4.7 Article

Analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in wastewater treatment plant effluents using hollow fibre liquid-phase microextraction

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 60, Issue 5, Pages 690-698

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.01.040

Keywords

wastewater analysis; PAHs; hollow fibre LPME; solvent microextraction; extraction method

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A simple and efficient method for the enrichment of low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in effluents originating from wastewater treatment plants is presented here. The proposed protocol couples the recently introduced hollow fibre liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) method with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Method parameters were controlled and the optimised experimental conditions were: 5 ml aqueous samples, containing 2.5% NaCl w/v, stirred at 1000 rpm, extracted with toluene for 15 min. The developed protocol yielded a linear calibration curve in the concentration range from 0.5 to 50 mu g l(-1) for all target analytes (namely acenaphthene, phenanthrene, fluoranthene and pyrene) and limits of detection in the low mu g l(-1) level (0.005-0.011 mu g l(-1)). The repeatability and interday precision of the method varied between 2.7% and 11.3% and 7.9% and 14.4% respectively. The relative recoveries from different types of natural water samples revealed that matrix had a small effect on the hollow fibre LPME process. The developed method was then applied for the determination of PAHs contamination in effluent samples taken from two major municipal wastewater treatment plants. The results were compared with those obtained with solid-phase microextraction. The ability of both microextraction methods to concentrate organic analytes was demonstrated as both methods confirmed the presence of PAHs as well as of phthalates in the examined effluent samples. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available