Literature DB >> 21482294

Determination of non-ionic and anionic surfactants in environmental water matrices.

Veronica Gomez1, Laura Ferreres, Eva Pocurull, Francesc Borrull.   

Abstract

Solid-phase extraction (SPE) combined with liquid chromatography electrospray mass spectrometry (LC-(ESI)MS) was used to determine 16 non-ionic and anionic surfactants in different environmental water samples at ng L(-1) levels. The proposed method is sensitive and simple and has good linear range and detection limits (less than 50 ng L(-1)) for most compound classes. The effect of ion suppression was studied in aqueous matrices from several treatment plants-including urban and industrial wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), drinking-water treatment plants (DWTPs) and seawater desalination plants (SWDPs)-and it was considered when quantifying our samples. In addition, conventional treatments and tertiary treatments that use advanced membrane technologies, such as ultrafiltration (UF) and reverse osmosis (RO) were evaluated in order to determine their efficiency in eliminating these compounds. The concentrations of non-ionic surfactants in the raw waters studied ranged from 0.2 to 100 μg L(-1). In effluents, the concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 5 μg L(-1), which reflects consistent elimination. Anionic surfactants were present in all waters studied at higher levels. Levels up to 3900μgL(-1) of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates (LASs) and 32,000 μg L(-1) of alkyl ethoxysulfates (AESs) were detected in urban WWTP influents, while levels up to 25 μg L(-1) of LASs and 114 μg L(-1) of AESs were found in drinking-water and desalination treatment plants. The results indicate that conventional processes alone are not sufficient to completely remove the studied surfactants from waste streams. Tertiary treatments that use advanced membrane technologies such as UF and RO can further reduce the amount of target compounds in the effluent water.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21482294     DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2011.02.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Talanta        ISSN: 0039-9140            Impact factor:   6.057


  6 in total

1.  Quantitative structure-retention relationship for retention behavior of organic pollutants in textile wastewaters and landfill leachate in LC-APCI-MS.

Authors:  Hadi Noorizadeh; Abbas Farmany
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Performance of a wall cascade constructed wetland treating surfactant-polluted water.

Authors:  Jessica Tamiazzo; Simone Breschigliaro; Michela Salvato; Maurizio Borin
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Occurrence of multi-class surfactants in urban wastewater: contribution of a healthcare facility to the pollution transported into the sewerage system.

Authors:  Alexandre Bergé; Laure Wiest; Robert Baudot; Barbara Giroud; Emmanuelle Vulliet
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Environmental monitoring of alcohol sulfates and alcohol ethoxysulfates in marine sediments.

Authors:  Carolina Fernández-Ramos; Oscar Ballesteros; Alberto Zafra-Gómez; Francisco Javier Camino-Sánchez; Rosario Blanc; Alberto Navalón; José Luís Vílchez
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  TiO₂-Mediated Photocatalytic Mineralization of a Non-Ionic Detergent: Comparison and Combination with Other Advanced Oxidation Procedures.

Authors:  Péter Hegedűs; Erzsébet Szabó-Bárdos; Ottó Horváth; Krisztián Horváth; Péter Hajós
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 3.623

6.  Determination of Dodecanol and Short-Chained Ethoxylated Dodecanols by LC-MS/MS (with Electrospray Ionization) After Their Derivatization (with Phenyl Isocyanate).

Authors:  Joanna Zembrzuska
Journal:  J Surfactants Deterg       Date:  2017-09-09       Impact factor: 1.902

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.