In situ (bio)remediation treatment options for U and Sr contaminated land: a comparison of radionuclide retention and remobilisation

The past 60+ years of global nuclear activity has resulted in a significant legacy of radioactive contaminated lands which have high economic costs associated with their remediation. Developing clean-up technologies that are environmentally friendly, economically viable and effective in the long-term is key, with in situ remediation techniques as an important option. However, questions remain regarding the most favorable methods of remediation, and the long-term stability of any immobilised radionuclide(s). Here, we used sediment microcosms to assess the long-term (300 day) stability of immobilised U and Sr formed during anoxic microbial and chemical treatments, and assessed their stability during re-oxidation scenarios (with oxygen or nitrate additions, 100 days). We used six contrasting treatment approaches which resulted in 89 to >99%, and 65-95% removal efficiencies for U and Sr, respectively. These included two Zero Valent Iron (ZVI) based products (NANOFER 25S and Carbo-Iron); a slow-release electron donor (Metals Remediation Compound, MRC) to stimulate U(vi) bioreduction alongside a readily bioavailable electron donor control (lactate/acetate mix); electron donor (lactate/acetate) with elevated sulfate to stimulate metal and sulfate reduction; glycerol phosphate to promote both bioreduction of U(vi) and biomineralization of inorganic U/Sr phosphates; and finally a natural attenuation (no remediation agent added) control. X-ray Absorption Spectroscopy (XAS) revealed that whilst aqueous U was removed from solution via multiple mechanisms including sorption, reduction and incorporation, aqueous Sr was mostly removed via outer sphere complexation mechanisms. Re-oxidation with air led to increased U remobilisation (& LE;89%) compared to nitrate oxidation (& LE;73%), but neither oxygen or nitrate re-oxidation led to significant Sr remobilisation (& LE;38%), suggesting Sr speciation may be stable over extended timescales post remediation. Treatments amended with ZVI or glycerol phosphate not only removed the most U and Sr from solution (>99%) but they also retained the most U and Sr following re-oxidation (retaining & GE;75% of the originally added U and Sr). XAS analyses suggests that enhanced immobilisation, as seen in the treatments amended with ZVI or glycerol phosphate, may be due to the U/Sr incorporation into mineral phases (i.e., iron oxyhydroxide and phosphate phases). This suggests that optimal (bio)remediation strategies should target both reduction and biomineralisation mechanisms to facilitate radionuclide-mineral incorporation, promoting longer-term stability.