New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

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."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe