Main Title |
Multielemental analytical techniques for hazardous waste analysis : the state-of-the-art / |
Author |
Oppenheimer, J. A. ;
Eaton, A. D. ;
Leong, L. Y. C. ;
Hinners, T. A.
|
Other Authors |
|
CORP Author |
Montgomery (James M.), Inc., Pasadena, CA.;Environmental Monitoring Systems Lab., Las Vegas, NV. |
Publisher |
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory ; Distributed by the National Technical Information Service, |
Year Published |
1984 |
Report Number |
EPA 600-4-84-028; 68-03-3076; EPA-68-03-3076 |
Stock Number |
PB84-178425 |
OCLC Number |
15495644 |
Additional Subjects |
Hazardous materials ;
Chemical analysis ;
Solid waste disposal ;
X ray fluorescence ;
X ray analysis ;
Metals ;
Comparison ;
Neutron activation analysis ;
Classification ;
Emission spectroscopy ;
Assessments ;
Soil analysis ;
Performance evaluation ;
Waste management ;
Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy ;
State of the art
|
Internet Access |
|
Holdings |
Library |
Call Number |
Additional Info |
Location |
Last Modified |
Checkout Status |
EJBD |
EPA 600-4-84-028 |
|
Headquarters Library/Washington,DC |
05/22/2018 |
NTIS |
PB84-178425 |
Some EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. |
|
07/26/2022 |
|
Collation |
xi, 99 pages : illustrations ; 28 cm |
Abstract |
Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, the multielemental techniques of inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP), x-ray fluorescence (XRF) and instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) have been compared for the determination of antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium and zinc in hazardous waste matrices. These particular elements were chosen because they are on the list for classifying a waste as hazardous or on EPA's Priority Pollutant list. Each technique is discussed with respect to theory, anticipated interferences, correction techniques, precision, accuracy, detection limits and cost. This literature review indicates that there has not been sufficient analytical work on complex matrices to fully compare these three techniques for many of the priority pollutant elements. For those elements with a sufficient database to compare precision and accuracy by the three techniques (arsenic, barium, chromium, lead, nickel and zinc), ICP has the advantages of lower detection limits and higher precision, whereas XRF may be very useful as a preliminary screening technique due to its ability to provide rapid semi-quantitative data even at trace levels. XRF and ICP have significant cost advantages over INAA, requiring much less capital expenditure and lower labor costs. |
Notes |
"EPA 600-4-84-028." "April 1984." Cover title. "Contract no. 68-03-3076." "Project officer Thomas A. Hinners." Includes bibliographical references. |
Place Published |
Las Vegas Springfield, Va. |
Corporate Au Added Ent |
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory (Las Vegas, Nev.); United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Research and Development.; James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers. |
PUB Date Free Form |
1984 |
NTIS Prices |
PC A06/MF A01 |
BIB Level |
m |
Medium |
unmediated |
Content |
text |
Carrier |
volume |
Cataloging Source |
OCLC/T |
OCLC Time Stamp |
20180521084329 |
Language |
eng |
Origin |
OCLC |
Type |
MERGE |
OCLC Rec Leader |
01630cam 2200397Ki 45010 |