Comparison of field and laboratory methods for monitoring metallic mercury vapor in indoor air

被引：11
|
作者：
Singhvi, R
Turpin, R
Kalnicky, DJ
Patel, J
机构：
[1] US EPA, Environm Response Team Ctr, Edison, NJ 08837 USA
[2] REAC, Environm Serv, Lockheed Martin Technol Serv Grp, Edison, NJ 08837 USA
来源：
JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS | 2001年 / 83卷 / 1-2期
关键词：
mercury; indoor air; field monitoring; laboratory analysis; statistical evaluation;
D O I：
10.1016/S0304-3894(00)00334-4
中图分类号：
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号：
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要：
Real-time metallic mercury vapor levels of the indoor air were monitored at several mercury spill sites around the US in order to evaluate the effectiveness of site cleanup operations. Mercury readings taken in the field with a Jerome 431 (TM) Mercury Vapor Analyzer were compared with laboratory analysis using a modified National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) 6009 method. Statistical evaluation showed that the data were highly comparable except at low concentrations, due to the large degree of uncertainty associated with measuring low levels of mercury with the Jerome analyzer. Regression analysis indicated that Jerome measurements of 10 mug/m(3) or greater are comparable for field analysis of mercury vapor in air. Published by Elsevier Science B.V.
引用
收藏
页码：1 / 10
页数：10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Laboratory comparison of measurement procedures for workplace monitoring of mercury vapor
    Dragan, George C.
    Hebisch, Ralph
    Woznica, Anita
    Warzecha, Andrea
    Martiny, Anastasia
    Hassemer, Rüdiger
    Nitschke, Lutz
    Nehls, Ralf
    Fendler, Dirk
    Gefahrstoffe Reinhaltung der Luft, 2021, 81 (9-10): : 339 - 344
  • [2] Laboratory comparison of measurement procedures for workplace monitoring of mercury vapor
    Dragan, G. C.
    Hebisch, R.
    Woznica, A.
    Warzecha, A.
    Martiny, A.
    Hassemer, R.
    Nitschke, L.
    Nehls, R.
    Fendler, D.
    GEFAHRSTOFFE REINHALTUNG DER LUFT, 2021, 81 (9-10): : 339 - 344
  • [3] LABORATORY AND FIELD COMPARISON OF 3 METHODS FOR MONITORING SULFUR-DIOXIDE IN AIR
    KRING, EV
    HENRY, TJ
    DAMRELL, DJ
    BYTHEWOOD, TK
    AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 1983, 44 (12): : 929 - 936
  • [4] Comparison of Reactive Gaseous Mercury Collection by Different Sampling Methods in a Laboratory Test and Field Monitoring
    Bu, Xiaoge
    Zhang, Hefeng
    Lv, Guangkuo
    Lin, Huiming
    Chen, Long
    Yin, Xiufeng
    Shen, Guofeng
    Yuan, Wen
    Zhang, Wei
    Wang, Xuejun
    Tong, Yindong
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LETTERS, 2018, 5 (10): : 600 - 607
  • [5] Laboratory development and validation of vapor phase PFAS methods for soil gas, sewer gas, and indoor air
    Hayes, Heidi
    Lutes, Chris
    Watson, Nicola
    Benton, Diane
    Hanigan, David J.
    Mccoy, Seth
    Holton, Chase
    Bronstein, Katherine E.
    Schumacher, Brian
    Zimmerman, John
    Williams, Alan
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE-ATMOSPHERES, 2025, 5 (01): : 94 - 109
  • [6] Comparison of methods for predicting indoor air distribution
    Zhao, B.
    Lin, B.R.
    Li, X.T.
    Yan, Q.S.
    Nuantong Kongtiao/HV & AC, 2001, 31 (04):
  • [7] Comparison of two indoor CO monitoring methods
    Xiao, JH
    Smith, KR
    Wei, QY
    Hou, JC
    Dong, RJ
    INDOOR AIR 2005: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE, VOLS 1-5, 2005, : 3685 - 3690
  • [8] RELEASE OF AIR-POLLUTANTS IN INDOOR AIR - COMPARISON OF TRADITIONAL AND METALLIC COOKSTOVES
    KANDPAL, JB
    MAHESHWARI, RC
    KANDPAL, TC
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 1994, 4 (07) : 833 - 837
  • [9] Field evaluation of mercury vapor analytical methods: Comparison of the "Double amalgam method" and ISO 17733
    Takaya, M
    Joeng, JY
    Ishihara, N
    Serita, F
    Kohyama, N
    INDUSTRIAL HEALTH, 2006, 44 (02) : 287 - 290
  • [10] Challenges on field monitoring of indoor air quality in china
    Ho, Steven Sai Hang
    Huang, Yu
    Lee, Shun-Cheng
    Cao, Junji
    INDOOR AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT, 2017, 26 (04) : 576 - 584
12345