4.5 Article

A comparison of alcohol ethoxylate environmental monitoring data using different analytical procedures

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 1268-1274

Publisher

SETAC
DOI: 10.1897/05-206R.1

Keywords

alcohol ethoxylates; wastewater treatment; analytical methods

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several analytical methods have been developed for analyzing alcohol ethoxylates (AE) in aqueous environmental samples. These methods differ widely in their selectivity and sensitivity for measuring the AE components; that is, they vary in their resolution of alkyl chain length homologs and ethoxymer distributions (degree of ethoxylation for each homolog). Given these differences, AE monitoring results from different studies often are inconsistent and, sometimes, are deemed to be incomparable. To address these differences, three currently available methods for determining AE concentrations in environmental matrices were compared among a common set of wastewater treatment plant samples. These methods included the detection of hydrogen bromide-derivatized homologs by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, the detection of aqueous homologs by high-pressure liquid chromatography/electrospray mass spectrometry, and the detection of pyridinium-derivatized homologs by high-pressure liquid chromatography/electrospray mass spectrometry. Results from the present study showed that all three methods responded differently in determining the complex suite of chemical species that comprise AE in the environment. The collective information, however, allowed a consistent comparison among the methods. This comparison was then used to reevaluate results from previous AE monitoring studies. Results from this reevaluation provided a more realistic profile of both historical AE removal during wastewater treatment as well as the occurrence of AE in U.S. surface waters.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available