3.9 Article

A simplified distillation-based sulfur speciation method for sulfidic soil materials

Journal

BULLETIN OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF FINLAND
Volume 93, Issue -, Pages 19-30

Publisher

GEOLOGICAL SOC FINLAND
DOI: 10.17741/bgsf/93.1.002

Keywords

Sulfur speciation; acid sulfate soils; pyrite; peat; limit of detection

Categories

Funding

  1. European Regional Development Fund 2017-2020

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The passage discusses a simplified method for speciation of sulfur species, which is widely used for risk assessment of acid sulfate soils and general characterization of marine sediments and subaqueous soils. The method has a low limit of detection and quantitation, making it suitable for analyzing sulfidic sulfur in various soil materials. Commercially available sulfide reagents were used for reproducibility testing on natural sulfidic soil materials with varying sulfide and pyrite content.
Speciation of inorganic sulfur species, mainly pyrite and metastable iron sulfides by operationally defined methods, is widely used for risk assessment of acid sulfate soils by quantifying the acidity producing elements, as well as for general characterisation of marine sediments and subaqueous soils. Traditional sulfur speciation methods commonly use highly specialised glassware which can be cumbersome for the operator, or, require long reaction times which limit the usability of the method. We present a simplified method which has a sufficiently low limit of detection (0.002%) and quantitation (0.006%) required for the analysis of sulfidic sulfur in acid sulfate soil materials. Commercially available sulfide reagents were used for determining reproducibility and the method was assessed on natural sulfidic soil materials, including fine to coarse grained soil materials as well as sulfide bearing peat, with a large variation of metastable sulfide and pyrite content.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available