Does analytical chemistry's development (dosage reached ppt (ng / kg) instead of ppm (mg / kg)) influence development of purification processes?
I am used to ppm !!!!
There are conversion charts to balance or equate the process units !!!!
EPA : https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.files/fileID/14285
I will follow the answers of my dear colleagues because it is outside my specialty.
I am used to ppm !!!!
There are conversion charts to balance or equate the process units !!!!
EPA : https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.files/fileID/14285
dear doctor
link may be help you
www.who.int/ipcs/publications/cicad/cicad26_rev_1.pdf
best wishes
Not really. ng means your looking at the effectiveness of sex hormones (~the lethal dose of nerve gas). Most facilities keep away from them.
It depends on the context. exploring for gold with hydro geochemistry, particularly for surface waters, with ground water one would need 1ppt min LDL gold, about 10ppt for silver and 100 ppt for arsenic. Even then one would normalize erosion/dissolution with silicon content. The convenient high res ICP-MS technology is improving, yet older Nuclear activation technology is still best, though utility marginal at best. Yes, it is a vector to improvement. Even in our own in house efforts with Atomic striping voltammetry (ASV, PDV6000+ square wave unit), we aim to use gel chromatography to resolve organic interference, enhance signal with lanthanum ligated gels. Otherwise our field instrument can optimally detect 0.5 ppb As, Cu, only sufficient for near surface blind mineralisation. You can't take an MS unit in the field! So in conclusion, for us at least, it is a driver for improved technology: reconcentration and handling interference, whilst ASV technology, and others now such a biological metal(oid) sensors improve for field works and low cost analysis.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Chemistry
- General Biochemistry
- Biochemical Techniques
- Analytical Chemistry