Upload
marcus-leonard
View
215
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Solvent Extraction of Europium (III) from a Nitric Acid SolutionAnnette Hein (Casper College)
Faculty Advisors: Dr. William Cross, Dr. Michael West
Conclusions
• The experimental results do not support the stoichiometric coefficients for H+ and for the ligand presented in the manufacturer’s literature.
• This suggests that some Eu ions are extracted according to a reaction that differs from that suggested by Cytec.
• The pH50 and associated isotherm found in this study agrees well with that presented by the manufacturer (Cytec 2014).
References• Bourzac, K. (2011, April 19). The rare earth crisis. MIT Technology Review.
Retrieved June 22, 2014, from http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/423730/the-rare-earth-crisis/#comments
• Deng, Q., Jin, Y., Wang, Q., Zhao, R., Pan, N., Zhai, F., et al. (2012). New cyclen derivative ligand for thorium(IV) separation by solvent extraction. Journal of Radioanalytical Nuclear Chemistry, 295, 125-133.
• Cytec Inc (2014). Cyanex 572 solvent extraction reagent product data sheet. Retrieved July 2, 2014 from http://www.cytec.com/sites/default/files/files/CYTEC_CYANEX_572_FINAL.pdf
• Han, K., Fuerstenau, M. (2003). Hydrometallurgy and solution kinetics. Principles of mineral processing. Englewood, CO: Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc.
This work was made possible by the National Science Foundation REU Back to the Future Site DMR-1157074 Thanks to Dr. Kenneth Han, Dr. Alfred Boysen, Mr. Kelsey Fitzgerald, Mr. Ian Markon, and Mr. Nathan Madden for help and advice.
Acknowledgments
Introduction
• This project focused on extraction of Eu (III) from aqueous solution, using Cyanex 572.
• China dominates supplies of rare earth elements, so methods of processing are being researched in the US (Bourzac 2011).
Research questions:• Relationship between solution pH
and percent extraction? • Stoichiometry of the reaction?
LeachingSize Reduction
Solvent Extraction Stripping
Use in Industry
MethodsExtraction procedure: agitate extractant in organic phase with Eu in aqueous phase, measure equilibrium pH and aqueous Eu concentration (Deng et al 2012, Han and Fuerstenau 2003).
Materials: Eu stock solution, kerosene, Cyanex 572 extractant, HNO3 and NaOH for titrations.
Experimental conditions: • Temp = 25 C⁰• Nitric acid stock solution• O:A volume ratio = 1:1• Contact time = 15 min• Cyanex 572 conc. = 30% by
volume in kerosene• Initial Eu conc. = 100 ppm
TheoryExtraction according to Cytec data sheet (Cytec 2014):
Generalized reaction:
Distribution coefficient: Equilibrium constant:
If we assume that m = n, rearranging gives:
Organic
Aqueous
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.00
102030405060708090
100
Equilibrium pH of aqueous solution
% E
u ex
trac
ted
pH50 ≈ 0.8
-1.1 -1.0 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.5-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
R² = 0.995886265096244
Log([H+]/[HL])
Log(
D)
95% confidence in-terval for slope:n = 3.85 ± 0.06
Equilibrium pH = 0.6-1.1
Results and Discussion• Good extraction occurs at pH > 1.1. • Poor extraction occurs at pH < 0.6.• The pH50 is about 0.8. • Precipitation was observed at pH ≥ 6.5
• Each Eu (III) ion is, on average, reacting with more than the predicted n = 3 ligands.
• Are some Eu (III) ions reacting with 3 and others with 4 ligands?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
H+
per
Eu
extr
acte
d
Cytec: n= m = 3
Equilibrium pH = 2.3 - 2.6
Experimental: n = 3.85
• More H+ ions are being released per Eu ion than the predicted m = 3.
• Experimental error makes it difficult to establish the exact H+/Eu ratio.
• Within error, it is possible that m = n.
Image credits: Retrieved June 22, 2014, from http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/423730/the-rare-earth-crisis/#comments
Error bars are based on uncertainty of ± 5% in pH and final Eu concentration.
Δ [Eu]
Δ [HL]
[HL] initial
[Eu] initial
[Eu] final
pH final
log(D)
[H+] final
[HL] final
Log(H+/HL)
n = slope of log(D) vs. log(H+/HL)
Δ [Eu] Δ [H+]
pH initial
[Eu] initial
[Eu] final
pH final
[H+] final
m = Δ [H+]/Δ [Eu]
[H+] initial