Dear Beenish Roha ,

I do not know what elements (Z-numbers) you are aiming at.

The ICP-MS is mass spectrometry. Here you are able to evaluate the concentration.

With XANES you can address the absorption edge(s) of an element and you have access to the oxidation number. You will also have some access to the concentration depending on which detection mode you perform. Expenditures are quite high.

However I would suggest X-ray fluorescence (XRF), a technique which is able to give you the elemental concentration. It is often used in soil analysis. Results are quite ok when the system is appropriately calibrated.

Just 'google' for 'XRF and soil'.

You may also use the search option here on RG.

Here is the result with respect to publications:

https://www.researchgate.net/search.Search.html?type=publication&query=xrf%20soil

There are nice handheld XRF-systems available, which can be used already in the field;

just 'google' for them.

Good luck

If you are intersted in the speciation I don't see the benefit ICP-MS since it gives you an concentration. XANES is better for speciation since you get the oxidation state, complementary to XANES usually also EXAFS is measured, this can help a lot in identifying ligands. Like mentioned by Curtis XANES and EXAFS are not common techniques and you would have to apply for beamtime at a synchrotron.

Following

XANES is highly selective unlike AAS, ICP-MS etc. The analyst has to decide which is the right tool which can throw light on the properties for which it is to be tested. The analyst requires application of knowledge,analytical ability, judgement, experience etc. prior to making a decision whether to use XANES or ICP-MS. The latter one would serve the purpose most often.

Very nice question.