Comparison of extraction techniques for the isolation of explosives and their degradation products from soil

• Published in: International journal of environmental analytical chemistry Vol. 93; no. 9; pp. 984 - 998
• Main Authors: Ungradova, Ivana, Simek, Zdenek, Vavrova, Milada, Stoupalova, Michaela, Mravcova, Ludmila
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Abingdon Taylor & Francis 01.08.2013; Taylor & Francis LLC
• Subjects: Analytical chemistry; Biodegradation; Chemical compounds; Explosives; isolation techniques; microwave assisted extraction (MAE); microwave treatment; Microwaves; pressurized solvent extraction (PSE); Recovery; soil; Soil (material); Soil contamination; soil sampling; Solvent extraction; Solvent extraction processes; Solvents; Soxhlet warm extraction (SWE); supercritical fluid extraction; supercritical fluid extraction (SFE); Supercritical fluids; temperature; Tetryl
• ISSN: 1029-0397; 0306-7319; 1029-0397
• DOI: 10.1080/03067319.2012.736972

A comparison of four extraction techniques used for the isolation of 14 explosive compounds (Method 8330-Explosives) from spiked soil samples is described. Soxhlet warm extraction (SWE), pressurized solvent extraction (PSE), microwave assisted extraction (MAE) and supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) were included. The effects of basic extraction conditions – i.e. type of extraction solvent, temperature, pressure, and extraction time – were investigated. The best extraction recovery of the monitored compounds from spiked soil was obtained using pressurized solvent extraction. Recoveries of explosives using the PSE technique were in the range from 65 to 112%. Extraction recoveries by Soxhlet warm extraction and supercritical fluid extraction reached 65–99% and 52–75%, respectively. The lowest extraction recoveries (28–65%) were obtained using microwave assisted extraction. A very low extraction recovery for tetryl was observed in all cases but the best results were achieved by pressurized solvent extraction (58%).