Skip to main content

Magnetic Nanoparticles to the Rescue ... Maybe

By
The Department of Energy is funding the University of Idaho with $732K to prove the feasibility of using highly magnetic nanoparticles to reprocess used nuclear fuel.
If successful, scientists at the University of Idaho will kill three birds with one nanoparticle by recovering usable nuclear fuel, making nuclear waste easier and safer to dispose of, and accomplishing the task in an environmentally friendly way.
Here's some heavy science for you:
The fundamental technology that makes the process possible is the ability to make the MNPs. These are tiny pieces of pure iron nanoparticles coated with a layer of iron oxides, commonly known as rust, just two nanometers thick. Because of their iron core, the MNPs are 10 times more magnetic than commercially available nanoparticles that typically are made entirely of iron oxide. The trick to using nanoparticles made of pure iron is the thin coating of iron oxide, which prevents the core from completely oxidizing into rust.

The particles can be created in exact sizes, ranging from two nanometers to 100 nanometers in diameter. At their largest, scientists still could fit 100 million nanoparticles on the head of a pin. At their smallest, a pin head could fit 250 billion.

The project will explore a process applied to the MNPs that allows the tiny pieces of iron to selectively grab on to radioactive metals belonging to the actinides group of elements. The nanoparticles are coated by an organic molecule that acts like glue for other chemicals, in this case holding alkyl-oxa-diamide. This long-named chemical compound works like Velcro, grabbing and holding tennis balls. Except in this case, the tennis balls actually are radioactive metal ions.

Because the MNPs have such a high magnetic momentum, a small magnetic field selectively can yank the MNPs with attached radioactive molecules out of the nuclear waste. Once separated, a process breaks the bonds, separating the actinides from the nanoparticles, both of which can be reused.
And what kind of experts are needed?
“We need a nuclear specialist, physicist and organic biochemist to even make the right experiments,” said Paszczynski. “It truly is an interdisciplinary research group.”
This stuff is way beyond my knowledge but it sounds cool. Best of luck!

Picture above is a chain of magnetic nanoparticles.
Labels:

Comments

Jason Ribeiro said…
This is interesting. I would also like to know if anyone has any news about nano-particle enhanced coolant water?
November 7, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...
6 comments
Read more