Cheap, Safe Storage for Radioactive Materials

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The storage of uranium, plutonium and other radioactive materials has given government officials and scientists headaches for decades, but researchers from the Department of Energy's Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) may have found an easier way to render them harmless.

Actinide metals like uranium, and especially plutonium, pose both an environmental threat and a security risk¿if stolen, they could be used to build nuclear weapons. Researchers have known for a while that one way of safely disposing of surplus plutonium is to combine it with boron, turning it into the very stable and insoluble compound, plutonium boride. Combining the two elements, however, has proved difficult. Traditionally the process has involved heating the two materials to more than 3000 degrees centigrade, cooling them off and grinding them to a powder, which is then mixed and heated again. In some cases this process had to be repeated several times.

Anthony Lupinetti and his colleagues at LANL thus decided to look for other, less energy-intensive ways to combine actinides and boron. "We're using reactive compounds to overcome the problems of working these very complex reactions," Lupinetti notes. Instead of using elementary uranium and boron, they tried the compounds uranium tetra-chloride and magnesium-diboride.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


What resulted were the desired uranium boride and the by-product magnesium chloride, which washed out easily. "By combining actinide metal halides, like uranium tetra- and tri-chlorides with molecular boron precursors like magnesium diboride or calcium hexaboride, we've been able to do reactions at much lower temperatures, in the 500 to 800 degrees centigrade range," Lupinetti explains.

Although their initial experiment was conducted on a very small scale, using only about 100 milligrams of material in a small quartz tube, the researchers are optimistic. "It's a very young field. We're still discovering what the rules are in combining these things¿using the entire periodic chart and wide variations of temperature with unusual materials like high-temperature solvents," Lupinetti observes. "There are so many variables, we're all really learning this together, so it's very exciting science."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe