Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste

Abstract

This study aimed to compare sample pretreatment procedures for the identification and quantification of asbestos. The performance of visual estimation and point counting procedures for evaluating asbestos-containing waste was investigated, and the effect of analytical experience was studied. The efficacy of pretreatments for the identification and quantification of asbestos in various sample matrices was compared. To evaluate the effect of experience on analytical accuracy, three analysts with different analytical experiences were selected. There were significant differences in the quantitative analysis results obtained using different pretreatments. False negatives were reported when asbestos, especially amphiboles, were analyzed by a less-experienced analyst. Quantification via point counting and visual estimation resulted in differences in the asbestos content. The results of point counting were more accurate than those of visual estimation for all analysts, regardless of the asbestos type and concentration. Experience in asbestos analysis affected accuracy and precision. The findings show that pretreatment is an important factor in qualitative analysis. Appropriate pretreatments should be assigned based on the properties of the sample. For quantitative analysis, the accuracy of the results depends on the experience of the analyst. Until analysts are fully trained, all their analysis results should be checked by an experienced analyst. Point counting is an adequate quantitative method for analyzing samples with low concentrations.

Identification of Chrysotile in Brake Pads and Linings From Malaysian Vehicles and Heavy Vehicles by Using Polarized Light Microscope (Plm)

“…2. Since this study focused more on the qualitative part of the fibre analysis in order to justify the existing usage of chrysotile asbestos in present year brake pad market, try to include quantification asbestos fibre analysis such as visual estimation or point counting [36] when using PLM as recommended in NMAM 9002 by NIOSH. 3.…”

The concentration and prevalence of asbestos fibres in Christchurch, New Zealand's drinking water supply

“…On balance, however, differences between the 2017 study and our study are most likely attributable to the different analytical methods for detecting asbestos fibres. The previous study used PLM, which is a method commonly used in bulk building materials, but it requires considerable skill to identify asbestos fibres and may yield false negatives especially when fibres are in low concentration (Ham et al 2019;OSHA 2021). Rather, the only US-EPA approved standard methods for detecting asbestos in water samples use TEM, which has a resolution that can readily detect fibres as small as 0.02 μm (Millette 2005).…”