| Literature DB >> 35547978 |
Joffrey Huve1,2, Andrey Ryzhikov1,2, Habiba Nouali1,2, Virginie Lalia3, Grégoire Augé4, T Jean Daou1,2.
Abstract
The number of studies on the capture of radioactive iodine compounds by porous sorbents has regained major importance in the last few years. In fact, nuclear energy is facing major issues related to operational safety and the treatment and safe disposal of generated radioactive waste. In particular during nuclear accidents, such as that in 2011 at Fukushima, gaseous radionuclides have been released in the off-gas stream. Among these, radionuclides that are highly volatile and harmful to health such as long-lived 129I, short-lived 131I and organic compounds such as methyl iodide (CH3I) have been released. Immediate and effective means of capturing and storing these radionuclides are needed. In the present review, we focus on porous sorbents for the capture and storage of radioactive iodine compounds. Concerns with, and limitations of, the existing sorbents with respect to operating conditions and their capacities for iodine capture are discussed and compared. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 35547978 PMCID: PMC9086542 DOI: 10.1039/c8ra04775h
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Evolution of the number of publications per year on the capture of radioactive iodine contaminants by solid porous sorbent materials.
Fig. 2(A) Formation of a non-volatile quaternary ammonium salt by an SN2 mechanism between TEDA and CH3I. (B) Secondary neutral complex formed between TEDA and CH3I.[73]
Fig. 3(A) Model systems of the surfaces of activated carbons (pristine graphene (PGr) and defect graphene (DGr)), the impregnating agent (TEDA), CH3I, H2O and PGr impregnated with TEDA. (B) Free energy diagram of the adsorption of CH3I on the surface of different systems. The dashed purple line represents the dissociation energy of a CH3I molecule. (C) Schematic figures for each reaction step on AC impregnated with TEDA. Reproduced in part from ref. 150 with the permission of the PCCP Owner Societies.
Fig. 4Schematic of capture of iodine by a silver-containing MOR-type zeolite.[171] After a pre-reduction step using hydrogen, AgMOR gives rise to a mixture of γ-AgI nanoparticles and sub-nanometer α-AgI, whereas the direct uptake of iodine by silver-exchanged MOR exclusively produces sub-nanometer α-AgI. Reprinted with permission from K. W. Chapman, P. J. Chupas and T. M. Nenoff, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2010, 132, 8897–8899. Copyright 2010 American Chemical Society.
Fig. 5Different reaction pathways and mechanisms for the adsorption and decomposition of CH3I on AgY zeolite.[78] Reprinted with permission from M. Chebbi, B. Azambre, L. Cantrel and A. Koch, Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2016, 120, 18694–18706. Copyright 2016 American Chemical Society.
Fig. 6Ranking of the ability of different sorbents to promote the irreversible trapping of CH3I as AgI. The best sorbents are on the left side of the diagram. Reprinted with permission from B. Azambre and M. Chebbi, ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 2017, 9, 25194–25203. Copyright 2017 American Chemical Society.
Fig. 7(A) Schematic of the different channels present in the mordenite structure: main channel (MC), side pocket (SP) and side channel (SC). The potential locations of aluminium atoms at the four non-equivalent tetrahedral sites T1 to T4 are indicated. The capital letters A–E correspond to different Mortier sites, which can be occupied by extra-framework Ag+ cations. Colour code: O atoms are in red and Si atoms are in pale blue. (B) Average interaction energies of CH3I, I2, CO and H2O at T1-E sites as a function of the Si/Al ratio. Reproduced from ref. 79 with the permission of the PCCP Owner Societies.
Fig. 8Effect of long-term weathering on the decontamination factor for the retention of radioactive methyl iodide using a 10 wt% AgX adsorbent with NO2 gas poisoning. Adapted by permission from Springer Nature from B. S. Choi, G. Il Park, J. W. Lee, H. Y. Yang and S. K. Ryu, Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 2003, 256, 19–26, Copyright 2003.
Comparison of Gibbs free energies of formation of iodides and oxides (ΔfG°, kJ mol−1)[190,191]
| Metal | Iodide | Δf | Oxide | Δf |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ag | AgI | −66.3 | Ag2O | −11.2 |
| Cu | CuI | −69.4 | CuO | −129.8 |
| Hg | HgI2 | −102.3 | HgO | −58.6 |
| Hg2I2 | −111.2 | HgO | −58.6 | |
| Fe | FeI2 | −109.1 | FeO | −246.5 |
| Tl | TlI | −125.5 | Tl2O | −147.3 |
| Sn | SnI2 | −144.3 | SnO | −257.0 |
| SnI4 | −215.2 | SnO2 | −519.9 | |
| Cd | CdI2 | −201.4 | CdO | −228.6 |
| Pb | PbI2 | −173.6 | PbO | −188.0 |
| Ti | TiI2 | −258.7 | TiO2 | −884.9 |
| TiI4 | −370.9 | TiO2 | −884.9 |
Fig. 9Comparison of the iodine adsorption capacities of different silver-functionalized aerogels (SH-Ag0, Ag0, SH-Ag+, Ag+, and SH) with that of a silver-loaded mordenite (AgZ).[105] Reprinted with permission from B. J. Riley, J. O. Kroll, J. A. Peterson, J. Matyáš, M. J. Olszta, X. Li and J. D. Vienna, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2017, 9, 32907–32919. Copyright 2017 American Chemical Society.
Summary of the advantages and drawbacks of the various porous sorbents described in this review
| Adsorbents | Advantages | Drawbacks |
|---|---|---|
| Activated carbons | Good adsorption performance if impregnated with KI and/or TEDA (DF of up to 104) | Decline in adsorption performance in the presence of humidity (>40%) |
| Low production cost | Decline in adsorption performance at high temperatures ( | |
| High stability in basic and acidic condition | Alteration of the adsorption performance due to aging | |
| Low autoignition temperature | ||
| Strong influence of NO | ||
| Silver-exchanged zeolites | Good adsorption performance (optimal adsorption temperature: 423 K) | Expensive |
| Trapping by precipitation (formation of AgI) + high capture stability | Alteration of the adsorption performance due to organic compounds (especially chlorides) | |
| High irreversibility of the trapping of iodine (especially for AgY zeolite, >80%) | Negative effects of NO | |
| No or little influence of γ-radiation | ||
| Tunable chemical and structural properties | ||
| High thermal and chemical stability | ||
| Silver-doped silica and/or alumina (Ag/SiO2 and Ag/Al2O3) | Good adsorption performance (DF > 102) up to 150 °C | Loss of efficiency at temperatures of <200 °C + higher operating cost |
| In the presence of NO | Loss of performance in the presence of a large excess of organic contaminants | |
| Less expensive by a factor of 3 to 10 than silver-doped zeolites (theoretically) | Alteration of the adsorption performance with humidity (>70%) | |
| Mesoporous silica | Adsorption performance similar to that of silver-doped zeolites | Few studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO |
| Elevated adsorption capacities (up to 0.6 gI2 gadsorbent−1) when functionalized ( | Limited thermal stability when functionalized | |
| Aerogels/chalcogels | Excellent adsorption performance (>0.5 g gadsorbent−1) | Few studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO |
| Little literature on these materials | ||
| Expensive | ||
| Titanosilicates | Adsorption performance similar to that of silver-doped zeolites when doped with silver | Low adsorption capacities |
| Few studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO | ||
| Macroreticular resins | Excellent adsorption performance (up to 1 g gadsorbent−1) | Significant decline in adsorption performance at temperatures of higher than 50 °C or in the presence of humidity |
| Stable in presence of γ-radiation | ||
| Resistant in acidic conditions (NO | ||
| Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) | Excellent adsorption performance (up to 1.75 gI2 gadsorbent−1) theoretically and in ideal conditions | No studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO |
| High selectivity toward I2 rather than water | No information on the adsorption and capture of CH3I | |
| Trapping | Low thermal stability at high temperatures | |
| Large range of existing MOFs (pores, specific surface areas, variable structures) + possibility of adjusting properties | Expensive | |
| Laboratory objects | ||
| Porous organic polymers | Excellent adsorption performance (up to 3.45 gI2 gadsorbent−1) | No information on the adsorption and capture of CH3I |
| Highly tunable molecular design | No studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO | |
| Low skeleton densities (lightweight elements) | Expensive | |
| High physicochemical stabilities and tunable porosities reversible adsorption of iodine | Laboratory objects | |
| Covalent–organic frameworks (COFs) | Excellent adsorption performance (up to 16.7 gI2 gadsorbent−1) theoretically and in ideal conditions | Theoretical studies only |
| Studies on the adsorption and capture of I2 and CH3I | No studies on the influence of humidity and/or inhibitors (NO | |
| Large range of existing COFs (pores, specific surface areas, variable structures) | Little literature on these materials for the capture of iodine compounds | |
| Expensive | ||
| Laboratory objects |