Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
- 2016 (2) (entfernen)
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (2) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (2)
Referierte Publikation
- ja (2)
Schlagworte
- Interlaboratory comparison (2) (entfernen)
The European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC requires monitoring of organic priority pollutants in so-called whole water samples, i.e. in aqueous nonfiltered samples that contain natural colloidal and suspended particulate matter. Colloids and suspended particles in the liquid phase constitute a challenge for sample homogeneity and stability. Within the joint research project ENV08 ‘‘Traceable measurements for monitoring critical pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC’’, whole water test materials were developed by spiking defined amounts of aqueous slurries of ultrafinely milled contaminated soil or sediment and aqueous solutions of humic acid into a natural mineral water matrix. This paper presents the results of an European-wide interlaboratory comparison (ILC) using this type of test materials. Target analytes were tributyltin, polybrominated diphenyl ethers and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the ng/L concentration range. Results of the ILC indicate that the produced materials are sufficiently homogeneous and stable to serve as samples for, e.g. proficiency testing or method validation. To our knowledge, this is the first time that ready-to-use water materials with a defined amount of suspended particulate and colloidal matter have been applied as test samples in an interlaboratory exercise. These samples meet the requirements of the European Water Framework Directive. Previous proficiency testing schemes mainly employed filtered water samples fortified with a spike of the target analyte in a water-miscible organic solvent.
Towards the standardization of biochar analysis: the COST action TD1107 interlaboratory comparison
(2016)
Biochar produced by pyrolysis of organic residues is increasingly used for soil amendment and many other applications. However, analytical methods for its physical and chemical characterization are yet far from being specifically adapted, optimized, and standardized. Therefore, COST Action TD1107 conducted an interlaboratory comparison in which 22 laboratories from 12 countries analyzed three different types of biochar for 38 physical–chemical parameters (macro- and microelements, heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pH, electrical conductivity, and specific surface area) with their preferential methods. The data were evaluated in detail using professional interlaboratory testing software. Whereas intralaboratory repeatability was generally good or at least acceptable, interlaboratory reproducibility was mostly not (20% < mean reproducibility standard deviation < 460%). This paper contributes to better comparability of biochar data published already and provides recommendations to improve and harmonize specific methods for biochar analysis in the future.