4.7 Article

Comparative study of solvent extraction and thermal desorption methods for determining a wide range of volatile organic compounds in ambient air

期刊

TALANTA
卷 82, 期 2, 页码 719-727

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2010.05.038

关键词

Thermal desorption; Solvent desorption; Comparison of methods; Air analysis; Volatile organic compounds

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [CTM2008-06847-CO2-01/TECNO]
  2. Observatori de Salut i Medi Ambient del Camp de Tarragona, of the Servei Regional de l'Agencia de Proteccio de la Sal ut (Generalitat de Catalunya)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper compares two analytical methods for determining levels of 90 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) commonly found in industrial and urban atmospheres. Both methods are based on two official methods for determining benzene levels and involve collecting samples by active adsorptive enrichment on solid sorbents. The first method involves solvent extraction and uses activated charcoal as a sorbent. After sampling, the sorbent is extracted with 1 mL of carbon disulfide and then 1 mu L of the extract is analysed in a GC-MS. The second method involves thermal desorption (TD) and uses Tenax TA and Carbograph 1TD as sorbents, which allows the whole sample to be analysed. In general, the thermal desorption method showed the best repetitivity and recovery and the lowest limit of detection and quantification for all target compounds. Because of its lower sensitivity, the solvent extraction method needs the preconcentration of large sample volumes of air (720 L vs. 2.64 L for the thermal desorption method) to yield similar limits of detection. The performance of both methods in real samples was tested in a location near to a petrochemical complex. The results of the 24-h samples for the solvent extraction method were compared with the average of 12 2-h samples for the TD method. In some cases, both methods found differences in the VOC concentrations, especially in those compounds whose concentrations fluctuate significantly during the day. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据