Cloud point and solvent extraction study of uranium(VI) by 8‐hydroxyquinoline

Abstract

Abstract BACKGROUND: Cloud point extraction (CPE) is an attractive alternative to solvent extraction. However, comparisons between both techniques are lacking. In this paper, the extraction of uranium(VI) using 8‐hydroxyquinoline (HQ) as chelating agent was studied by CPE using Triton X‐114 as non‐ionic surfactant and by solvent extraction using CHCl 3 as diluent. RESULTS: Using CPE, a quantitative extraction was observed for pH higher than 4.5 with a HQ/U ratio of 10. Using solvent extraction an increase in the HQ/U ratio up to 50 is necessary to obtain a near quantitative extraction. Both extraction systems were then compared with respect to the nature of extracted species, and the extraction constants determined using log‐log analysis of the extraction data. In the solvent extraction system, the extracted species were identified as UO 2 Q 2 and the corresponding extraction constant was found to be log k ex = − 3.6 ± 0.2 on the molar scale. Considering that UO 2 Q 2 is also the extracted species in CPE, a slightly higher extraction constant, i.e. log k ex = − 2.5 ± 0.3, was found. CONCLUSION: Such a small difference in favour of the CPE system may arise from the combination of various phenomena, including effects of temperature and effects of ‘extractant environment’. However, a change in the nature of the extracted species, namely from UO 2 Q 2 in the solvent extraction system to the formation of adducts, i.e. UO 2 Q 2 (HQ) and UO 2 Q 2 (HQ) 2 in the CPE system, due to higher HQ concentration in the surfactant‐rich phase compared with chloroform, cannot be precluded, but requires confirmation. Copyright © 2012 Society of Chemical Industry