Literature DB >> 11542111

Atmospheric H2O2 measurement: comparison of cold trap method with impinger bubbling method.

H Sakugawa1, I R Kaplan.   

Abstract

Collection of atmospheric H2O2 was performed by a cold trap method using dry ice-acetone as the refrigerant. The air was drawn by a pump into a glass gas trap immersed in the dry ice-acetone slush in a dewar flask at a flow rate of 2.5 l min-1 for approximately 2 h. Collection efficiency was > 99% and negligible interferences by O3, SO2 or organic matter with the collected H2O2 in the trap were observed. This method was compared with the air impinger bubbling method which has been previously described (Kok et al., 1978a, b, Envir. Sci. Technol. 12, 1072-1080). The measured total peroxide (H2O2 + organic peroxide) values in a series of aim samples collected by the impinger bubbling method (0.06-3.7 ppb) were always higher than those obtained by the cold trap method (0.02-1.2 ppb). Laboratory experiments suggest that the difference in values between the two methods probably results from the aqueous phase generation of H2O2 and organic peroxide in the impinger solution by a reaction of atmospheric O3 with olefinic and aromatic compounds. If these O3-organic compound reactions which occur in the impinger also occur in aqueous droplets in the atmosphere, the process could be very important for aqueous phase generation of H2O2 in clouds and rainwater.

Entities:  

Keywords:  NASA Discipline Exobiology; Non-NASA Center

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1987        PMID: 11542111     DOI: 10.1016/0004-6981(87)90119-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atmos Environ        ISSN: 0004-6981            Impact factor:   4.798


  2 in total

1.  Hydrogen peroxide in expired breath condensate of patients with acute respiratory failure and with ARDS.

Authors:  D Kietzmann; R Kahl; M Müller; H Burchardi; D Kettler
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Measurement of ambient hydroperoxides using an automated HPLC system and various factors which affect variations of their concentrations in Korea.

Authors:  Sang B Hong; Gyu S Kim; Chang H Kang; Jai H Lee
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2008-01-06       Impact factor: 2.513

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.