Statistical validation of sulfate quantification methods used for analysis of acid mine drainage.
Turbidimetric method (TM), ion chromatography (IC) and inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) with and without acid digestion have been compared and validated for the determination of sulfate in mining wastewater. Analytical methods were chosen to compare the performance of a portable field turbidimetric instrument and to validate the underlying assumption utilized in conversion of total sulfur to sulfate during ICP-AES analysis. Accuracy and precision of analytical techniques were compared to one another using control and field samples collected from a mine site using the Bonferroni multiple comparison test. Effects of sample dilution, filter pore size and acidification on sulfate quantification were also studied. The results showed that IC and ICP-AES with and without acid digestion provided excellent recoveries in the case of control samples (within 90-110%). These analytical methods also showed lower relative standard deviation for both control and field samples. On the other hand, performance of the turbidimetric method was severely affected by sample dilution and acidification, and also revealed poor sulfate recoveries for control samples ranging from 0 to 83.5%. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the response (sulfate concentration) obtained from factorial design. Analytical method had significant effect (P<0.0001) on the sulfate quantification. The interaction between determination method and sample dilution was more significant than other two-way interactions.
Reisman
David J
DJ
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA.
Sundaram
Vijayakumar
V
Al-Abed
Souhail R
SR
Allen
Derrick
D