skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Extraction of uranium: comparison of stripping with ammonia vs. strong acid

Abstract

Following extraction of uranium in the first stage of solvent extraction using a tertiary amine, typically Alamine 336, the stripping of the extracted uranium is accomplished either by use of an aqueous solution of (NH{sub 4}){sub 2}SO{sub 4} /NH{sub 4}OH or by strong-acid stripping using 400-500 g/L H{sub 2}SO{sub 4}. Both processes have their merits and determine the downstream processing. The classical stripping with ammonia is followed by addition of strong base, to precipitate ammonium uranyl sulfate (NH{sub 4}){sub 2}UO{sub 2}(SO{sub 4}){sub 2}, which yields finally the yellow cake. Conversely, stripping with H{sub 2}SO{sub 4}, followed by oxidation with hydrogen peroxide yields uranyl oxide as product. At the Cameco Key Lake operation, both processes were tested on a pilot scale, using a Bateman Pulsed Column (BPC). The BPC proved to be applicable to both processes. It met the process criteria both for extraction and stripping, leaving less than 1 mg/L of U{sub 3}O{sub 8} in the raffinate, and product solution had the required concentration of U{sub 3}O{sub 8} at high flux and reasonable height of transfer unit. In the Key Lake mill, each operation can be carried out in a single column. The main advantages of the strong-acid stripping overmore » ammonia stripping are: (1) 60% higher flux in the extraction, (2) tenfold higher concentration of the uranium in the product solution, and (3) far more robust process, with no need of pH control in the stripping and no need to add acid to the extraction in order to keep the pH above the point of precipitation of iron compounds. The advantages of the ammoniacal process are easier stripping, that is, less stages needed to reach equilibrium and lower concentration of modifier needed to prevent the creation of a third phase. (authors)« less

Authors:
 [1]; ;  [2]
  1. Cameco Corporation (Canada)
  2. Bateman Solvent Extraction (Israel)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Chemical Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (United States)
OSTI Identifier:
21230349
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: ISEC 2008: International Solvent Extraction Conference on Solvent Extraction: Fundamentals to Industrial Applications, Tucson, AZ (United States), 15-19 Sep 2008; Other Information: Country of input: France; 3 refs; Related Information: In: Proceedings of ISEC 2008, International Solvent Extraction Conference - Solvent Extraction: Fundamentals to Industrial Applications, by Moyer, Bruce A. (ed.), 1740 pages.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS; AMMONIA; AMMONIUM HYDROXIDES; AMMONIUM SULFATES; AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS; EXTRACTION COLUMNS; HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; PRECIPITATION; SOLVENT EXTRACTION; STRIPPING; SULFURIC ACID; URANIUM; URANIUM OXIDES U3O8; URANYL SULFATES

Citation Formats

Moldovan, B, Grinbaum, B, and Efraim, A. Extraction of uranium: comparison of stripping with ammonia vs. strong acid. United States: N. p., 2008. Web.
Moldovan, B, Grinbaum, B, & Efraim, A. Extraction of uranium: comparison of stripping with ammonia vs. strong acid. United States.
Moldovan, B, Grinbaum, B, and Efraim, A. 2008. "Extraction of uranium: comparison of stripping with ammonia vs. strong acid". United States.
@article{osti_21230349,
title = {Extraction of uranium: comparison of stripping with ammonia vs. strong acid},
author = {Moldovan, B and Grinbaum, B and Efraim, A},
abstractNote = {Following extraction of uranium in the first stage of solvent extraction using a tertiary amine, typically Alamine 336, the stripping of the extracted uranium is accomplished either by use of an aqueous solution of (NH{sub 4}){sub 2}SO{sub 4} /NH{sub 4}OH or by strong-acid stripping using 400-500 g/L H{sub 2}SO{sub 4}. Both processes have their merits and determine the downstream processing. The classical stripping with ammonia is followed by addition of strong base, to precipitate ammonium uranyl sulfate (NH{sub 4}){sub 2}UO{sub 2}(SO{sub 4}){sub 2}, which yields finally the yellow cake. Conversely, stripping with H{sub 2}SO{sub 4}, followed by oxidation with hydrogen peroxide yields uranyl oxide as product. At the Cameco Key Lake operation, both processes were tested on a pilot scale, using a Bateman Pulsed Column (BPC). The BPC proved to be applicable to both processes. It met the process criteria both for extraction and stripping, leaving less than 1 mg/L of U{sub 3}O{sub 8} in the raffinate, and product solution had the required concentration of U{sub 3}O{sub 8} at high flux and reasonable height of transfer unit. In the Key Lake mill, each operation can be carried out in a single column. The main advantages of the strong-acid stripping over ammonia stripping are: (1) 60% higher flux in the extraction, (2) tenfold higher concentration of the uranium in the product solution, and (3) far more robust process, with no need of pH control in the stripping and no need to add acid to the extraction in order to keep the pH above the point of precipitation of iron compounds. The advantages of the ammoniacal process are easier stripping, that is, less stages needed to reach equilibrium and lower concentration of modifier needed to prevent the creation of a third phase. (authors)},
doi = {},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/21230349}, journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2008},
month = {Tue Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2008}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share: