1988
DOI: 10.1021/es00170a014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and evaluation of a procedure for determining volatile organics in water

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…ECH, similarly to other volatile organic compounds, has been determined in water by gas chromatography (GC), although this can require multi‐stage and time‐consuming procedures prior to the chromatographic analysis. The methods involved are most often based on isolation and/or enrichment techniques as dynamic headspace purge and trap,6, 7 static headspace,7, 8 liquid‐liquid extraction (LLE),8 solid‐phase extraction (SPE),5, 8 or solid‐phase microextraction (SPME) 8–10. GC determination has been carried out by using detection systems as electron capture detection (ECD),5, 7, 9, 12 flame ionization detection (FID)9, 10, 12 and mass spectrometry (MS) 10–13…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ECH, similarly to other volatile organic compounds, has been determined in water by gas chromatography (GC), although this can require multi‐stage and time‐consuming procedures prior to the chromatographic analysis. The methods involved are most often based on isolation and/or enrichment techniques as dynamic headspace purge and trap,6, 7 static headspace,7, 8 liquid‐liquid extraction (LLE),8 solid‐phase extraction (SPE),5, 8 or solid‐phase microextraction (SPME) 8–10. GC determination has been carried out by using detection systems as electron capture detection (ECD),5, 7, 9, 12 flame ionization detection (FID)9, 10, 12 and mass spectrometry (MS) 10–13…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other acceptable methods include portable direct reading instruments and real-time continuous monitoring systems; these methods generally have a sensitivity in the ppm range. The most frequently used analytical methods for water samples containing benzene are GC/MS, GC/FID, and GC/PID (Blanchard and Hardy, (1986); Colenutt and Thorburn (1980);DOI, 1984;EPA, 1984EPA, , 1992Hammers and Bosman, 1986;Harland, et al, 1985;Lysyj, et al, 1980;Michael, et al, 1988;Pereira and Hughes, 1980;Sporstøl, et al, 1985). Benzene is usually isolated from aqueous media by the purge-and-trap method (Brass, et al, 1977;Colenutt and Thorburn (1980);DOI, 1984;EPA, 1979EPA, , 1984EPA, , 1992Hammers and Bosman, 1986;Harland, et al, 1985;Michael, et al, 1988).…”
Section: Environmental Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The purged benzene is trapped on an adsorbent substance, such as Tenax GC or activated charcoal, and thermally desorbed. Recovery, where reported, ranges from acceptable (≈70%) (EPA, 1979(EPA, , 1984Michael, et al, 1988) to very good (≥90%) (Colenutt and Thorburn (1980); EPA, 1984EPA, , 1992Hammers and Bosman, 1986). Detection limits in the sub-ppb to ppt range may be attained with HRGC/MS techniques (EPA, 1992;Michael, et al, 1988).…”
Section: Environmental Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The internal standard solution in methanol and a water standard of native analytes in "VOC-free" water were prepared fresh each day. Samples of "VOC-free" water (containing < 20 ppt of most VOCs) were prepared by helium purging of rural well water at elevated temperature followed by distillation under helium purge, using a similar method to that reported previously [24].…”
Section: Sample Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%