Parallel sampling for dioxins using various sampling techniques at a swedish municipal solid waste incinerator |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Institute of Environmental Chemistry, University of Umeå, S-901 87. Umeå, Sweden;2. Institute of Organic Chemistry, University of Tübingen, D-7400 Tübingen, Germany;1. Government of India, New Delhi, New Delhi, India;2. College of Fisheries (Dr. B. S. Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth), Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India;1. Faculty of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China;2. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China;3. Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Regional Development and Environmental Response, Wuhan 430062, China;4. School of Geographic and Oceanographic Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China;1. College of Ocean Science and Engineering, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China;2. Shanghai Key Lab for Urban Ecological Processes and Eco-Restoration, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China;3. International Joint Research Center for Persistent Toxic Substances (IJRC-PTS), Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China;1. College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province 712100, PR China;2. Key Laboratory of Plant Nutrition and the Agri-environment in Northwest China, Ministry of Agriculture, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Parallel sampling was carried out in a Swedish municipal solid waste (MSW) incinerator, on two consecutive days, with five different sampling techniques. The samples were analysed for chlorinated dioxins (PCDDs) and chiorodibenzofurans (PCDFs) at two laboratories, one in Sweden and the other in Germany. Two different spiking protocols were used, both including pre-sampling or clean-up spikes from each homolog group of the tetra to octa CDDs and CDFs. Comparable results were obtained for all five sampling methods for the emission data and the recoveries for all pre-sampling spikes were above 50%. The agreement between the two laboratories was good. The different sampling methods resulted in very similar congener distributions (congener profiles) or isomer distributions (isomer patterns). However, the sampling techniques differ considerably in the distribution of PCDDs/PCDFs in various sampling compartments. The sampling techniques where large contribution of PCDDs and PCDFs could be found in the wash solvent may suffer from losses and/or cross-contamination problems unless the washing is carried out properly. The use of a cooled probe in combination with an adsorption (polyurethane foam plug) or absorption (ethoxyethanol) trap, where the main portion of the PCDDs and PCDFs were found in the condensate, is considered as a convenient and efficient sampling technique. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
