Thermal desorption gas chromatography–mass spectrometry as an enhanced method for the quantification of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from ambient air particulate matter

• Published in: Journal of Chromatography A Vol. 1216; no. 18; pp. 4030 - 4039
• Main Authors: van Drooge, Barend L., Nikolova, Irina, Ballesta, Pascual Pérez
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.05.2009; Amsterdam; New York: Elsevier; Elsevier
• Subjects: Air Pollutants - chemistry; Ambient air; Analysis methods; Analytical chemistry; Applied sciences; Atmospheric pollution; Benzo[a]pyrene; Chemistry; Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography; Differential Thermal Analysis - methods; Exact sciences and technology; Gas chromatographic methods; Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry - methods; Particulate matter; Particulate Matter - chemistry; Pollution; Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons - chemistry; Thermal desorption; Thermal desorption; Benzo[a]pyrene; Ambient air; Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Particulate matter; Chemical analysis; Hydrocarbon; Coupled method; Thermodesorption; Air; Polycyclic aromatic compound; Gas chromatography; Suspended particle; Dust; Air pollution; Mass spectrometry; Quantitative analysis
• ISSN: 0021-9673; 1873-3778
• DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2009.02.043

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from ambient air particulate matter (PM) were analysed by a two-step thermal desorption (TD) injection system integrated to a gas chromatograph–mass spectrometer (GC/MS). The operational variables of the TD method were optimised and the analytical expanded uncertainties were calculated to vary from 8% to 16% over the operative concentration range (40–4000 pg). The performance of the TD method was validated by the analysis of a standard reference material and by comparison of PAH concentrations in PM samples to those obtained by a conventional liquid extraction (LE) method. The TD method reported lower uncertainties than the LE method for the analysis of similar concentrations in air. The TD method also showed advantages for shorter sampling times in comparison to 24 h for source apportionment applications and for reducing losses of more reactive compounds such as benzo[a]pyrene.