
the classical anion “sorption edge” curves of selenite and selenate anions on ferrihydrite. The
fraction of species adsorbed is represented as a function of pH. The batch sorption
experiments were performed at three different values of the ionic strength: 0.013 M, 0.1 M,
and 1 M NaNO3.
Figure A7.2.1: Effect of pH and NaNO3 concentration on Se(VI) and Se(IV) adsorption by
0.001 M Fe (as ferrihydrite), total Se = 10-4 M in each experiment. Data from Hayes et al.
(1988).
Se(VI): ×-boxes, 0.013 M NaNO3; open squares, 0.1 M NaNO3; filled squares, 1.0 M NaNO3;
Se(IV): open-circles, 0.013 M NaNO3; filled circles, 1.0 M NaNO3.
As observed on Figure A7.2.1, selenate [Se(VI)] is much less sorbed than selenite [Se(IV)] at
pH < 8 and selenate sorption is quasi nil at pH > 8. The selenate sorption is strongly affected
by the concentration of the background electrolyte and decreases at high concentration of
NaNO3. Selenite sorption already starts at pH ~ 11 and gradually increases at lower pH. The
effect of ionic strength is much less pronounced for selenite, but surprisingly, the selenite
sorption even slightly increases at higher NaNO3 concentration.
A7.2.3 Formation of outer-sphere versus inner-sphere surface complexes
The non-specific sorption of oxyanions due to single electrostatic interactions is explained by
the acido-basic functions of the hydroxyl groups present at the surface of iron oxides. At high
pH when the ≡S–OH surface groups are largely deprotonated as ≡S–O– the electrostatic
repulsion hinder, or even inhibit, the sorption of anions. As the pH is lowered below the zero255/328
point-of-charge (ZPC) of the hydroxylated surface, this latter becomes progressively
positively charged by the protonation of the ≡S–OH groups. The anions adsorption increases
thus at low pH as the population of the ≡S–OH2+ groups grows. The different variants of the
electrical double layer (EDL) theory allow to explain the effect of the ionic strength on this
non-specific electrostatic sorption: this latter decreases when the double layer is compressed
at high ionic strength and that its thickness decreases (cfr., e.g., Davis and Kent, 1990).
The formation of both outer- and inner-sphere surface complexes on goethite is also treated
by Peak et al. (1999) based on the pH-dependent protonation of the surface groups. It is
proposed that inner-sphere surface complexes are formed by ligand exchange with ≡Fe-OH2+
groups, which are predominant at lower pH values. Indeed, a typical ligand exchange reaction
for forming a monodentate mononuclear inner-sphere surface complex with selenite in neutral
condition
SeO32– + ≡Fe—OH
ligand
(selenite)
⇌
≡Fe—OSeO2–
neutral
surface
inner-sphere
complex
+ OH–
(eq. A7.2.1)
hydroxyl ion
(leaving group)
can be rewritten by adding a proton to the hydroxylated surface, so that a H2O molecule is
expelled in the nucleophilic substitution reaction in place of an OH– ion:
SeO32– + ≡Fe—OH2+
ligand
(selenite)
⇌
≡Fe—OSeO2–
protonated
surface
inner-sphere
complex
+ H2O
(eq. A7.2.2)
water
(leaving group)
This basic example with a simplified ligand-exchange reaction explicitly implies the removal
of one –OH group from the Fe(III) sites. As H2O molecules are better “leaving groups” than
naked OH– hydroxyl ions, a pH lowering favours the ligand exchange process. At neutral pH
values and higher, the number of Fe-OH2+ groups easily available for ligand exchange is
much lower and the ligand exchange becomes more difficult. As the pH continues to raise, the
formation of inner-sphere complex is progressively impeded and inhibited: only much weaker
non-specific electrostatic bindings, or hydrogen bonds, remain possible through the formation
of an outer-sphere complex with oxyanions. In their turn, these latter becomes more and more
rare as the pH increases and the population of ≡S–OH2+ sites decays.
SeO42– + ≡Fe—OH2+
ligand
(selenate)
⇌
protonated
surface
≡Fe—OH2+ ··(H2O)SeO42–
outer-sphere
complex
256/328
(eq. A7.2.3)
A7.2.4 Effect of the nature of the mineral surface
The nature of the mineral surface also plays an important role on the strength of the sorption
and on the ratio between the formation of inner- and outer-sphere complexes. Hydrous ferric
oxide (HFO) are known to be stronger sorbent than aluminium oxide, themselves much
stronger than silica surface. The surface reactivity decreases in the following order:
≡Fe–OH > ≡Al–OH >>> ≡Si–OH.
The predominance of weaker outer-sphere surface complexes on Al oxide may be the result of
a lower complexation affinity of Al with oxyanions compared to that of Fe. Indeed, Al-sites
are harder Lewis acids than Fe(III)-sites (see the hard soft acids bases (HSAB) principle
explained in pp. 75–77 by Sposito, 1981) and they could more strongly retain their hydroxyl
groups (hardest base). As a consequence the ligand exchange with oxyanions is hindered and
the oxyanion sorption weaker. In a similar way, a lower sorption affinity is also expected for
the aluminol groups present on the octahedral gibbsite layer accessible at the clay mineral
edges. The proportion of the lateral surface of octahedral layer accessible in clay minerals is
also much lower than in pure aluminium oxide and the proximity and steric hindrance of the
two adjacent silica tetrahedral layers could also restrain the surface complexation reactions
(see Figure A7.2.2).
Figure A7.2.2: Structure of 1:1 and 2:1 layer clay minerals with the ≡S–OH surface
groups accessible on the lateral edges of the octahedral (gibbsite) and tetrahedral
(silica) layers. Slightly modified from Sposito et al. (1999).
257/328
To conclude, in Boom Clay, only selenite is expected to form relatively strong inner-sphere
surface complexes with aluminium hydroxyl groups located on the edges of illite and smectite
clay minerals. Selenate is not assumed to significantly sorb onto clay minerals in Boom Clay.
Bruggeman (2006) has experimentally confirmed these assumptions by means of batch
sorption tests (made with selenate and selenite on fresh Boom Clay suspensions under
anaerobic conditions) and independent EXAFS measurements (with selenite on sodiumconditioned illite du Puy). No sorption is observed for selenate in Boom Clay suspensions
while batch sorption tests and EXAFS show a significant sorption of selenite on illite with the
formation of inner-sphere complexes.
However, recent diffusion experiments with sulfate in undisturbed compact Boom Clay cores
have provided a (one order of magnitude) lower that expected average value for the apparent
diffusion coefficient of sulfate (Dapp = 3.2 ± 1.0 × 10-11 m2 s-1) while the corresponding
diffusion accessible porosity (ηR = 0.23) for a divalent oxyanion was surprisingly higher than
for a monovalent simple anion as iodide (ηR = 0.16). According to a deduction scheme
proposed by Maes (2006) and a set of simple calculations based on the Bruggeman
relationship, it could be consistent with a small retardation factor (R = 2.3) suggesting that
sulfate is thus weakly sorbed in Boom Clay.
R values in the range 2 – 6 correspond to very small distribution coefficients (Kd of 0.2 –
1 ml/g), especially difficult to determine experimentally by means of classic batch sorption
tests. Indeed, the decrease of concentration expected in the supernatant is extremely small and
probably within the uncertainties of the measurement technique. This remains thus to be
carefully verified by means of dedicated sorption tests adequately designed.
258/328
A8. Selenium and organic matter
259/328
260/328
A8
Selenium and organic matter
During the HR-ICP-MS analyses of selenium, the precipitation, or flocculation, of humic acid
was observed by Maes (2004) after acidification of the solution. The consequence was a
decrease of the Se concentration remaining in solution after filtration, or centrifugation. This
observation suggests that a fraction of selenium could be associated with the natural organic
matter present in Boom Clay. However, analyses of natural selenium concentrations in
immobile and mobile organic matter of Boom Clay have not yet been performed and would
deserve more attention in the future.
Selenium may occur in nature in many organic compounds where it is covalently bound to
carbon atoms. Selenium may occupy the place of sulfur in many peptides and proteins and
their subsequent degradation products commonly found in soils. Some major organo-selenium
compounds are listed in Table A8.1 as illustration.
Table A8.1: Some major organic compounds of selenium commonly found in nature and whose
degradation products are incorporated in natural organic matter (NOM) by micro-organisms.
Oxidation State Organic Compound
Abbreviation
Chemical Formula
Se(-II)
Dimethylselenide
DMSe
CH3SeCH3
Se(-I)
Dimethyldiselenide
DMDSe
CH3Se–SeCH3
Se(-II)
Diallylselenide
DASe
Allyl-Se-Allyl
Se(-I)
Diallyldiselenide
DADSe
Allyl-Se–Se-Allyl
Se(-II)
Trimethylselenonium
TMSe+
(CH3)3Se+
Se(-II)
Selenomethionine
Se-meth.
H3N+CHCOO–·CH2CH2SeCH3
Se(-II)
Selenocysteine
Se-cyst.
H3N+CHCOO–·CHSeH
Se(-II)
Se-Glutathione
GSH-Px
enzyme: complex protein
Se(-II)
Selenocyanate
—
SeCN–
Selenium is also often found associated with organic matter (OM) in seleniferous rocks and
contaminated soils.
The frequently observed correlation between selenium and organic matter in water and soil
samples does not necessarily imply that inorganic selenium species are complexed by
dissolved organic matter, or sorbed onto solid OM (kerogen fraction). Two well established
261/328
selenium pathways and many other hypotheses could explain this correlation between
selenium and organic matter in environmental samples:
1. microbial sulfato-reduction can occur in shallow sediments, or soils, under reducing
conditions in the presence of organic matter (OM). Traces of dissolved inorganic selenate
are reduced along with sulfates (electron acceptors) and subsequently coprecipitated as
selenide into sulfides minerals (e.g., pyrite). Organic matter is fuelling the bacterial
activity as an electron donors, so seleniferous sulfide deposits are quite logically
correlated to OM;
2. as previously mentioned, organo-selenium molecules might be present in residues of
biodegraded “sulfur-like” protein structures left after maturation of organic matter in soils
or sediments;
3. selenium could be linked to organic matter by means of an iron or aluminium bridge: Fe3+
or Al3+ cations could bind Se(IV) or Se(-II) and OM in dissolved Se–Fe–OM ternary
complexes where the trivalent cation occupies a central position between both anionic
entities;
4. if positively charged amino-acids groups (H3N+-CH-COOH) are present in the structure of
OM, they could attract selenite or selenide anions;
5. and finally, a weak association of amorphous colloidal Se0 and OM by means of
hydrophobic interactions cannot be ruled out.
These different potential mechanisms are discussed more in detail hereafter in their
corresponding sections respectively.
1. Sulfato-reduction and correlation between sulfide/selenide and organic matter
A first pathway involves the process of sulfato-reduction where selenium follows sulfur and is
incorporated in selenium-bearing pyrite present in the clay and shale formations with high
content in organic matter. This organic matter (reductant) is needed as electron donor to fuel
the sulfato-reducing bacteria (SRB) responsible for the reduction of sulfate and selenate
present in the sediments. After reduction, the produced sulfides and selenides react with Fe2+
leading to the precipitation of selenium-rich pyrite. In case of sulfato-reduction, pyrite is
correlated with OM, and so is also selenium at trace level.
2. Organo-selenium present in the organic matter structure
A second pathway is based on the direct biological incorporation of organo-selenium
compounds in the natural organic matter through two seleno-amino-acids: seleno-methionine
and seleno-cysteine. Numerous organisms are able to incorporate selenium in peptides and
proteins: bacteria, yeast, fungi, algae, phytoplankton, plants, animals, mammals, and finally
humans. Selenium takes the place of sulfur in proteins and other organic molecules. Enzymes
can selectively organise around selenium cofactors to catalyse specific oxidation-reduction
262/328
processes in the intra-cellular liquid (cytosol). The first discovered (Rotruck et al., 1973) and
the best known protein is the selenium containing glutathione peroxidase protecting living
cells and their phospho-lipidic membranes against oxidation from free radicals (peroxide:
HO–O•, and HO•) produced by the respiration chain in the mitochondria.
Selenium also exhibits a strong bioaccumulation in the food chain. It is indispensable to
mammals and humans, but there is little evidence that selenium is essential for plants.
However, some plants, e.g., Indian mustard, cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, sprout, behave
like Se-bioaccumulators and present a surprising resistance to high levels of selenium, so that
their use in selenium phytoremediation is envisaged using transgenic varieties (Bañuelos
et al., 2005).
Crops of the alliae family (garlic, onion, …) can also accumulate a considerable amount of
selenium in their bulb as illustrated by μ-XANES tomography made at University of Antwerp
(UA) by Prof. Janssen (2003). Selenium can also take the place of sulfur in allyl sulfide (the
volatile eye-irritant substance emitted by onions), and many plants can emit volatile organoselenium compounds (selenium disulfide, diselenium disulfide).
Many biological pathways of incorporation of selenium into proteins exist and still remain to
be discovered. After the death of marine plankton and terrestrial plants, maturation of organic
matter occurs giving rise to humic matter and kerogen bearing evolved organo-selenium
compounds. Organic matter maturation increases with burial depth and temperature leading to
a great diversity of sulfur-organic molecules accompanied by seleno-organic molecules. As a
consequence, organic-rich clay and shale, but also coal deposits and oil reservoirs may
contains in some locations very high level of selenium.
In the case of Boom Clay, according to Deniau (2005) low sulfur content and S/C ratios
around 0.025 are observed for the immature Boom Clay Kerogen (BCK). As a consequence,
only a low level of organo-selenium is expected for Boom Clay organic matter.
3. Iron bridge [Se—Fe—OM]
A hypothesis remains to be verified: the indirect association of selenium with organic matter
(OM) by means of a third binding species.
If one excepts one very particular species of organo-selenium, the tri-methyl-selenonium
(CH3)3Se+, or TMSe+, which is a cation, and elemental Se0, all inorganic dissolved species of
selenium are negatively charged anions (SeO42–, SeO32–, HSe–). As a consequence, these
anionic species experience in a large range of pH a general non-specific electrostatic repulsion
from the negatively charged humic acids (because the presence of dissociated carboxylic,
R-COO–, and phenolic, Ø-O–, groups). This explains why the association between
263/328
radiolabelled
weak.
75
Se and humic acids is very rarely observed, and if sometimes noticed, very
To elaborate a satisfying theory accounting for a sorption of anionic selenium on the generally
negatively charged organic matter, one should envisage mechanisms like chemisorption,
inner-sphere complex, bidentate bonds, or ligand exchange with an intermediate metallic
species acting as bridge between the two anionic antagonists. This could perhaps occur if
amorphous hydrous oxides of iron (III) or aluminium (III) are present in the system. Colloidal
particles of iron or aluminum hydrous oxides (goethite, gibbsite) could then play the role of
bridge between the two negatively charged entities.
It is possible to imagine that both the selenium species (as SeO32– or HSe–) and the organic
matter would form inner-sphere complexes on the colloidal Fe(OH)3 particles. The
mechanism would be similar to the sorption of selenite onto iron hydroxides and to the ironbridges that strongly retain OM at the surface of goethite.
OM + Fe(OH)3 + SeO32–
—>
OM—Fe(OH)—SeO3–
(eq. A8.1)
This association is analogous to that of ternary complex of A type (surface-metal-ligand,
) in surface complexation model (while ternary surface complexes, of B type follow
the reverse order: surface-ligand-metal,
), as mentioned by Buerge-Weirich et al.
(2003) in one of their publications on adsorption of heavy metals on goethite in the presence
of organic ligands.
The same hypothesis is also put forward by Redman et al. (2002) and Macalady et al. (2002)
to tentatively explain the mobilisation of arsenic in the presence of iron oxide and organic
matter. Indeed, the reason of the mobilisation of arsenic in the presence of organic matter and
iron oxides under strongly reducing conditions seems more complicated than thought and
could depend on other poorly understood processes. A consistent theory is also lacking to
explain the anomalously high level of arsenic found in water wells in Bangladesh where
arsenic poses a serious health problem to millions of persons.
So, although such an iron bridge [Se—Fe—OM] is perfectly conceivable, there is still a lack
of evidences to clearly demonstrate this hypothesis in the context of Boom Clay. In the frame
of our limited survey of the literature we have not found many convincing papers on the
subject. This topic certainly deserves more attention and further research. If this mechanism
exists, a supplementary correlation with iron should also be observed in natural samples
containing selenium in association with OM.
264/328
4. Other weak interactions
Other poorly established mechanisms are also sometimes suggested to explain an association
between selenium and OM.
A first one sets forth the possible presence of protonated amino-acids in the structure of
organic matter: H3N+-CH-COOH. At low pH, these amino-acids could bear positively
charged ammonium groups that could interact with selenium anions.
A second one puts forwards a hydrophobic interaction between humic acids and colloidal
elemental selenium, as recently suggested by Maes et al. (2004) to explain the association of
selenium with organic matter in some Se/OM interaction experiments.
5. Possible implications
A possible correlation (or association) between selenium and organic matter could be
important for two reasons:
− to know if the solubility limit of natural inorganic selenium in Boom Clay is reached, and;
− to assess the possible interaction of long-lived selenium-79 with natural selenium
associated to the natural organic matter.
(i) Impact of a possible confusion between total dissolved selenium and inorganic selenium
on the determination of saturation index of different Se species in Boom Clay porewater
When measuring the total selenium concentration present in clay porewater, it is not easy to
distinguish free-inorganic dissolved selenium (e.g., HSe– expected under strongly reducing
conditions) from organo-selenium.
If a non-negligible fraction of selenium present in Boom Clay is well biologically
incorporated in the organic matter since its sedimentation, the total dissolved selenium
concentration in Boom Clay porewater does not represent only the sum of inorganic Se
species. The speciation of dissolved selenium must be considered with prudence before to
determine a saturation index, or to attempt to validate the results of thermodynamical
solubility calculations. A clear distinction need to be made between inorganic (mineral) and
organic dissolved selenium: [Seaq mineral] = [Seaq total] – [Seaq organic]. Considering that the
total dissolved selenium corresponds to dissolved selenide would lead to an overestimation of
the true dissolved selenide concentration.
(ii) Effect of organic matter on the mobility of 79Se: comparison with the case of 129I
What is the potential implication of organic matter on the transport of 79Se ? An increase of its
mobility if 79Se would be associated to the dissolved organic matter (OM), or at the contrary a
265/328
higher retention if 79Se would be rather sorbed on the immobile OM, or isotopically
exchanged with natural Se–OM groups present in the Boom Clay kerogen ?
The anionic character of dissolved inorganic species of selenium is in principle not favourable
to their association with the negatively charged organic matter at slightly alkaline pH (8 –8.5).
Only a weak association between SeO32– and OM has been observed. No association could be
established between HSe– or SeO42– and OM.
If stable ternary complexes [Se—Fe(III)—OM] (a.k.a. iron bridge) should play a significant
role in Boom Clay, they could influence the transport of 79Se.
Another open question deals with the presence of organo-selenium compounds in natural
kerogen which could perhaps also contribute to retard the long-lived 79Se by isotopic
exchanges.
Such a question was already formulated in studies dealing with a possible very weak retention
observed for 129I in Opalinus Clay (OPA) and in the Callovo-Oxfordian Clay (COx). Indeed,
organic matter of these clay formations is also naturally rich in organo-iodine compounds (a
few mg iodine / g clay), and a low Kd value (~ 0.2 cm3 g-1) corresponding to a small
retardation factor R = 2 has been determined by several authors (Van Loon and Soler, 2004;
Van Loon et al., 2006; Devol-Brown et al., 2003, Tournassat et al., 2005). A possible isotopic
exchange between 129I and natural organo-iodine was suspected for the Callovo-Oxfordian
Clay (Bure URL) and the Toarcian Clay (Tournemire tunnel), but the effect cannot be taken
into account for safety calculations because it is very small and still disputed amongst
different laboratories in France (Devivier et al. (2004), IRSN; Bazer-Bachi et al. (2006),
CEA; Tournassat et al. (2006), BRGM; Reiler (2006) in GCA, CEA; Wittebroodt (Ph. D
Thesis, 2009), IRSN). Moreover, according to Claret et al., (2009) at BRGM, natural iodine
in the COx is not correlated with organic matter but well with calcium carbonate (aragonite of
the fossil shells preserved in the COx). The same correlation could also apply for natural
selenium in COx, but it remains yet to be proven (Carignan, 2008, Personal Communication).
266/328
A9. Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay
267/328
268/328
A9
Selenium migration behaviour in Boom Clay
A9.1 Overview
The results of the first migration experiments made with 75Se on compact Boom Clay cores
have revealed very intricate profiles in the solid clay at the end of the tests. The initial
interpretations of these results at SCK•CEN with the analytical Micof code (Henrion et al.,
1990; Put et al. 1992; De Preter et al., 1992; De Cannière et al., 1996) have first lead to think
that selenium was strongly sorbed onto Boom Clay with a retardation factor (R) of ~ 300.
However, when considering that the 75Se source was initially not in chemical equilibrium with
Boom Clay conditions and that the large activity engaged was much higher than the solubility
limit of the species prevailing under reducing conditions, we realised that most of selenium
had likely precipitated around the source after its progressive reduction along its migration
path. Because the gamma counting method used to measure selenium-75 in the clay did not
allow to distinguish between precipitated selenium and sorbed selenium, we realised that the
first interpretations of the migration profiles were inappropriate and that precipitated selenium
was mistakenly considered as sorbed. As a consequence, a highly overestimated retardation
factor was derived from these experimental data and used for the performance assessment
(PA) (Marivoet et al., 1999: Data Collection Forms, Feb 1998). When we realised the process
really at work, we considered that most of selenium was precipitated near the source and we
assigned new values to the migration parameters of 79Se (Marivoet et al., 1999: Data
collection Forms, Feb 1999; data set 1). Since then selenium is considered as a non-retarded
element in Boom Clay (R = 1). However it is expected to be solubility limited
(S = 5 × 10-8 mol dm-3) under reducing conditions. Recent results obtained from electromigration tests (Beauwens et al., 2005) made with 75Se selenite source containing selenate as
impurity have revealed that if selenate is present in the system, the selenate species migrates
unretarded, but contrary to selenite, it does not undergo reduction, nor subsequent
precipitation within our experimental conditions, and at the time frame and the spatial scale of
the investigated system. So, we realise that if selenium would be present in the source term of
a HLW geological repository as selenate, it could be not solubility limited as expected
according to thermodynamical calculations.
269/328
A9.2 Percolation Experiments
A9.2.1 Percolation experiments with 75SeO32–
A9.2.1.1 Percolation tests: experimental
The principle of percolation experiment with an undisturbed Boom Clay core is given in
Figure A9.2.1. A few µl of 75Se (T½ = 120 d) solution with a very high activity (0.68 milliCurie: 2.5 × 107 Bq of 75Se) are pipetted onto a filter paper and dried in air. 75Se is not carrierfree and is accompanied by cold selenium because it was produced by neutron activation
according to the nuclear reaction 74Se (n, γ) 75Se. All selenium is supposed to be initially
under the form of selenite according to the technical specifications given by the supplier.
However, the manufacturer also acknowledges that because of the high γ activity of the 75Se
stock solution, and water radiolysis, a fraction of selenite could have been oxidized in selenate
by oxidizing free radicals (•OH) produced by water radiolysis. At the time of these
experiments, this point was not controlled by ion chromatography. The source is then
transferred into a nitrogen atmosphere glovebox (≤ 1 ppm O2) and sandwiched between two
Boom Clay cores of about 3.5 cm length (sampled by drilling perpendicular to the bedding
plane). (This type of source configuration in sandwich is sometimes referred in the literature
as “back-to-back” plugs). The whole is then pushed with a manual press in a stainless steel
cell and confined between two stainless steel porous filters (Krebshöge). The screw-caps of
the percolation cell are tighten with a torquemeter set at 150 Newton meter. After assembly,
the stainless steel set-up is gas tight to prevent oxygen ingress in order to reproduce the
anticipated in situ chemical conditions imposed by the clay. Boom Clay interstitial water in
equilibrium with a 0.4 % CO2 atmosphere is percolated at constant flow rate through the core
as illustrated in Figures A9.2.1 and A9.2.2. A typical flow rate of ~ 0.150 cm3 d-1 is achieved
with a hydraulic gradient (ΔP) of 10 to 14.3 MPa m-1 (~ 10 bar on 7 cm). Water samples are
collected at regular interval at the outlet of the cells and their 75Se concentration measured
with an automatic NaI(Tl) gamma counter (75Se decays to 75As, emitting main γ at 136, 265
and 279 keV respectively, DAMRI, 1991).
clay water
outlet
radionuclide source
C
Figure A9.2.1: Schematic principle of a percolation experiment with the radionuclide source
sandwiched between two clay cores. Also known as “back-to-back” or “C4 type” experiment
according to the in-house classification of M.J. Put described by De Preter et al. (1992).
270/328
[RN]
[RN]
t
x
RN profile after cutting
RN breakthrough curve
(for retarded RN)
(for non or weakly retarded RN)
(for solubility controlled RN: sigmoid curve)
RN = Radionuclides
Figure A9.2.2: Schematic representation of a percolation experiment: expected radionuclides profiles in
clay and in the percolated water.
Two percolation experiments were performed in the surface laboratory between 1995 and
1998:
• NRM010 A (from 08-March-1995 to 02-April-1997), and;
• NRM010 B (from 08-March-1995 to 05-March-1998).
These two percolation experiments are referred as “C4 type” according to an in-house
classification defined by M.J. Put and described in the state-of-the-art report on the Migration
studies by De Preter et al. (1992).
A9.2.1.2 Evolution of 75Se concentration in the percolation water
The evolution with time of the concentrations of selenium measured in the water collected at
the outlets of the percolation experiments is given on Figure A9.2.3 (linear scale) and
Figure A9.2.4 (logarithmic scale). The value of the hydraulic conductivity of the percolation
experiments varies from 2 × 10-12 m s-1 to 4 × 10-12 m s-1, a typical range for Boom Clay.
After a very fast breakthrough peak of 75Se concentration at respectively about
8 × 10-7 mol dm-3 (NRM010 A) and 2.8 × 10-7 mol dm-3 (NRM010 B) a lower selenium
concentration is observed in the percolate of both experiments at about 1.6 × 10-8 mol dm-3.
271/328
selenium concentration [mole.l-1]
9.0 E-07
8.0 E-07
7.0 E-07
6.0 E-07
Migration experiment NRM010A with Se-75
5.0 E-07
4.0 E-07
3.0 E-07
2.0 E-07
1.0 E-07
0.0 E+00
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Volume of percolated water [ml]
Figure A9.2.3: Concentration of 75Se in the percolation water of the NRM010A
experiment. A concentration plateau of 1.6 × 10-8 M is reached at the end of the
experiment (linear concentration scale).
selenium concentration [mole.l-1]
1.0 E-06
1.0 E-07
Migration experiment NRM010A with Se-75
1.0 E-08
1.0 E-09
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Volume of percolated water [ml]
Figure A9.2.4: Concentration of 75Se in the percolation water of the NRM010A
experiment. A concentration plateau of 1.6 × 10-8 M is reached at the end of the
experiment (log concentration scale).
As seen on Figure A9.2.3 (linear scale) and Figure A9.2.4 (logarithmic scale) showing the
evolution of 75Se concentration in the percolated water, a breakthrough peak of mobile 75Se
rapidly appears in the first milliliters of water collected at the beginning of the percolation.
Although no chemical speciation analyses could be performed on these samples, selenium is
assumed to be mainly present in the first water samples as slightly retarded SeO32– or very
mobile SeO42–. Then the 75Se concentration rapidly decreased to reach a plateau value of
about 1.6 × 10-8 mol dm-3. At this level of concentration, we suppose that the selenium
272/328
concentration is solubility limited by metallic Se, or by FeSe, or FeSe2 (crystalline or
amorphous phases). We interpret this low selenium concentration assuming that the mobile
dissolved species of selenium is HSe– the species in thermodynamical equilibrium with
reduced selenium solid phases under in situ conditions. In this hypothesis, we do not envisage
the dissolution of selenide by oxidation (then traces of SeO42– could also be present in
solution). The fact that 75Se is permanently detected in the percolation water suggests that we
are likely faced with a constant concentration source of poorly soluble selenium (Se, FeSe, or
FeSe2 ?). So, to summarize our interpretation, the sequence of elution of the different aqueous
species of selenium present in the percolate is the following: small quantities of impurities of
SeO42– the more oxidized but also an almost unretarded species of selenium appears the first
in the water. Then a part of the bulk of SeO32–, the main species of selenium introduced at the
source percolates out of the clay core without undergoing chemical reduction because of
kinetics limitations. Finally HSe–, the selenium species at the lowest valence is released in the
water when all selenate and the non reacted fraction of selenite have been totally leached out
of the core. Selenide originates from the chemical reduction of selenite by pyrite or organic
matter during the transport of selenite in the clay. However, no direct speciation
measurements were performed on the percolate. The quantity of mobile selenium released by
each clay core is low: about ~ 0.62 % of the initial inventory pipetted onto the paper filter for
each percolation test.
A9.2.1.3 75Se migration profile in the solid clay
At the end of the percolation experiments (2.07 and 2.99 years of percolation for experiments
NRM010A (756 d) and NRM010B (1 093 d) respectively), the clay cores were progressively
removed from the permeameter cells with a screw mechanical press and cut in thin slices of
0.5 – 1 mm thickness to allow the determination of the migration profile of selenium in the
solid clay. 75Se was analyzed by means of an automatic NaI(Tl) counter.
The 75Se activity profile measured in the clay core after the percolation experiment for
NRM010A is presented in Figures A9.2.5 and A9.2.6 (plotted on a linear or a log scale
respectively). An effect of percolation due to advection is observable on the asymmetric
activity profile and an increase of selenium concentration appears downwards to the source
position, in the direction of the water flow.
273/328
600 000
NRM010A: migration of Se-75
in a vertical Boom Clay core
500 000
400 000
Fit result
Conc (Bq/cm)
Fitted experimental results
Non fitted experimental points
300 000
200 000
Direction of percolation
100 000
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
Distance (cm)
Figure A9.2.5: Migration profile of 75Se in a vertical Boom Clay core (experiment
NRM010A, percolation type C4). Linear scale. Fit on relative error.
10 000 000
1 000 000
NRM010A: migration of Se-75
in a vertical Boom Clay core
Direction of percolation
100 000
Fit result
Fitted experimental results
Non fitted experimental points
Conc (Bq/cm)
10 000
1 000
100
10
1
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
Distance (cm)
Figure A9.2.6: Migration profile of 75Se in a vertical Boom Clay core (experiment
NRM010A, percolation type C4). Log scale. Fit on relative error.
Figure A9.2.5 (linear scale) shows a well developed peak of 75Se whose the tails reach the
baseline after about 1.2 cm. Very surprisingly, the activity increases again near the stainless
steel porous plate confining the clay core at the water outlet ! Figure A9.2.6 gives a clearer
representation of the 75Se migration profile on a logarithmic activity scale. Most of the
measurements points of the central diffusion peak (xo ± 1.2 cm) are lying along a parabolic
curve, if one excludes however a tenth of points with the highest activity just near the 75Se
source. Beyond one centimeter on each side, the 75Se activity decreases less rapidly. At
greater distance, the parabolic curve does no longer fit the measurement points whose activity
274/328
is clearly above the limit of detection for 75Se. A more or less constant background of 75Se is
then observed. The migration is not symmetrical in both directions from the source: an
unexpected increase of activity occurs downwards just beside the outlet stainless filter. Due to
the complexity of the measured migration profile modelling attempts have only been
performed with the experimental points lying on the parabolic curve. The other points have
not been taken into account for the fitting. This complicated migration profile is a good
illustration of chemical-coupled transport involving also reduction-precipitation reactions and
chemi-sorption with surface complexation. Although the inorganic chemistry of selenium is
very similar to that of sulfur and may appear relatively simple when looking at Eh - pH
diagrams (Brookins, 1988), the whole situation is more difficult to interpret without
thermodynamical sorption modelling, and without data on reduction-precipitation kinetics, or
on interaction of selenium with organic matter (OM).
So, we are reduced to a purely speculative scenario to give a qualitative interpretation of the
observed profiles. We thought to have introduced selenium onto the filter paper as selenite
(SeO32–) according to the chemical specifications of the source provided by Amersham, but
no direct measurements were performed to control the chemical form of selenium in the
spike. However, because of the water radiolysis of the 75Se stock solution selenite was likely
accompanied by selenate (SeO42–) as indirectly evidenced by Beauwens et al. (2004) during
later electromigration tests. This hypothesis has been independently confirmed by Bruggeman
et al. (2006) which applied specific characterization techniques to several selenium sources
supplied by the same manufacturer. Under the low Eh conditions normally prevailing in the
undisturbed Boom Clay cores used, SeO32– was most likely slowly reduced to metallic
selenium (Se), or further to selenide (HSe–). Metallic selenium is very insoluble while HSe–
easily precipitates with Fe2+ to form ferroselite (FeSe, or FeSe2), an iron selenide analogous to
pyrite. So, perhaps that most of selenium precipitated close to the source in the first days of
the percolation experiments. The rate of precipitation may be controlled, either by the redox
properties (reducing capacity, state of freshness) of the clay surrounding the filter paper,
either by a kinetic limitation, the reduction reactions involving multiple electrons transfers
being often quite slow. On one hand, if the redox capacity of the first “section” of clay
adjacent to the paper filter spiked with 75Se is exhausted by the reduction reaction of cold
selenium, SeO32– has to move to the next “section” to be reduced and to precipitate as Se, or
FeSe2. In this hypothesis, we are faced to an Eh gradient in the clay surrounding the 75Se
source explaining partly the profile. On the other hand, if the redox capacity of the clay close
to the source is sufficient to reduce immediately all the selenium and that selenium continues
to move without immediate reduction, it may be due to kinetic limitations. The whole is still
complicated by the fact that the oxyanion SeO32– can easily be sorbed onto ferric and
aluminium hydrous oxide by ligand exchange forming a stable monodentate or bidentate
complex with the metallic ion (also called inner-sphere complex). This reaction is similar to
275/328
that of chemi-sorption of borate, silicate, phosphate and arsenate, onto Al or Fe oxyhydroxides, schematically, for a monodentate surface complex:
SeO32–
>Al—SeO3– + OH–
(eq. A9.2.1)
H+ —> 2 X=SeO3 + OH– + H2O
(eq. A9.2.2)
+ >Al—OH
—>
or for a bidentate complex:
+ SeO32– +
2 X–OH
Surface
hydroxyl group
(X= Surface)
Ligand
Proton
Inner-sphere
Bidentate
complex
Water
So, selenite might already be retarded onto aluminium oxide groups located on the lateral
edges of clay minerals (or also on the basal plane of kaolinite) before to be reduced by the
more reactional clay constituents (pyrite, siderite, glauconite, sorbed Fe2+, and maybe organic
matter). If pyrite oxidation occurs, SeO32– might be sorbed onto the resulting ferrihydrite
[FeO(OH)], or jarosite [KFe3(SO4)2(OH)6], produced in the near-field of a ventilated gallery.
The type of chemi-sorption reaction on iron oxy-hydroxides is the same than on aluminium
oxides, but with a higher affinity for Fe3+ than for Al3+, as, e.g., in the case of a monodentate
mononuclear complex:
SeO32–
+ >Fe—OH
—>
>Fe—SeO3– + OH–
(eq. A9.2.3)
or for a bidentate binuclear surface complex:
(eq. A9.2.4)
As seen on Figures A9.2.5 and A9.2.6 the selenium bulk concentration outside the parabolic
curve (log scale) is more or less constant if one excepts the slices near to the porous stainless
steel filter at the outlet. This concentration corresponds to that of selenium measured in the
percolated water (~ 1.6 × 10-8 mol dm-3 ).
How to explain the unexpected 75Se “peak” (or accumulation) observed downwards near to
the stainless steel porous filter at the outlet of the percolation cell ? The best clue we have up
to now is that a fraction of the soluble selenium (SeO32– accompanied by SeO42– at the
beginning of percolation, followed later by HSe– in the steady state) is sorbed or precipitated
onto a very thin layer of ferric hydrous oxide always present at the surface of sintered
stainless steel. A direct reduction-precipitation of selenium by metallic iron (Fe-0) is also
276/328
another possible mechanism. After its uptake by the metallic porous filter, selenium is
progressively released in the water and percolates outside, or diffuses back inside the clay
core, the filter acting then as a secondary source of 75Se.
A9.2.1.4 Modelling of the 75Se profile in the solid clay: questionable attempt
So, to summarize these explanations, several zones can be distinguished in the migration
profile of 75Se in the clay core presented at Figures A9.2.5 and A9.2.6:
1. a region very close to the initial source (first precipitation ?);
2. a region inside a parabolic curve (mainly diffusion);
3. a region outside the parabolic curve with a low but measurable background of 75Se;
4. a region close to the stainless filter at the outlet acting as a secondary 75Se source
(back-diffusion peak), and;
5. finally, the stainless steel outlet filter first taking up 75Se, and then releasing the
accumulated 75Se.
An attempt of modelling with the Micof code (based on an analytical solution of the simple
advection / dispersion model with linear and reversible sorption) was performed only using
the measurement points of the second region which are properly aligned on a parabolic curve.
All other points (very close to the 75Se source, in the background, or near the stainless steel
filter at the outlet) have been omitted in the fitting to simplify the problem. The programme
dfit38 was used. The results of the fitting presented at Figures A9.2.5 and A9.2.6 are the
following:
ηR
= 1 123
R
= 11 230 if we assume η = 0.10
Dapp = 6.9 × 10-14 m2 s-1
Deff = ηRDapp = 7.7 × 10-11 m2 s-1
What are the consequences of omitting the points around the origin during the fit ? First, the
fitted value for the total amount of selenium in the clay (Qmo = 1.18 × 105 Bq) is 200 times
smaller than the real total amount of selenium effectively present in the clay core
(Qo = 2.52 × 107 Bq). Indeed, the major part of selenium in the clay is situated around the
source (see Figure A9.2.5, linear concentration scale), and these points have been omitted.
Then, by omitting these points, the value of the diffusion coefficient is higher than if these
points should not have been omitted. As a consequence, the value of the diffusion coefficient
obtained from the fit presented at Figure A9.2.6 is a conservative estimation for the migration
of 75Se around the source.
277/328
However, for the positions around the edges of the clay core, the fitted value for the diffusion
coefficient is no more conservative. According to this fit, no selenium could have diffused out
of the clay. But, during this experiment, a small fraction (0.62 %) of selenium (1.55 × 105 Bq
on the 2.52 × 107 Bq initially introduced) has been leached out of the clay. The profile
measured outside the parabolic domain suggests a concentration limit controlled by a solid
phase as, e.g., Se, FeSe, or, FeSe2.
As the transport of selenium may be coupled with various chemical reactions implying
reduction, precipitation and chemisorption, two or three species of selenium with different
migration behaviour (certainly SeO32– and SeO42– in the beginning, and then after its
reduction: HSe–, or maybe HSe–Fe–OM) may contribute to the general profile measured in
the clay and in the water. However, the programme “dfit38s” fits only one mobile species and
is based on a conceptual model considering only diffusion, advection, sorption and
radioactive decay, without taking into account reduction or precipitation phenomena. Another
model (and various programmes for different chemical conditions) is needed to take into
account the migration of two different species, as it was done by Put (1994) to attempt to fit
the first four migration experiments made by Henrion and De Cannière (1990) with metallic
Se and reduced Se (whose results are also summarized in Table A9.2.1). Three species seems
a maximum for such a model to avoid the risk of over-parameterisation. However, a model
with stable species migrating independently from each others is not sufficient. One of its main
limitation is the difficulty to take into account the progressive transformation of one soluble
species (SeO32–) in another one (HSe–) precipitating, or sorbing differently, during the
transport (need of kinetic constant, and solubility limit under in situ conditions as additional
parameters).
A9.2.1.5 Comparison with the results of previous migration experiments made with clay
plugs equilibrated with elemental and reduced 75Se
Four migration tests were performed by De Cannière and Henrion, (1990) with elemental
selenium (reduction of selenite by hydrazine hydrochloride) and with reduced selenium
(2 months in contact with a Boom Clay slurry) as two pure diffusion tests and two percolation
tests. The detailed experimental procedure are reported in the semi-annual progress report of
1990 to 1992. Their principle is similar to these described more in detail in the previous
section. Pure diffusion tests were not percolated with porewater. The main difference resided
in the nature of the source and the way selenium was pre-equilibrated to match in situ
chemical conditions. Table A9.2.1 allows for the comparison of the results of the percolation
NRM010A experiment with those of the four previous migration tests performed under
reducing conditions with pre-equilibrated sources as reported by De Cannière et al. (1996).
The results have been sorted by increasing order of retardation according to the ηR value.
278/328
Table A9.2.1: Results of migration experiments with selenium in Boom Clay under reducing conditions.
Selenium
Source
⎯Reduced
⎯Metal
⎯SeO32–
(—)
Dapp
(m2 s-1)
Deff = ηRDapp
(m2 s-1)
Cbulk (a)
(Bq ml-1)
—
2.1 × 10-13
—
122
• percolation (C4)
54
1.9 × 10
-13
• diffusion
—
1.2 × 10-13
Migration Test
Type
• diffusion
(C3)
(C3)
ηR
• percolation (C4)
215
• percolation (C4)
1 123
1.3 × 10
-13
0.69 × 10-13
1.0 × 10
-11
—
849
1 610
-11
11.300
7.7 × 10-11
—
2.8 × 10
(a): Cbulk : the calculated bulk concentration in the source at the end of the experiment, taking into account
a counter yield of 33 %. The bulk concentration is the sum of the concentrations in solution and in the
solid phase (sorption + precipitation) per unit clay volume. Cbulk = ηR Caq (Caq : concentration in water).
An important remark must be made when analysing the reported migration parameters for
these experiments. The experiments were at that time not modelled with a constant
concentration boundary condition (all Se was considered to be soluble) which is clearly not
correct. Simply speaking, the Dapp is taken from the width of the diffusion profile which
develops in de clay around the source position. However, if the source is solid (solubility
limited constant release), it is clear that the so-called distribution profile is very narrow
leading to relative low Dapp values which in fact do not reflect true diffusion.
Finally, a last question arises: what is the mechanism of retardation of selenium in Boom
Clay ? It is difficult to distinguish true reversible sorption from specific chemi-sorption, or
surface precipitation. We have no clue to know if HSe– is sorbed, or not. As anion without
oxygen similar to iodide, a priori, we do not expect sorption because of the electrostatic
repulsion with the negatively charged surface of the clay minerals (anion exclusion). Due to
the absence of oxygen in its molecular structure, chemisorption analogous to that of PO43–, or
SeO32– is also not expected. However, HSe– could strongly interact with Fe2+ / Fe3+ anywhere
in the clay (sorbed iron, cation exchange pool, OM complex), or present at the surface of
minerals as pyrite, siderite, or glauconite. If this interaction does not lead to an irreversible
precipitation of FeSe, but to a reversible exchange, perhaps that HSe– could be retarded.
A9.2.2 Lessons learned during the updating of the Data Collection Forms (DCF’s) in
1999
In the course of the revision of migration parameters for selenium in the frame of the exercise
of the Data Collection Forms (DCF’s) made in 1999 for the performance assessment, we
realized a problem of interpretation and modelling with selenium percolation experiments.
The selenium migration experiments were erroneously interpreted previously with the Micof
279/328
code. The analytical solutions used in the various programs designed for the different
experimental configurations were very well adapted to the case of conservative tracers, i.e.
non sorbed radionuclides as, tritiated water (HTO), halogenide anions (131I–, 82Br–, 36Cl–), or
alkaline cations (22Na+, 134Cs+), with a simple chemistry, without complexation, without
solubility limit, and without multiple oxidation states. However, precipitation processes (often
initiated by redox reactions) were not taken into account in the conceptual model and in the
code. So, precipitation in the Boom Clay cores labelled with 75Se, was not considered during
the modelling calculations performed with the bulk activity in the clay cores to determine the
migration parameters and was misinterpreted as a strong sorption.
The reasons for the confusion of precipitation with sorption in the modelling calculations is
explained hereafter. After cutting the clay cores in thin slices, 75Se in each slice was counted
by means of a NaI(Tl) crystal, but only the bulk activity could be directly measured in the lab
without sequential extraction procedure:
Bulk activity = Σ activities = activities of the (soluble + sorbed + precipitated) fractions.
So, when measuring the total activity present in each clay slice, the distinction between
sorption and precipitation was not possible. The analytical advection-dispersion model used
took only into account linear and reversible sorption, not precipitation. The reason of the
problem is that all activity measured in the solid phase was considered by the Micof model as
sorbed. So, the large fraction of precipitated selenium was also considered as “sorbed
selenium” in the calculations. The consequence was an overestimation of the retardation
factors. To remain conservative for the safety assessment, these values were considered as
suspect and all the soluble and mobile fraction of reduced selenium (HSe–) was considered as
non retarded in the new set of parameter.
In fact, to correctly interpret diffusion or percolation tests in term of linear and reversible
sorption with fast local equilibrium, the same precautions than for “Kd” measurements should
also be taken as illustrated by Figure A9.2.7. In “Kd” experiments because one cannot also
distinguish between sorbed species and precipitated phases, the first golden rule is to always
work below the solubility limit. The second rule is to work at low loading capacity of the
sorption sites to remain in the linear range if no sorption isotherm can be performed. So, the
same rules also apply to migration experiments to remain in the valid range of the hypothesis
underlying the conceptual model based on the hypothesis of linear and reversible sorption.
280/328
log Cs (mg/g)
precipitation
ΓT
sorption site
saturation
co-/surfaceprecipitation
neither Kd
nor isotherms
isotherms
Kd
solubility
log Cl (mg/L)
Figure A9.2.7: General principles of sorption isotherm and applicable working
ranges to remain in the limit of validity of the models and to avoid precipitation
processes.
The problem is the most critical with the redox-sensitive elements as Se, Tc, Np and U. The
reason for the precipitation is that the 75Se sources were not in direct equilibrium with Boom
Clay at the start of the experiments. 75Se was directly loaded in the clay in oxidized form
(SeO32– accompanied by SeO42– produced by radiolysis) as delivered by the supplier. The
initial selenium concentration in the source was relatively high because of the presence of
cold selenium present as carrier. Moreover, because of the half-life of selenium (120 days)
and to be able to detect 75Se during two or three years, a large activity was introduced at the
start. The consequence was a slow precipitation in the source, or more worrying, in the clay
during the transport process.
In conclusion, a source of a redox-sensitive radionuclide not in chemical equilibrium with the
clay makes modelling and interpretations very difficult, if not impossible. Simple advection /
diffusion transport models are no longer valid and complicated reactive transport models
should be used to estimate the migration parameters. Moreover extra parameters as kinetic
rates and specific area would also be needed. Indeed, the kinetics of reduction / precipitation
are unknown and will depend amongst others on experimental conditions (pH, Eh, pCO2, ...),
and on the mineral surface effectively accessible in the sample (could depend on the liquid-tosolid ratio). So, how to acquire correct data relevant for real in situ conditions ?
Reactive transport modelling is a very difficult task for redox-sensitive elements and remains
an unresolved issue. Most often, the chemical-coupled models are only used for predictive
281/328
calculations, not for parameters estimation from experimental results. The knowledge of the
exact mechanisms and reactions occurring during transport is a mandatory prerequisite. If
multiple chemical reactions are simultaneously, or consecutively, involved, the system will be
too complex to be modelled and a serious risk of over-parameterisation exists.
Recommendations
So, to perform successful migration experiments with redox-sensitive elements in equilibrium
with the clay, it is necessary to know the exact geochemical conditions prevailing in situ in
the clay (pH, Eh, pCO2, CO32–, ...) and to reproduce them effectively in the lab. After correct
calculation of the expected speciation of the element under the relevant conditions a last
challenge is to master and to control its speciation in the source to verify that the chemical
equilibrium is reached before to start the migration tests.
A9.2.3 Conclusion of percolation experiments
However, because of conceptual model restrictions, and limitations of analytical measurement
techniques, the determination of the migration parameters for selenium (diffusion accessible
porosity, η; retardation factor, R; and apparent diffusion coefficient, Dapp) was very
problematic with these total 75Se activity profiles. The analytical model used only considers
diffusion, advection, linear reversible sorption and radioactive decay. The very high
retardation factor values calculated from this “solid” profile (ηR = 1 123; R = 11 230) were
completely incompatible with the low retardation factor value (R = 0) determined from the
evolution of the concentration of selenium in the percolation water.
This apparent conflict can be resolved if selenite present initially on the filter paper is reduced
by pyrite or organic matter in the Boom Clay and precipitates in the clay as metallic selenium
or iron selenide. Considering the precipitated solid as “reversibly” sorbed in the mathematical
analysis would give erroneous apparently high retardation factors. This conclusion, coupled
with the solubility studies indicates that all or most of the selenite is reduced to Se(0) or
Se(-2) in the Boom Clay. However, the work also highlights the need to avoid kinetically
controlled precipitation reactions during future percolation experiments with redox-sensitive
elements. Thus it is necessary to work with a source of the element chemically
preconditioned to be in equilibrium with the clay under in situ conditions before starting the
migration experiments, or to use concentrations below the solubility limit of the species
occurring under in situ conditions.
282/328
A9.2.4 Percolation experiments with dual tracer: FeSe contacted with 14C-OM
In the framework of the EC 5th Framework TRANCOM-II project (Maes et al., 2004),
percolation experiments were performed with so-called double-labelled tracer sources
consisting of a tracer under a specific chemical form (here HSe– released by the FeSe solid
phase) and in contact with 14C-labelled Boom Clay Organic Matter (BCOM). The aim is to
verify if the mobile BCOM facilitates selenium migration by following both the fate of Se and
the 14C-labelled BCOM.
To avoid technical problems in the preparation of reduced 75Se(-II) sources starting from
SeO32–, it was decided to use stable selenium (74Se, 0.9 %;76Se, 9.0 %; 77Se, 7.6 %; 78Se,
23.5 %; 80Se, 49.8 %; 82Se, 9.2 %) in the form of commercially available FeSe powder (Alfa
Aesar).
A Nalgene tube was filled with 10 ml of synthetic Boom Clay water (SCW, prepared
anaerobically, bubbled with Ar containing 0.4 % CO2 for 4 hours prior use) and spiked with
an aliquot of 200 µl of the 14C-OM (prepared by Loughborough University; TROM 33-34,
5 316 mg C dm-3, 642.2 kBq cm-3). Subsequently, 0.061 g of FeSe (stored under anaerobic
conditions) powder was added to this solution. The FeSe powder was used “as is” and was
not washed nor purified.
The suspension is shaken and a small aliquot is taken as dual tracer source for the migration
experiments (loading of the migration experiments was performed in a glovebox under
anaerobic conditions in Ar containing 0.4 % CO2). The breakthrough of the stable isotopes of
Se was followed by High Resolution ICP-MS (Museum for Middle Africa, Tervuren,
Belgium) while the 14C-OM breakthrough was measured by liquid scintillation (LSC
counting). Because of its much higher sensitivity high resolution ICP-MS was used to be able
to measure concentrations lower than 10-7 mol dm-3 (corresponding to the detection limit of
the normal ICP-Mass Spectrometer used in routine at SCK•CEN).
Two percolation experiments codename SeCOM 1 and SeCOM 2 were started under similar
conditions but they exhibit different hydraulic conductivity: respectively 2.3 × 10-13 m s-1 and
7.1 × 10-13 m s-1.
For both experiments presented at Figures A9.2.8 and A9.2.9 we do not observe a clear
relation between the breakthrough of 14C-OM and this of selenium. So, we have no obvious
indication of an association between dissolved selenium (expected to be present under the
form of HSe– in these experimental conditions) and 14C-labelled natural organic matter
(NOM). However, a small fraction of Se percolates very fast out of the clay core. We attribute
it to the partial oxidation of FeSe in the source releasing mobile SeO42–. Indeed the solid FeSe
283/328
was used “as is” without any purification). The SeO42– species move unretarded through
Boom Clay as evidenced by electromigration experiments with oxidized selenium sources
(see Section A9.3.2). The presence of oxidised species was also observed during high
resolution ICP-MS analyses of reference samples prepared from the same FeSe powder (Alfa
Aesar).
80000
70000
SeCOM1
SeCOM2
Activity C-14 (Bq/l)
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Average total percolated volume (ml)
Figure A9.2.8: Se-14C-OM percolation experiments: breakthrough curves of 14C-OM.
9,0E-07
SeCOM-1
SeCOM-2
Se-RBCW
8,0E-07
Se concentration (mol/l)
7,0E-07
6,0E-07
5,0E-07
4,0E-07
3,0E-07
2,0E-07
1,0E-07
0,0E+00
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Average total percolated volume of RBCW (ml)
Figure A9.2.9: Se-14C-OM percolation experiments: breakthrough curves of selenium. The fast
initial Se breakthrough, not associated to NOM, is due to the SeO42–. The horizontal line
indicates the natural Se concentration in the Boom Clay porewater.
284/328
Furthermore, high resolution ICP-MS measurements of Boom Clay porewater samples made
at Tervuren showed a concentration of natural dissolved selenium of 2 × 10-8 mol dm-3. This
concentration is below the limit of detection of the standard ICP-MS used in the analytical
chemistry laboratory of SCK•CEN and could not be observed previously because of the lack
of sensitivity of this technique.
After the breakthrough of the oxidised Se species, the Se concentration decreases back to this
natural background value. Surprisingly, the measured concentration of natural selenium in the
water is higher than the value calculated from thermodynamic data for the solubility of Se
solid phases [Se(0) or FeSe]. Because of the presence of this unexpected relatively high
concentration of natural dissolved Se we cannot determine any migration parameters for
aqueous selenium species from these experiments. We can only conclude that the different
soluble species of selenium released by FeSe(s) are not associated to the 14C-labelled NOM. If
the FeSe(s) source was not partially oxidized at the beginning, we expected HSe– to be the
dominant species in the percolation water of these two experiments.
The source of Se in the Boom Clay is presently unknown and deserves further study. Recent
measurements on fractionated Boom Clay pyrite samples of different sizes and morphologies
showed that pyrite contains between 12 – 33 ppm of Se (see Table A9.2.2). Another source
for mobile natural Se might be the natural organic matter. It has been reported that Se is often
associated to humic substances. This question also deserves more attention.
Table A9.2.2: Selenium content in different fractions of Boom Clay pyrite.
Size Fraction
(μm)
Shape
(—)
20-32
Framboïds
12.2
32-64
Framboïds
18.1
64-125
Framboïds
29.3
125-500
Aggregates
33.0
>500
Concretions
20.1
>500
Faecal pellets
17.0
285/328
[Se]
(ppm)
A9.3 Electromigration experiments
A9.3.1 Electromigration: experimental setup
For electromigration experiments (more info on the electromigration technique can be found
in Maes et al., 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002 and Beauwens et al., 2005), a clay core of
approximately 10 cm in length is cut in two pieces. An aliquot (100 – 200 µl) of the
radionuclide source is spiked on the surface of the transversal section and the cores are
mounted in a Plexiglas electromigration cell. Electromigration is performed either in normal
laboratory atmosphere or inside a glovebox under anaerobic conditions and with a controlled
Ar/0.4 % CO2 atmosphere. A constant electrical current of 5 – 20 mA is applied with a power
supply between the electrodes for a time period of days up to weeks, and Boom Clay
porewater is used as electrolyte solution. To avoid the development of acid and alkaline fronts
in the clay core due to electrolysis reactions at the electrodes, the Boom Clay porewater is
continuously pumped around to a buffer tank, taking care not to provoke a short-circuit as
illustrated in Fig. A9.3.1. The electrical field in the clay core is continuously monitored.
When the electromigration cell is dismantled, the clay core is cut in 1 mm thick slices which
are then analyzed by radiometry to determine the activity profile of the radionuclide in the
clay after diffusion (see Fig. A9.3.2).
DC power supply
Cathode
-
Anode
+
source position
r
clay core
⊕
ceramic filter
Electromigration cell
Water compartment
Peristaltic
pump
Water compartment
Acid-Base
neutralization
reservoir
Peristaltic
pump
Figure A9.3.1: Schematic principle of the set-up used for electromigration experiments.
286/328
ΔE
-
+
Cathode (–)
Electrolyte
Anode (+)
Clay
Clay
Electrolyte
RN source
[RN]
cation
anion
x
Radionuclide (RN) distribution profile after cutting
Figure A9.3.2: Distribution profile of tracer in the clay core submitted to an electrical field.
A9.3.2 Electromigration experiments with oxidized Se sources (SeO42– and SeO32–)
(Beauwens et al., 2005)
The 75Se stock solution (37.86 MBq, ref. date 17-04-2002), was purchased from Amersham,
in the form of sodium selenite (Na2SeO3, containing about 50 mg dm-3 of non radioactive
selenite as carrier, 3.9 × 10-4 mol dm-3).
Two kinds of experiments were performed: the first one with the untreated diluted stock
solution (EM_SeO3-series, source species: mainly selenite), and the second one with the
diluted and oxidized stock solution (EM_SeO4 series, source species: mainly selenate).
Experiment with selenite: a 20 µl-aliquot of the 75Se stock solution was diluted in 2 000 µl
BCW before its use in electromigration experiment (EM_SeO3/2).
Experiments with selenate: selenate was obtained by a first dilution step of 20 µl of the
selenite stock solution with 36 µl hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, 30 % wt./vol.) and 144 µl of
Milli-Q water. A second 10-fold dilution step in Boom Clay water gave the source solution
used in electromigration experiments EM_SeO4/1, EM_SeO4/6 and EM_SeO4/7. For
experiments EM_SeO4/2 through EM_SeO4/5, the second dilution step consisted in mixing
100 µl of the first dilution with 20 µl of NaOH 0.1 N and 880 µl Boom Clay water.
287/328
After electromigration, each clay core is cut in 1 mm thick slices, whose gamma activity is
counted during 20 minutes in the 60 – 467 keV energy range with a Packard 5250 gamma
counter.
It is clear from the activity profiles of electromigration experiments performed with the
untreated selenite source solution (e.g. EM_SeO3/2, shown on Fig. A9.3.3) that two different
selenium fractions are present in the source (likely due to a mobile and an immobile species),
as they are distinctly separated in the Boom Clay by the electrokinetic processes. After two
days of electromigration only, a small activity peak has moved away from the source position:
we think that this mobile fraction is likely selenate. Most of the 75Se-activity remained at the
source position, originating from the selenite initially present in the spike. If selenate moves,
without undergoing reduction, in a practically unretarded way in the Boom Clay, the
behaviour of selenite remains unclear. Selenite is either sorbed, reduced and precipitated as
elemental selenium (Se0), or precipitated as iron selenide (FeSe). The presence of two
different species in this experiment was a surprise for us, as we purchased a “chemically
pure” selenite source. Selenate has however also been detected in the 75Se-labelled selenite
spike used by Bruggeman et al. (2002). The presence of two different selenium fractions was
also suspected from diffusion profiles in bentonite spiked with selenite (Garcia-Gutiérrez et
al., 2001). Apparently, radiolytic production of free radicals in a stock solution of 75SeO32–
may cause a partial oxidation of selenite to selenate This information was confirmed by
Amersham.
1000.00
activity
(cps/g)
100.00
10.00
cathode
anode
1.00
0.10
D.L.=0.07 cps/g
0.01
-50
-30
-10
10
distance from source (mm)
Figure A9.3.3: Experiment “EM_SeO3/2” with the untreated selenite source
(note the logarithmic scale on the ordinate axis).
288/328
30
50
The identification of the fast moving species as selenate is confirmed by the activity profiles
of electromigration experiments performed with the oxidized selenite sources. As shown on
Fig. A9.3.4 (experiment EM_SeO4/1), after 18 hours of migration, a typical Gaussian
diffusive profile is observed towards the anode. However, some activity remains at the source
position, most likely because oxidation was incomplete for kinetics reasons. If oxidation
occurred in the presence of NaOH, the relative amount of immobile species was even more
pronounced (Fig. A9.3.4, experiment EM_SeO4/3). Apparently, the efficiency of H2O2 to
oxidize selenite to selenate is lower at high pH. Following Yllera De Llano et al. (1996), the
optimal conditions for the oxidation of selenite to selenate by H2O2 are met at neutral pH, and
by bubbling O2 through the solution. In the present experiments, the volume of source
prepared was to small to perform accurate pH- measurements.
Besides the assumption of incomplete selenite oxidation, another explanation could account
for the persistence of some activity at the source position, i.e. that the clay is oxidized, either
at the time of loading of the clay core, or during the experiment itself, thereby creating the
opportunity for selenite to sorb onto newly formed iron oxy-hydroxides. To check the validity
of such assumption, two last experiments were performed in anaerobic conditions (glovebox
with Ar/0.4 % CO2 mixture) with the same selenate source. For experiment EM_SeO4/6, the
oxygen contamination level inside the glovebox remained smaller than 8 ppm throughout the
whole experiment, making it unlikely the formation of iron oxy-hydroxides or to deplete the
reducing capacity of the Boom Clay. The activity profile is also shown on Fig. A9.3.4. As one
can see, only one species is present in the activity profile. While this provides a further
evidence for the absence of selenate reduction in Boom Clay at short time scales, even under
anaerobic conditions, it does not resolve the issue raised by the presence of two species under
ambient air conditions. Nevertheless, as oxygen contamination occurred during the loading of
the second experiment in the glovebox (EM_SeO4/7, up to 400 ppm O2), the possible
formation of iron oxy-hydroxides does not seem to exert an influence on the selenate
behaviour in Boom Clay, at least during the short time scale of the present experiments. We
then conclude that some selenite remained in the source at the time of loading experiments
EM_SeO4/1 to EM_SeO4/5, but was completely oxidized at the start of the two experiments
performed in the glovebox (EM_SeO4/6 and EM_SeO4/7).
289/328
100
activity
(cps/g clay)
90
EM_SeO4/3:163 h - 1mA
80
EM_SeO4/6:76 h - 5mA
EM_SeO4/1: 18 h - 8mA
70
EM_SeO4/7:21 h - 12mA
60
50
40
anode
cathode
30
20
10
0
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
distance from source (mm)
Figure A9.3.4: Experiments with oxidized selenium source: EM_SeO4/1, EM_SeO4/3,
EM_SeO4/6, and EM_SeO4/7. In case of incomplete oxidation an immobile species
subsists beside the mobile one.
By performing a series of electromigration experiments with increasing electric fields, it is
possible to estimate the apparent diffusion coefficient of selenate in the Boom Clay. Two
different methods are used for this purpose, i.e. “curve fitting” or “hydrodynamic
relationship”, and the “Nernst – Einstein” method. More details are given by Maes et al.,
(1999) and Beauwens et al., (2005).
The hydrodynamic relationship is a straightforward method, as both parameters, the apparent
dispersion coefficient (Di) and the apparent velocity (Vapp) are determined for each
electromigration experiment by fitting the measured activity profiles with a Gaussian
equation. The method is based on the linear regression between the apparent dispersion
coefficient Di (sum of advection and diffusion terms) and the apparent electromigration
velocity Vapp, according to equation A9.3.1.
It is generally accepted that Di varies linearly with the advection velocity (Domenico and
Schwartz, 1998), the dispersion length (α) is the linear coefficient. The apparent diffusion
coefficient is extrapolated at zero electric field (as in the nature), and is thus given by the
intercept of the Di - Vapp regression line with the ordinate axis. The value obtained for Dapp of
selenate is 2.2 × 10-11 m2 s-1, as indicated on Fig. A9.3.5.
Di = Dapp + αVapp
(eq. A9.3.1)
290/328
The Nernst-Einstein relationship makes the link between the diffusion coefficient in pure
water and the ionic mobility (Atkins, 1983). To use this relationship in a porous medium,
correction terms are introduced to account for sorption, tortuosity and electro-osmotic effects.
For more details see Maes et al., (1999) and Beauwens et al., (2005).
The modified Nernst-Einstein relationship can be written as:
Dapp =
D0 ⎛
µ ⎞ kT
= ⎜ µapp + eo2 ⎟
2
Rτ
Rτ ⎠ Ze
⎝
(eq. A9.3.2)
Because the electrical double layer of clay minerals is enriched in cations, when a porous
medium such as Boom Clay is submitted to an electric field, the water molecules associated to
the cations present in the electrical double layer also accompany them towards the cathode:
this displacement of water molecules under an electrical field gradient is known under the
name of electro-osmosis. As anionic species move towards the anode under the action of the
electric field, their migration is somehow counteracted by the electro-osmotic flow. The
electro-osmotic mobility must then be added to the apparent mobility calculated from the
activity peak's position in the clay.
As illustrated on Fig. A9.3.6, the “apparent” electromigration mobility (µapp) is given by the
slope of the regression line obtained by plotting the apparent velocity (Vapp) as a function of
the electric field (E) for a series of electromigration experiments. In order to calculate the
“true” electromigration mobility (µem), i.e., in the absence of electro-osmosis, we must add up
µapp and µeo. The value obtained for the slope of the regression line is 2.7 × 10-9 m2 s-1 V-1, so
the “true electromigration velocity” of selenate is here equal to 4.9 × 10-9 m2 s-1 V-1 as for the
electro-osmotic mobility we take the value (2.2 × 10-9 m2 s-1 V-1) previously determined for
tritiated water (HTO) by electromigration experiments in Boom Clay (Maes et al., 1999).
Note that in equation A9.3.2 we assume that both HTO and selenate are unretarded, i.e. R = 1.
The apparent diffusion coefficient is then obtained by the Nernst-Einstein relationship given
above. The value calculated by this method for Dapp is 6.2 × 10-11 m2 s-1, about three times
higher than the value obtained with the hydrodynamic relationship. This is perhaps a
consequence of the systematic correction term introduced for electro-osmosis. To overcome
sampling variations inherent to the clay core itself, the electro-osmotic mobility should ideally
be determined for each experiment by adding tritiated water to the source. It is also difficult to
assert beforehand that both tracers (75Se and HTO) will always remain inside the clay core
during the whole duration of the experiment and will never migrate into the reservoirs
containing the electrolyte in which the electrodes are immersed. If a tracer comes out of the
core and finally reaches one of the two electrolyte reservoirs, because of the continuous
pumping made to neutralize the two compartments, it will inevitably re-enter the clay core
291/328
from the other side giving rise to some unexpected and very confusing migration pattern.
Another point is that selenate could perhaps be slightly retarded, but here we assumed R = 1
for conservative reasons.
The values of Di and Vapp calculated by the two methods for each experiment apart are also
given in Table A9.3.1. To do so, we used the previously published values for electro-osmotic
mobility and dispersion length (Maes et al., 1999). Averaging over all experiments yields Dapp
= 6.6 ± 1.8 × 10-11 m2 s-1 with the Nernst-Einstein method and Dapp = 4.8 ± 2.0 × 10-11 m2 s-1
with the hydrodynamic relationship method (see Table A9.3.1).
However the best way to derive a consistent Dapp is the method based on the linear regression
between the apparent dispersion coefficient Di (sum of advection and diffusion terms) and the
apparent electromigration velocity Vapp, according to equation A9.3.1. The apparent diffusion
coefficient is extrapolated at zero electric field (as in the nature), and is thus given by the
intercept of the Di - Vapp regression line with the ordinate axis. The value obtained for Dapp of
selenate is 2.2 × 10-11 m2 s-1, as indicated on Fig. A9.3.5.
1.3E-10
Di
(m/s²)
1.0E-10
7.5E-11
-4
5.0E-11
y = 2.08×10 Vapp+ 2.19×10
-11
2
R = 0.847
2.5E-11
0.0E+00
0.00E+00
1.00E-07
2.00E-07
3.00E-07
4.00E-07
5.00E-07
Vapp (m/s)
Figure A9.3.5: Estimation of the diffusion coefficient of selenate from the hydrodynamic
relationship between the dispersion coefficient and the apparent advection velocity.
Experiments EM_SeO3/2 (black square) and EM_SeO4/1 through EM_SeO4/7 (empty
squares).
292/328
Vapp
(m/s)
5.0E-07
4.0E-07
3.0E-07
-9
Vapp = 2.68 x 10 E
2.0E-07
2
r = 0.874
1.0E-07
0.0E+00
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Electric field (V/m)
Figure A9.3.6: Estimation of the electromigration mobility of selenate in Boom Clay from
the relationship between advection velocity and electric field for experiments EM_SeO3/2
(black triangle) and EM_SeO4/1 to EM_SeO4/7 (grey squares).
293/328
Table A9.3.1: Experimental parameters and results of electromigration experiments made with selenite and selenate.
Experiment
Source
Atmosphere
I
Immobile/Mobile Migration Electric
Di
Code
Used
Composition
Se fractions
Time
Field
× 10-11
(—)
(—)
(—)
(mA)
(%)
(hours)
(V m-1) (m² s-1)
Vapp
× 10-7
(m s-1)
Dapp (c)
× 10-11
(m² s-1)
Dapp (d)
× 10-11
(m s-1)
EM_SeO3/2
selenite
Ambient air
8
93 – 7
47
74
6.9
1.5
5.3
1.5
EM_SeO4/1(a)
selenate
Ambient air
8
27 – 73
18
26
5.7
1.7
11.0
1.7
EM_SeO4/2(b)
selenate
Ambient air
8
69 – 31
21
67
4.8
1.6
6.0
1.
EM_SeO4/3(b)
selenate
Ambient air
1.2
69 – 31
163
11.5
3.8
0.3
5.6
0.26
EM_SeO4/4(b)
selenate
Ambient air
20
70 – 30
25
161
11.2
4.1
6.0
4.1
EM_SeO4/5(b)
selenate
Ambient air
15
57 – 43
24
123
10.2
3.7
6.6
3.7
EM_SeO4/6(a)
selenate
99.6 % Ar – 0.4 % CO2
5
0 – 100
76
45
3.0
1.3
6.4
1.3
EM_SeO4/7(a)
selenate
99.6 % Ar – 0.4 % CO2
12
0 – 100
21
97
6.8
2.6
6.2
2.6
6.6 ± 1.8
N-E
4.8 ± 2.0
H-R
Average ± std deviation
(a): selenite oxidized without NaOH addition (see text).
(b): selenite oxidized with NaOH addition (see text).
(c): apparent diffusion coefficient calculated for each experiment apart using the Nernst-Einstein (N-E) method (equation A9.3.2), where µeo/Rτ² = 2.2 × 10-9, and T = 298 K).
(d): apparent diffusion coefficient calculated for each experiment apart by the hydrodynamic relationship (H-R) method, but using α = 8.47×10-5 m, as given by (Maes et al., 1999).
N-E: Nernst-Einstein relationship.
H-R: Hydrodynamic relationship.
.
294/328
A9.3.3 Electromigration experiments with 75SeO3 – Boom Clay slurries
The aqueous Se species in equilibrium with Boom Clay is expected to be selenide (HSe–),
whose concentration should be controlled by the solubility of solid phases such as FeSe2 or Se
metal. These solids have a very low solubility in reducing conditions: 2 × 10-9 mol dm-3 for
FeSe2 and 3 to 8 × 10-7 mol dm-3 for Se(0) according to Maes et al., (2003). Batch
experiments with selenite in Boom Clay slurries have shown that selenite undergoes a
sorption/reduction process in contact with Boom Clay (Maes et al., 2003), while selenate
remains in solution.
In order to assess the behaviour of selenite in equilibrium with Boom Clay by
electromigration, a slurry was prepared in a controlled atmosphere (99.6 % Ar, 0.4 % CO2) by
mixing 1.6 ml of 75Se stock solution (selenite) (composition previously given) in Boom Clay
porewater with 2 g of fresh Boom Clay and 8.4 ml of Boom Clay porewater (solid-to-liquid
ratio = 1/5) in a 15 ml Nalgene tube. The tube was left in the glovebox during one month
under constant agitation. To get rid of selenate trace impurities present in the stock solution,
the slurry was centrifuged (at 21 255 g during 30 min, T = 4 °C). The containing selenate
supernatant was eliminated and the solid centrifugation slug was washed twice with Boom
Clay porewater. The clay paste was then resuspended with 2 ml of Boom Clay porewater and
the slurry formed was loaded in between two half clay cores, held in the middle of a 2 mm
thick Teflon ring to avoid any slurry loss during the loading of the migration cell.
Two electromigration experiments were performed with the slurry as 75Se source. The
experimental parameters are listed in Table A9.3.2, and the activity profiles of both
experiments are shown on Fig. A9.3.7. As observed from these profiles, the main activity
remains at the source position, we assume that selenite undergoes some kind of sorption
followed by a reduction-precipitation process. The activity profile, more developed in the
anode direction, indicates the gradual release of selenium, either by desorption of selenite,
followed by sorption to the next sorbing sites, or by a solubility-limited release of selenide. If
we assume that the solid phase controlling the selenium solubility is crystalline elemental
selenium (Se(c)), it can however be calculated that the concentration of selenide in equilibrium
with a redox potential of -350 mV (SHE) at a pH of 8.2 (Boom Clay in situ conditions) is as
low as 10-14 mol dm-3. However, to detect such a low Se concentration, it is necessary to work
with carrier-free 75Se produced in a cyclotron beam by a (p, n) nuclear reaction on a 75As
target.
These experiments also demonstrate that no selenate is formed due to oxidation, despite the
fact that these experiments took place in ambient atmosphere and lasted for relatively long
times (see Table A9.3.2). The number of porewater renewal, i.e., the number of times water
295/328
moved by electro-osmosis through the whole length of each of the clay cores is given in
Table A9.3.2 for indication.
Table A9.3.2: Number of porewater renewal in electromigration tests with 75SeO3 – Boom Clay slurries.
Loaded
I
E
Experiment
Time
Recovery
Porewater
75
Se activity
-1
(mA)
(V m )
Code #
(hours)
(%)
Renewal
(cps g-1)
EM_SeO3/5_BCS
647
8
60 ± 6
452
94
3.4
EM_SeO3/6_BCS
729
8
68 ± 5
675
85
4.7
1000
activity
(cps/g clay)
100
10
cathode
anode
1
0.1
0.01
0.001
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
distance from source (mm)
Figure A9.3.7: Activity profiles of electromigration experiments loaded with Boom Clay
slurries spiked with 75SeO32–. The experiments shown are respectively EM_SeO3/5_BCS
(grey circles) and EM_SeO3/6_BCS (black squares). The dotted line represents the
detection limit (0.06 cps g-1).
296/328
A10. Redox disequilibrium and reluctance of sulfate
for reduction in deep clay formations
297/328
298/328
A10 Redox disequilibrium and reluctance of sulfate for reduction in deep
clay formations
Under reducing conditions, at ambient temperature and in the absence of catalyst, or bacterial
enzymatic activity, selenate is reluctant to reduction. In natural conditions, it is also often the
case for the highest valence species of other common elements (e.g., carbonate, phosphate,
arsenate, sulfate, perchlorate, …), because of the multiple electron transfers needed in the
reduction reaction. Under in situ conditions prevailing in Boom Clay, the selenate reduction is
uncertain due to kinetic limitations. Another reason could be that electron donors are present
in insufficient quantity in the system, not enough accessible, too less reactive, or have been
consumed by oxidation reactions and water radiolysis (or other repository-induced
perturbations).
A well known case of redox disequilibrium is the persistence of sulfate often observed in deep
reducing sediments. Under strongly reducing conditions prevailing in Boom Clay, sulfur is
expected to be present as HS– aqueous species in equilibrium with FeS2 (pyrite) at a solubility
of about 10-8 to 10-7 mol L–1. However, SO42– is detected in “undisturbed” Boom Clay
porewater at the Mol site at higher concentration, typically of the order of 1 mg L-1
(10-5 mol L-1) or more, i.e., two to three orders of magnitude above the expected sulfide
concentration. Although this might be due to traces of sulfate produced by pyrite oxidation, a
process virtually impossible to totally prevent during clay sampling and borehole drilling even
under inert atmosphere, it could also reflect the true residual sulfate concentration present in
the Boom Clay porewater. Because of the high content of Boom Clay sediments in natural
organic matter (NOM), sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) active at the sedimentation time (30 –
35 Ma) in the poorly consolidated clay below the seabed might have been able to transform
most of the sulfate contained in the seawater into sulfide precipitated with Fe2+ as pyrite, but
some sulfate might have also subsisted. At the beginning of the Quaternary era (2 Ma),
hydrochemical changes from marine to fluviatile conditions have freshen the surrounding
aquifers (Mazurek et al., 2008a,b; 2009). As a consequence most of seawater salts (mainly Cl–
and SO42–) have diffused out of the clay formation in the fresh aquifers recharged by
meteoritic water, leading to the low sulfate concentration observed today. However, elevated
concentration of dissolved sulfate have been entrapped from sea water in other deep clay
formations studied for radioactive waste disposal in Switzerland and in France. Higher
concentration of sulfate have been measured in the Opalinus Clay (OPA) at Mont Terri Hard
Rock Laboratory and in the Callovo-Oxfordian Clay (COx) at the Bure underground research
laboratory.
In the porewater of well preserved undisturbed OPA Clay (half-diluted seawater, ~ 0.3 M Cl-),
the observed SO42– to Cl– concentration ratio is still this of seawater (Pearson et al., 2003;
299/328
De Cannière et al., 2008). In the COx Clay, due to diagenesis processes, sulfate concentration
is now also determined by the solubility of celestite (SrSO4) (Gaucher et al., 2006). The
presence of sulfate in ancient porewater of OPA Clay (180 Ma) and COx Clay (155 Ma) is a
natural evidence that a fraction of sulfate can resist to reduction over geological time period
and that hexavalent sulfur, S(VI), can still be present today and coexist with pyrite under
strongly reducing conditions at depth. Another explanation, not incompatible with redox
disequilibrium, is that an insufficient quantity of electron donor presently subsists in the
system to completely reduce the sulfate inventory initially available in seawater.
Considering the chemical similarities between selenate and sulfate for their recalcitrance to
reduction, we have thus to conclude that selenate could also subsist in deep geological
formations under reducing conditions.
300/328
A11. Behaviour of redox-sensitive elements in a
nitrate plume associated with bituminized
MLW – The selenium case study
301/328
302/328
A11 Behaviour of redox-sensitive elements in a nitrate plume associated
with bituminized MLW – The selenium case study
Oxidation and mobilization of selenium by nitrate is a known problem in irrigation drainage
in Western US. Selenium (Se) can be oxidized by nitrate from irrigation on Cretaceous
marine shale in the Western Colorado (Wright, 1999). Dissolved Se concentrations are
positively correlated with dissolved NO3– concentrations in surface water and ground water
samples from irrigated areas. Redox conditions dominate in the mobilisation of Se in marine
shale hydrogeological settings: dissolved Se concentrations increase with increasing Eh.
Negative (i.e., favourable) ΔG (delta Gibbs free energies) values for the oxidation of Se by
NO3– are obtained from theoretical calculations, indicating that NO3– can act as an electron
acceptor for the oxidation of Se. Wright (1999) observed in laboratory batch experiments with
shale suspensions under anaerobic conditions, in O2-free water, an increase of Se
concentrations over time with increased NO3– concentrations.
Concomitantly, Steinberg et al., (1992) and Oremland et al., (1999) have also observed that
selenate can resist to microbial reduction in the presence of sufficiently high nitrate
concentrations. With both ions present, nitrate reduction precedes selenate reduction. The
presence of nitrate precludes the microbial reduction of selenate. Stock cultures of denitrifiers
grow anaerobically on nitrate but not on selenate.
Nitrates are also commonly injected in oil fields for preventing sulfato-reduction by SRB
bacteria and subsequent oil souring (H2S in petroleum) leading to oil degradation and severe
corrosion-related problems in oil wells and transport pipelines.
These multiple evidences and independent lines of reasoning suggest that selenide could be
oxidized or selenate be reluctant to reduction in Boom Clay affected by a nitrate plume
released by the bituminized MLW (Eurobitum). Therefore, only the migration of the more
mobile selenate species should be taken into account for safety calculations dealing with the
disposal of Eurobitum MLW.
Specific batch and diffusion experiments with selenate and selenide in the presence of nitrate
have thus to be performed to assess the compatibility of Eurobitum waste with Boom Clay.
This topic is also presently being addressed in France by Andra (Achim Albrecht, personal
communication) and discussed at the Mont Terri Rock Laboratory (Switzerland) in the frame
of the Bitumen Nitrate (BN) experiment.
303/328
304/328
A12.
305/328
List of Abbreviations
306/328
A12 List of Abbreviations
(am.)
(cr.)
(el.)
(met.)
“as is”
< d.l.
14
C-OM
A
a.m.u.
a.o.
AAS
AC
ADE
ADM
ADS
Adduct
AEA
AEAT
AECL
AES
AFM
AFS
AHA
aka
AMD
AMS
Andra
AOM
Aq-SS
ASIN
ASR
ASV
ATR
amorphous solid phase
crystalline solid phase
elemental solid phase
metallic solid phase
as such, as supplied, untreated
below detection limit
14
C-labelled Organic Matter
atomic mass number; A = 79 for selenium
atomic mass unit
amongst other
Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry
Anion Chromatography
Alternate Current
Advection Dispersion Equation
Advection Dispersion Model
Accelerator Driven System
Addition product
Atomic Energy Agency (Harwell, UK)
AEA Technology, Ltd. (Harwell, UK)
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Atomic Emission Spectrophotometry,
Auger Electron Spectroscopy, or;
Altered Evolution Scenario (see also NES and EES)
Atomic Force Microscopy
Atomic Fluorescence Spectrophotometry
Aldrich Humic Acid
also known as
Acid Mine Drainage
Accelerator Mass Spectrometry
Agence Nationale pour la gestion des Déchets Radioactifs (France)
Amorphous Organic Matter
Aqueous – Solid Solution
Amazon Standard Identification Number
Alkali Silica Reaction
Anodic Stripping Voltammetry
Attenuated Total Reflectance
307/328
ATR-IR
ATR-FTIR
ATSDR
AVS
B&B
BC
BCE
BCF
BCHA
BCK
BCOM
BCW
BE
BGR
BGS
b.l.d
BLG
BNL
Bq
BRGM
BSEM
C2
C3
C4
ca
CA
CAM
CAS
CCM
Attenuated Total Reflectance – Infrared Spectroscopy
Attenuated Total Reflectance – Fourier Transformed InfraRed
Spectroscopy
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (US):
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html
Acid Volatile Sulfide
Baeyens and Bradbury
Boom Clay
Boom Clay Extract: organic matter extracted from Boom Clay with
synthetic Boom Clay water
Boom Clay Formation
Biosphere Conversion Factor
Boom Clay Humic Acid
Boom Clay Kerogen
Boom Clay Organic Matter
Boom Clay Water = porewater = interstitial water
Best Estimate
Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe (Deutschland)
Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (Germany)
British Geological Survey
Below limit of detection
Belgian open international report published by SCK•CEN
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Becquerel = 1 disintegration per second
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (Orléans, France)
Back Scattering Scanning Electron Microscope (images)
Repository System Safety Function C2: Confinement;
water tightness of waste package and overpack
Code used in the SCK•CEN migration laboratory to name a pure diffusion
experiment with a radioactive source between two back-to-back clay
cores
Code used in the SCK•CEN migration laboratory to name a percolation
experiment with a radioactive source between two back-to-back clay
cores
circa, approximately, around, about
Component Additivity
Component Additive Method (bottom up approach)
Chemical Abstract Service
Constant Capacitance Model
308/328
CD
CDB
CE
CEA
CEC
Cedra
Ci
CIG
CNRS
CRIEPI
CSC
CSIC
cpm
cps
CSH
D2
Da
DAMRI
DC
DCF
DDLM
DIC
DL
DLM
DMDS
DMS
DOC
DoE
DOI
DOM
DR
DRIFT
Charge Distribution
Citrate-Dithionite-Bicarbonate Fe(III) extraction buffer
Capillary Electrophoresis
Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (Paris, Fr)
Cation Exchange Capacity
Société coopérative nationale pour l’entreposage de déchets radioactifs
(Suisse)
Curie = 3.7 × 1010 Bq = activity of 1 g radium
Centre d’Informatique Géologique
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France)
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (Japan)
Conditional Stability Constant
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
National Research Council of Spain
Count Per Minute
Count Per Second
Calcium Silicate Hydrate
Code used in the SCK•CEN migration laboratory to name a percolation
experiment with a radioactive source injected as a pulse
Dalton (atomic mass unit)
Département des Applications et de la Métrologie des Rayonnements
Ionisants (CEA, Direction des Technologies Avancées)
Direct Current
Data Collection Forms
Diffuse Double Layer Model
Dissolved Inorganic Carbon
Double Layer
Double Layer Model
DiMethyl-DiSelenide
DiMethyl-Selenide
Dissolved Organic Carbon
US Department of Energy, or;
US Department of Environment
Digital Object Identifier: persistent identification number used by
scientific publishers to univocally identify an electronic publication
http://dx.doi.org/doi:number
Dissolved Organic Matter
Diffuse Reflectance
Diffuse Reflectance Infrared Fourier Transformed spectroscopy
309/328
DS
DSC
DTA
E
e.g.
EBS
EC
EC 5thFP
ed.
EDAX
EDL
eds.
EDS
EDX
EDZ
EdZ
EES
EFZ
EG-BS
Eh
EIA
EM
EMP
ENRESA
EPA
EPR
eq.
ER
ESR
ESRF
ETLM
Design Specification;
Data Set
Differential Scanning Calorimetry
Differential Thermal Analysis
Electrical field
ex gratia, for example
Engineered Barrier System
European Commission;
Electrical Conductivity;
Electronic Capture, e– capture
European Commission fifth Framework Program
Editor
Energy Dispersive X-ray Analysis
Electrical Double Layer
Editors
Energy Dispersive x-ray Spectrometry
Energy Dispersive X-ray
Excavation Damaged Zone
Excavation disturbed Zone
Expected Evolution Scenario (see also NES and AES)
Excavation Failed Zone
Piezometer installed at Extension Gallery – Bottom Shaft
redox potential measured with respect to Standard Hydrogen Electrode
Environmental Impact Assessment
Electro-Migration
Ecole des Mines de Paris
Empresa Nacional de Residuos Radiactivos (Spain);
Spanish radioactive waste management company
Environmental Protection Agency
Exchangeable Potassium Ratio;
Electron Paramagnetic Resonance;
European Pressurised Reactor
Equation
Expert Range;
External Report published by SCK•CEN
Exchangeable Sodium Ratio;
Electron Spin Resonance
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (located in Grenoble, France)
Extended Triple Layer Model
310/328
ETV
ETV-ICP/MS
et al.
EVEREST
EXAFS
FA
FANC
FAO
FAP’s
FBR
FEMS
FEP’s
FES
FeSe
FeSe2
FF
Fig.
FNRS
FoCa
FP
F-T
FTIR
FZK
g
GC
GC-MS
GCA
GDWQ
GEM
gen. nov.
GF
GPC
GRS
GSH-Px
Electro-Thermal Vaporisation
Electro-Thermal Vaporisation coupled with Inductively Coupled Plasma
Mass Spectrometry
et alii: and co-workers
EVEREST Project: Sensitivity Analysis of Geological Disposal Systems
Extended X-ray Absorption Fine Structure Spectroscopy
Fulvic Acids
Federal Agency of Nuclear Control (in Belgium)
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Fission and Activation Products
Fast Breeder Reactor
Federation of European Microbiological Societies
Features, Events, and Processes
Frayed Edge Sites
Achavalite
Ferroselite
Far Field
Figure
Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique (Belgique)
FoCa Clay from the Fourge Cahaine quarry in France
Fission Products, or;
European Framework Program (e.g., 5th FP, or FP-5)
Flow-Through
Fourier Transform Infra Red spectroscopy
ForschungsZentrum Karlsruhe GmbH
Gravitational acceleration (g = 9.81 m s-2)
Gas Chromatography
Generalised Composite
Gas Chromatography – Mass Spectrometry
Generalized Composite Approach (top down approach)
Guidelines for drinking-water quality
Gibbs Energy Minimization
Genus nova: new genus (microbiology)
Graphite Furnace
Gel Permeation Chromatography
Gesellschaft für Anlagen- und Reaktorsicherheit GmbH (Deutschland)
Institute for the safety of nuclear reactor (Germany)
selenium-Glutathione peroxidase: antioxidant enzyme protecting the
phospholipids membrane of living cells against peroxides free radicals
311/328
GSL
GTA
GTS
GWB
HA
HATCHES
HFO
HG
HLW
HPLC
HR
H-R
HR-ICP-MS
HRL
HS
HS–
HSAB
HTO
HTR
I
IAP
ID
i.e.
I/S
IAEA
IC
ICP
ICP-AES
ICP-OES
ICP-MS
ICRP
INAA
INRA
IRF
IRMM
IS
Galson Sciences Ltd.
Groupe de Travail Architecture
Grimsel Test Site
The Geochemist’s Workbench (geochemical code)
Humic Acids
Harwell thermodynamic database used by AEA Technology
Hydrous Ferric Oxide
Hydride Generation
High Level Waste
High Performance Liquid Chromatography
High Resolution
Hydrodynamic Relationship
High Resolution Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
Hard Rock Laboratory (Aspö)
Humic Substances (not recommended in sulfide-containing systems
because very confusing with HS–, Hydrogeno-Sulphide, bisulphide). Use
better HA or OM instead of HS.
Hydrogeno-Sulphide, bisulphide
Hard and Soft (Lewis) Acids and Bases (principle)
Tritiated water
High Temperature Reactor
Current
Ion Activity Product
Inner Diameter
id est
Illite/Smectite (interstratified Mixed Layer, ML)
International Atomic Energy Agency (Vienna, Au)
Ion Chromatography
Inductively-Coupled Plasma
Inductively-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrophotometry
Inductively-Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrophotometry
Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
International Commission of Radio-Protection
Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis
Institut National pour la Recherche Agronomique (France)
Instant Released Fraction (gap inventory in spent fuel)
Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements
Ionic Strength
Interstratified Illite/Smectite
312/328
ISBN
ISSN
ISO
ISO/CD
ITU
IUPAC
JAEA
JNC
JRC
K
KAPL
KBD
KD
Kd
Ks
KULeuven
L
LC
LC-MS
LDH
LFER
LIBS
LIPS
LILW
LLNL
LLW
LNHB
LoD
L/S
LSC
LTE
LU
Inner-Sphere (complex)
International Standard Book Number
International Standard Series Number
International Standard Organisation
ISO Committee Draft
European Institute for Transuranium elements (Karlsruhe, Germany)
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (ex JNC, ex PNC)
Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute
Joint Research Centre
Equilibrium constant (log K)
Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL Inc.)
Kashin-Beck Disease
(endemic osteoarthropathy due to deficiency in selenium in China)
Keshan Disease
(endemic cardiomyopathy due to deficiency in selenium in China)
Distribution coefficient, assuming linear and reversible equilibrium
between solid and solution phases (see also Rd)
Equilibrium constant
Katholieke Universiteit van Leuven
Liquid;
Litre (dm3)
Liquid Chromatography
Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
Layer Double Hydroxide;
synonym: MDL, Mixed Double Layer
Linear Free-Energy Relationship
Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy
Laser Induced Plasma Spectrometry
Low and Intermediate Level Waste
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Low Level Waste
Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel (CEA, France)
Limit of Detection;
Level of Detection
Liquid-to-Solid ratio (see also S/L)
Liquid Scintillation Counting
Long Term Evolution
Loughborough University
313/328
LWR
M/L
M2
MALDI
TOF MS
MAS
MC-ICP-MS
MDL
MICOF
MLW
MMA
NMR
MOX
MRS
MS
MTP
MUSIC
MW
MWCO
NAA
n.a.
Nagra
Nagra
n.d.
NDA
n.d.a
n.f.
n.m.
Light Water Reactor
Mixed Layer (interstratified Illite/Smectite Mixed Layer)
e.g. hydrotalcite (Mg2+ /Al3+); or green rust (Fe2+ /Fe3+)
Praclay M2 Mixture: 65 % FoCa clay + 30 % sand + 5 % graphite
Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization
Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry
Magic Angle Spinning (see NMR)
Multiple Collection Inductively-Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
Mixed Double Layer (interstratified Illite/Smectite Mixed Layer)
e.g. hydrotalcite (Mg2+ /Al3+); or green rust (Fe2+ /Fe3+)
synonym: LDH, Layer Double Hydroxide
Migration Code in Fortran (with analytical solutions developed by Martin
J. Put at SCK•CEN; collection of several programs used in the Migration
team to fit data from migration experiments)
Medium Level Waste
Museum for Middle Africa, Tervuren, Belgium
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
(PuO2/UO2) Mixed OXide based nuclear fuel
Materials Research Society
Mass Spectrometry
Mont Terri Project
MUltiple SIte Complexation
Molecular Weight
Molecular Weight Cut-Off
Neutron Activation Analysis
not analysed, or,
not accounted for
National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Switzerland)
Société coopérative nationale pour l’entreposage de déchets radioactifs
(Suisse)
Nationale Genossenschaft für die Lagerung radioaktiver Abfälle
(Schweiz)
not detected, or,
not determined ?
very ambiguous abbreviation if not clearly defined in its own context !
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
non destructive analysis
not filtered
not measured
314/328
NDS
N-E
NES
NAS
NBS
NDA
NEA
NERC
NES
NF
NIH
NIRAS
NIREX
NIROND
NIST
NMWCO
NNDC
NOM
NPP
NRC
NTB
NuDat
OD
ODS
OECD
OES
OM
OMS
ONDRAF
Nuclear Data Sheet
Nernst-Einstein relationship
Normal Evolution Scenario (see also EES and AES)
National Academy of Sciences, or,
Natural Analogue Studies
National Bureau of Standard
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (UK)
non destructive analysis
Nuclear Energy Agency (Paris, Fr)
National Environment Research Council (UK)
Natural Evolution Scenario
Near Field
National Institutes of Health (US)
Nationale Instelling voor Radioactief Afval en Verrijkte Splijtstoffen
(België)
Belgian agency for radioactive waste and enriched fissile materials
Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive (United Kingdom)
NIRAS/ONDRAF
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Nominal Molecular Weight Cut-off
US National Nuclear Data Center
Natural Organic Matter
Nuclear Power Plant
National Research Council of Canada
Nagra Technischer Berichte
NuDat 2.1 Nuclear Database from the US National Nuclear Data Center
(NNDC), Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL)URL:
http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2, as seen on 02-Feb-2005.
Optical Density;
Outer Diameter
Office of Dietary Supplements (US):
http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Selenium_pf.asp
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (Paris, Fr)
Optical Emission Spectrophotometry
Organic Matter
Organisation Mondiale de la Santé
Organisme National des Déchets Radio-Actifs et des matières Fissiles
enrichie (Belgique)
Belgian agency for radioactive waste and enriched fissile materials
315/328
OPG
ORNL
ORP
OS
OSHA
OSTI
P
PA
PACOMA
PAGIS
PAR
PDF
pE
PEC
PEEK
PES
PD
pH
PHREEQC
PI
PIXE
pKa
POC
PORFLOW
POSIVA
pp.
PSI
P&T
PWR
PXAMS
Py
Py-GC-MS
PZC
PZNPC
Ontario Power Generation
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oxidation-Reduction Potential
Outer-Sphere (complex)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (US)
US Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Pressure
Performance Assessment
Performance Assessment of the Geological Disposal of Medium-level and
Alpha waste in a clay formation in Belgium
Performance Assessment of Geological Isolation Systems
Potassium Adsorption Ratio
Probability Density Function;
Portable Document Format (Adobe)
-log [e–] = (F × Eh ) / 2.3 RT
Proton Exchange capacity
Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone
Poly-Ether-Sulfone
Pure Diffusion experiment
(i.e., without advection due to a hydraulic gradient)
-log [H+] = potential of hydrogen, hydrogen pondii
pH Redox Equilibrium-C code
Principal Investigator
Proton Induced X-ray Emission
-log Ka = -log [equilibrium constant]
Particulate Organic Carbon
Numerical transport code developed by Runchal (Acri, California). Code
used by the Performance Assessment team for the safety studies)
Finnish radioactive waste management company
Organization responsible for radioactive waste management in Finland
pages
Paul Scherrer Institute (Switzerland)
Partitioning and Transmutation
Pressurised Water Reactor
Projectile X-ray Accelerator Mass Spectrometry
Pyrolysis
Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography – Mass Spectrometry
Point of Zero Charge
Point of Zero Net Proton Charge
316/328
PZSE
Q
R
R2
RBCW
RCW
Rd
R&D
RDD
REV
RIC
RIS
RN
RP
RSF
S
S/C
S/L
SA
SA/V
SAFIR 2
SAR
SBCW
SC
SCE
SCK•CEN
SCM
SCN
SCW
Point of Zero Salt Effect
quantity
Retardation factor;
R-####: Restricted report number
Repository System Safety Function R2: geological barrier;
Retention of radionuclide and spread in time
Real Boom Clay Water = Boom Clay porewater
Real Clay Water (with organic matter)
Distribution coefficient, not assuming equilibrium between solid and
solution phases (see also Kd)
Research and Development
Research, Development and Demonstration
Representative Elementary Volume
Real Interstitial Clay Water
Research Information System (citation format for Refman and ProCite)
Radionuclides
Research Plan
Radial Structure Functions
(terminology used for XANES and EXAFS spectroscopy)
atomic symbol of the sulfur element
(z = 16; A = 32), or also;
Solubility;
Solid
Sulfur-to-Carbon ratio
Solid-to-Liquid ratio (see also L/S)
Surface Area, Specific Area;
Safety Assessment
Surface Area / Volume
Safety Assessment and Feasibility Interim Report 2
Sodium Adsorption Ratio;
Semi-Annual Report
Synthetic Boom Clay Water = artificial preparation according a recipe
(without organic matter)
Super Container;
Surface Complexation
Saturated Calomel Electrode
StudieCentrum voor Kernenergie – Centre d’Etude de l’énergie Nucléaire
Surface Complexation Modelling
Thiocyanate
Synthetic Clay Water (without organic matter)
317/328
SD
Se
SEC
SEM
SEP
SF
SFC
SHE
SI
SIC
SMEP
SKB
SKI
SM
sp. nov.
SPA
SPA+
SR
SRB
SRM
SSRL
STG
SXRF
T
TD
TDB
TDS
TGA
TIC
TIMS
TLM
TN
TOC
TOF-MS
TR
Standard Deviation
atomic symbol of the selenium element (z = 34; A = 79)
Size Exclusion Chromatography
Scanning Electron Microscope
Solid Extraction Phase
Spent Fuel
Safety and Feasibility Case
Standard Hydrogen Electrode
Saturation Index = log (Q/K);
Système International d’unité, International unit System
Synthetic Interstitial Clay Water
Solid Micro-Extraction Phase
Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB
Swedish Institute for the management of spent fuel
Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate
Standard Methods
Species nova: new species (microbiology)
Spent fuel Performance Assessment (European Project)
Spent fuel Performance Assessment Plus
(SPA report updated for ONDRAF/NIRAS)
Synchrotron Radiation;
Source Range
Sulfato-Reducing Bacteria
Standard Reference Material
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Science and Technology Group
Synchrotron X-Ray Fluorescence
Temperature
Through-Diffusion
Thermodynamic DataBase
Total Dissolved Solids, or Total Dissolved Salts
Thermo-Gravimetric Analysis
Total Inorganic Carbon
Thermal Ionisation Mass Spectrometry
Triple Layer Model, see also ETLM
Technical Note
Total Organic Carbon
Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry
Technical Report
318/328
TRANCOM
TRIS
TROM
TRU
TSM
TTK
UA
UF
u.f.
UK
UKAEA
UNO
UOX-55
URF
URL
UPD90
US
USA
USGS
UV
Vis
VITO
VOC
vs
VTT
WAC
WHO
WP
XAFS
XANES
XAS
XRD
XRF
XSW
TRANsport of radionuclides by Complexation with Organic Matter.
European project: phase 1: 4th FP; phase 2: 5th FP.
tris(hydroxymethyl)methylamine, or;
tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane;
TRIS buffer
TRancom Organic Matter
(concentrated batch of OM used for labelling with 14C)
TRansUranic Waste
Thermodynamic Sorption Model
(Millipore ultrafilter unit code number)
University of Antwerp
Ultra Filtration
ultra-filtered
United Kingdom
UK Atomic Energy Authority
United Nation Organisation (New York, USA)
UO2 uranium oxide based nuclear fuel with a burn-up of 55 MW d/tHM
Underground Research Facility
1. Underground Research Laboratory
2. Uniform Resource Locator: web address on the internet
Updating 1990, BLG-634 Report (Marivoet J., 1991)
United State
United State of America
United State Geological Survey
Ultra-Violet
Visible
Vlaamse Instelling voor Technologische Onderzoek (Mol, Belgium)
Volatile Organic Carbon
versus
Technical Research Centre of Finland
Waste Acceptance Criteria
World Health Organisation of the United Nations
Work Package
X-ray Absorption Fine Structure
X-ray Absorption Near Edge Spectroscopy
X-ray Absorption Spectroscopy
X-ray Diffraction
X-ray Fluorescence
X-ray Standing Wave
319/328
YMP
z
zpc
ZVI
Yucca Mountain Project
atomic number = number of proton = number of electron in an atom;
z = 34 for selenium
zero point of charge
Zero-Valent-Iron: metallic Fe, Fe0
320/328
A13.
321/328
List of Symbols
322/328
A13 List of Symbols
α
μ
dispersion length
η
μapp
ρd
μeo
apparent electro-mobility
A
C
C(site)
Caq
Cbulk
Csor
D0
Dapp
Daq
Deff
Di
Dp
G
K
Ka
Kd
Kh
Ks
Kv
R
Rd
electro-mobility, or;
microdiffusion accessible porosity of the species in the porous medium
dry density of the porous material
electro-osmotic mobility
activity (Bq)
concentration of the considered species in the water accessible by
diffusion
concentration of uncomplexed sorption sites
concentration of aqueous selenium (aqua: dissolved in water)
concentration in the bulk of the porous material
concentration of selenium associated with the solid
molecular diffusion coefficient
apparent diffusion coefficient obtained after fitting of data from diffusion
experiments
molecular diffusion coefficient of the species in pure water at 25 °C.
effective diffusion coefficient determining the flux of the species across a
section. Deff = ηRDapp
apparent dispersion coefficient
pore diffusion coefficient of the species, diffusion coefficient of the
species in the porous medium
geometrical factor G = 1/Rf : inverse of the rock factor, or formation
factor
hydraulic conductivity
association equilibrium constant
linear distribution coefficient (dm3 kg-1 = 1 L/kg = 1 ml/g)
hydraulic conductivity in the horizontal direction (parallel to bedding)
stability constant for dissolution / precipitation equilibrium;
dissolution constant
hydraulic conductivity in the vertical direction (perpendicular to bedding)
retardation factor of the species in the porous medium. R = water velocity
/ species velocity
distribution ratio: non linear distribution coefficient
(dm3 kg-1 = L/kg = ml/g)
323/328
Rf
S
T½
Vapp
VDarcy
wt. %
x
c
e
w
rock factor, or formation factor: inverse of the geometrical factor (G),
taking into account the tortuosity and the constrictivity of the porous
medium. Rf = 2
solubility limit; do not confuse with the atomic symbol of the
sulfur element S (z = 16; A = 32)
radioactive half-life; radioactive period
apparent velocity
Darcy velocity
weight percent
position coordinate
sigma, standard deviation (see also Gaussian distribution, average)
consolidation pressure
effective stress e = c - w
porewater pressure
tortuosity
324/328
A14.
List of Physical Constants and Units
325/328
326/328
A14 List of Physical Constants and Units
°C
a
A
A
Å
Celsius grade
anno = year = y
ampere
Atomic mass
Angstrom = 10-10 m
atm
1 atmosphere ≃ 105 Pa ≃ 100 kPa ≃ 1 bar ≃ 0.1 MPa ≃ 1 kg cm-2
Bq
Ci
cpm
cps
d
Da
dm
dm3
e
eV
F
g
Becquerel = 1 disintegration per second
1 Curie = 3.7 × 1010 Bq = activity of 1 g radium
Count Per Minute
Count Per Second
day
Dalton (atomic mass unit) (see MWCO)
deci-meter = 10-1 m
cubic deci-meter = 1 L = 1 liter
charge of proton = 1.60219 × 10-19 coulomb
electron Volt
Faraday constant = F = eL = 96 485 Coulomb mol-1
gram, or,
gravitational acceleration (g = 9.81 m s-2)
GigaWatt-day (energy produced by a nuclear power plant of 1 GW in one
day)
GigaWatt-day/ ton Heavy Metals: unit expressing the nuclear fuel burn-up
hour
Boltzmann constant = 1.38066 × 10-23 J K-1
kilo anno = kilo years = ky
kilo-Dalton (atomic mass unit) (see MWCO)
kilo electron Volt
kilogram = 103 g
Avogadro number = 6.023 × 1023 mol-1
meter
molar concentration (1 mol dm-3)
normal concentration (1 eq. dm-3)
deci-meter = 10-1 m
centi-meter = 10-2 m
milli-meter = 10-3 m
micro-meter = 10-6 m
GWd
GWd/tHM
h
k
ka
kDa
keV
kg
L
m
M
N
dm
cm
mm
μm
327/328
nm
pm
Ma
MBq
meq.
MeV
min.
mL
mol
N
Pa
pe
ppb
ppm
ppt
R
s
T
tHM
V
W
z
Z
nano-meter = 10-9 m
pico-meter = 10-12 m
Mega Anno = Mega years = My
Mega-Becquerel
milli-equivalent
Mega electron Volt
minute
milli-litre = 1 cm3
mole: quantity containing Avogadro number (6.023 × 1023) of molecules
Number of neutron
Pascal = Newton / m2
-log [e–] = (F × Eh ) / 2.3 RT
part per billion (10-9); 1 μg kg 1
part per million (10-6); 1 mg kg-1
part per trillion (10-12); 1 ng kg-1
gas constant: R = kL = 8.31441 J mol-1 K-1
second
absolute Temperature (Kelvin)
ton Heavy Metals (of nuclear fuel)
Volt
Watt = 1 joule s-1
number of electrical charges
number of proton
328/328