Determination
methods for total carbon concentration in water samples
Wei Yanlin, Lin Jinming (Research Center for
Eco-Environmental Science, Chinese Academy of Science, P.O. Box 2871,
Beijing 100085, China)
Received Nov. 2, 2003; The
Project Sponsored by the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned
Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry.
Abstract In this paper,
determination methods of total carbon concentration (TC), including total
inorganic carbon (TIC) and total organic carbon (TOC) were summarized. TIC
determination in natural water samples is essentially vital, especially in
sea water samples, for studying the present and future global
CO2 air-sea flux. Flow injection analysis (FIA) coupled with a
gas diffusion unit (GDU) is proved to be simple, sensitive, rapid and easy
to operate for TIC determination. TOC determination is one of the most
important works for acquiring knowledge about water and wastewater
quality. TOC analysis procedures include two steps, firstly converting the
component of organic matter to CO2 and then detecting of the
CO2 or carbonate ion in CO2 absorbing solution.
Keywords Total carbon concentration; Total organic carbon;
Total inorganic carbon
1 INTRODUCTION Items of
carbon analysis in water sample include total carbon concentration (TC),
inorganic carbon (IC), also known as total inorganic carbon (TIC), total
organic carbon (TOC), non-purgeable organic carbon (NPOC), purgeable
organic carbon (POC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and volatile organic
compound (VOC) or volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Among those, TC
including TIC and TOC are more important than others.
Determination of TC is an important work in
environmental science and engineering. It is possible to classify the
different fractions of carbon according to the physical or chemical
properties of the compounds present in the sample. Thus, one can find the
so-called IC, or TIC, which corresponds to the sum of dissolved carbon
dioxide, bicarbonate and carbonate, and TOC, which is defined as the
amount of carbon covalently bonded as organic compounds present in the
sample [1,2]. TOC is obtained from the difference between TC
and IC, i.e. TOC = TC-IC, or the sum of NPOC or POC, i.e. TOC = NPOC +
POC. Therefore, the precision might be significantly improved by
determining these parameters in a direct fashion.
2 TIC Carbon dioxide
(CO2) can dissolve in environmental waters, and is kept at the
equilibrium between the atmosphere and the aquatic environment. The
exchange of CO2 across the air/water is an important parameter
for understanding the processes related to the carbon cycle within the
aquatic environment. In contrast to the freshwater systems, the oceans are
a huge reservoir of CO2, and can act as both a source and a
sink of CO2, depending upon the region, season, and the
occurrence of episodic events. Widespread mapping of the partial pressure
of CO2 and TIC of seawater is essentially vital for determining
the present and future global CO2 air-sea flux. Several methods
for the determination of TIC in aqueous solutions have been reported.
Commonly, the water sample is firstly acidified
with sulfuric acid and give CO2 gas, then measuring this
CO2 with infrared spectrophotometer, gas chromatography or
other methods [3], or absorbing it with Ba(OH)2
solution and then followed by titration. For saving time and sensitive
determination of CO2, various kinds of methods were
proposed. CO2 sensors based on solid
electrolyte were widely used in practice for the monitoring of
CO2 in industrial waste gas [4,5]. These solid
electrolyte sensors have wide dynamic ranges and their response times are
in the ranges of 8 to 40s. However, they always have to be worked at high
temperature (600-1100 K) and their response is sensitive to temperature
changes [6-8]. They are not adapted for the determination of
CO2 in water samples at room temperature. Fiber optic sefnsors
for CO2 have been extensively studied [9,10].
However, their sensitivity and precision are not enough for their
application to all water samples. Chemiluminescence
is another method but less used for the determination of CO2.
Lan et al. [11,12] found that luminol- cobalt(II)
phthalocyanine chmiluminescence could be enhanced by CO2 in the
absence of added oxidant. Based on this property, CO2 was
determined from about 50 ppm to 800 ppm. This system gives a fast response
and is capable of reaching detection limits down to 1.5 ppm when working
at steady state conditions with the gaseous sample being continuously
pumped. However, the system employs an expensive reagent mixture, the
signal is pH-dependent and the chemiluminecence detection system is
somewhat complex [11]. The single
operator multiparameter metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) proposed by Johnson et
al. [13,14] has been widely used in practical determination of
TIC in sea water. Descriptions of the SOMMA-coulometer system and its
calibration can be found in the works of Johnson from 1985 to 1993. A
schematic diagram of the SOMMA is shown in Fig. 1 , briefly, seawater
fills an automated sample pipette. The contents of the pipette are
pneumatically injected into a stripping chamber containing approximately
1.2 cm of 8.5% v/v phosphoric acid, and the resultant CO2 is
extracted, dried, and coulometrically titrated. Calibration is performed
by titrating known masses of pure CO2 and checked by analyzing
certified reference material (CRM). The system, however, is very big,
complicated and difficult to operate [15].
Gas permeation methods coupled with flow injection
analysis (FIA) have been proved to be simple, sensitive, rapid and easy to
operate. In the methods, the changes of physicochemical property of the
CO2 receptor, which are caused by permeated CO2, can
be detected by potentiometry[16], spectrophotometry
[17-21] and conductometry[21,22].
The flow analysis used for the determination of TIC
with membrane separation was first reported by Carlson [23].
The method was based on the transfer of CO2 by diffusion
through silicone-rubber hollow fibres into a flowing stream of deionized
water, followed by electrical conductivity detection. Jardim et al.
[24] used a FIA system, which was proposed by Pasquini and de
Faria [25] for the measurement of ammonia based on gas
diffusion through a PTFE membrane and measurement in a conductance flow
cell, to monitor aqueous CO2 production from Escherichia
coli in toxicity tests. More recently, other authors have also published
articles based on the same system for the determination of TIC
[26]. Kuban and Dasgupta [21]
compared the conductometry with spectrophotometry, and found that the
conductometric procedure with a weak alkaline receptor solution provided
better day-to-day reproducibility, sensitivity and detection limits.
Aoki et al. [22] improved a
conductometric method based on a continuous flow reported by Carlson
[23]; the limit of detection corresponding to the
signal-to-noise ratio of 3 was 1.0 x 10-5 M. Motomizu et al.
reported a gas-diffusion/FIA (GD/FIA) for carbonate [17-19] and
ammonium [19,20], and recently Higuchi et al. developed a
stable GD apparatus for ammonia determination [27]. Futher
evolution on this GD unit (GDU) was made and used for the determination of
TIC in various water samples , especially in the purified water samples
[28,29]. For improving the sensitivity,
new indicators were sythesised and used for the determination of TIC in
water samples [28]. A new indicator named 4-(2¡¯,4¡¯-dinitrophenylazo)-1- naphthol-5- sulfonic acid is
much better than that of cresol red, which is the best one in commercial
available indicators. The limit of detection (LOD) corresponding to a
signal-to-noise ratio of three was 1x10-6 M.
For continuous in-situ analysis of TIC in natural
water samples, Wei et al. [30] proposed a reversed-flow
injection analysis (rFIA) method based on the improved GDU and a portable
FIA system [31].
3 TOC TOC is one of the
most important parameters for acquiring knowledge about water and
wastewater quality because it concerns theoretically all organic compounds
[32]. It is shown that TOC becomes more and more important in
the environmental protection areas than other parameters such as
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD), because
TOC is a more suitable and direct expression of the organic pollutants
than BOD or COD. The assessment is based on two main reasons: (i) TOC is
directly correlated with the carbon concentration, irrespective of the
oxidation state of the organic compounds, and (ii) theoretically, TOC is
not influenced by the presence of some inorganic reducing agents
[33].
 TOC has been
successfully employed as a general pollution indicator for volatile and
non-volatile organic compounds. There are many kinds of commercial
available TOC analyzers, for example, TOC-4100 of Shimadzu Corporation,
the basic analysis principles are all the same. The typical flow diagram
of TOC determination is as shown in Fig. 2. Analysis procedures include,
normally, two critical steps [34]. The
first one refers to the conversion of all organical bounded carbon to a
simple molecular form, which can be measured quantitatively. As a rule,
the most usual method for this conversion is the oxidation of organic
carbon to carbon dioxide, which can be done by high temperature
combustion, chemical or radiative oxidation, such as thermal combution
[35,36], pyrolitic methods [37], persulfate
oxidation [36,38] and photodecomposition by ultraviolet
radiation [39-43]. In these
methods, called high-temperature combustion methods, the oxidation of the
carbon-containing species is normally carried out in vapor phase in the
presence of a catalyst at temperatures ranging from 700 to 900 ¡ãC. The
main analytical problem in the TOC determination by high temperature
combustion methods arises from the difficulty in controlling the
temperature in the oxidation step, leading to deterioration in the
precision of the results. Additional pitfalls of the high temperature
combustion methods include [44] (i) appearance of long memory
effects, (ii) capillary blocking when working with high-salt-content
solutions or with samples containing suspended solid matter, (iii) high
background levels due to carbon release from the catalyst and some other
parts of the system, (iv) sometimes the oxidation yield is too low (e.g.,
82% for sulfathiazole), and (v) mechanical problems caused by the sudden
expansion of the carrier gas stream as it enters the high temperature
column [45].
 Fig. 2 Flow diagram of TOC
determination
Photodecomposition cannot be used for noncombustible compounds and the wet
oxidation is useful only for nonvolatile organic carbon, and the pyrolitic
methods are restricted to samples with low organic carbon
content[46]. The second step is
concerning to the detection of produced CO2 during the
oxidation of the organic compounds. A carrier gas stream (e.g., oxygen
[36], helium [47], argon [45], air or
nidrogen [48], and so on) is used to drive the CO2
toward the detector. The CO2 may be determined by means of
nondispersive infrared spectrometry [49], near-infrared
spectrometry [50], thermal conductivity [35], or
indirectly, by acid/base titration of a CO2-absorbing solution
[51], and also, by gravimetry [52] or ionic
chromatography [36], include the use of a hydrogen-flame
ionization detector [47]. A procedure for
the determination of TOC is proposed based on the development of a
microscale system for the wet decomposition and the conversion of the
organic compounds to CO2. The construction and fitness of a
microreactor for gas¨Cliquid
transfer were proved to be suitable for FI and the turbidimetric
determination of the generated CO2
[46]. Plasma spectrometric
techniques have been hardly applied to carbon determination
[56]. An inductively coupled plasma atomic emission
spectrometer system was proposed [45] for the direct
determination of TOC and TIC. To determine the TOC,
the TIC must be removed from the sample. To this end, several methods have
been proposed [53,54], the most common one being the addition
of acid to the sample, to transform inorganic carbon into CO2
and the use of a sparging/carrier gas stream to remove and drive the
carbon dioxide toward the measurement zone [36]. Alternatively,
for the TIC determination, the sample can be injected into a separated
reaction chamber packed with phosphoric acid-coated quartz beads
[55]. TIC can also be determined through the use of a
semiautomated coulometric method. In this case, the calibration is
performed from standards containing known concentrations of bicarbonate
[43].
4.
PERSPECTIVES Monitoring TOC in environmental water is very
important. In a recent China-Japan environmental technology symposium, it
is said that, the standard of COD in tap water will be replaced by the
standard of TOC on 1 April 2005 in Japan. There are so many methods for
monitoring TOC have been developed as reviewed above beside the standards,
but all those methods for determination of carbon concentration in water
samples, even in air or solid samples are related with each other. We can
select a proper determination method and instrument from commercial
available analyzers or develop a new method and a new instrument according
to the analytical aims. However, a small portable instrument for
continuous, stable and automatic on-site monitoring of TIC and TOC is
strongly desired, such as portable FIA[30-31] and optic fiber
sensors. Optic fiber sensors may become the perfect sensors for
environmental monitoring and analysis. It is very suitable for automatic
on-site environmental monitoring and analysis, especially for data network
environmental monitoring system. The key point for making optic fiber
sensors is to make a sensitive and selective micro membrane for the
monitoring target with different materials, such as microorganism,
luciferase or molecularly imprinted polymers etc.
REFERENCES [1] Harrison
J F, McGowan W. WAQ Glossary of Terms. 3rd Edtion. Lisle, IL: Water
Quality Association, 1997. [2] Maestre S E, Mora J,
Hernandis V et al. Anal. Chem., 2003, 75: 111. [3] JIS K0304, Method
for determination of CO2 in air. Tokyo: Japanese Industrial
Standards Committee, 1996. [4] Wang L, Kumar R V. Solid State Ionics,
2003, 158: 309. [5] Qiua F, Zhua Q, Yanga X et al.Sensors and Actuators
B, 2003, 93: 237. [6] Ishihara T, Kometani K, Hashida M et al. J.
Electrochem. Soc., 1992, 139: 2881. [7] Miura N, Yao N, Shimizu Y et
al. J. Electrochem. Soc., 1992, 139: 1384. [8] Imanaka N, Murada T,
Kawasato T et al. Chem. Lett., 1992, 21:103. [9] Munkholm C, R.Walt D,
Milanovichi F P. Talanta, 1988, 35: 109. [10] Wolfbesis O S, Weis L J,
Leiner M J P et al. Anal.Chem., 1988, 60: 2028. [11] Lan Z-H, Mottola H
A. Anal. Chim. Acta, 1996, 329: 305. [12] Lan Z-H, Mottola H A.
Analyst, 1996, 121: 211. [13] Johnson K M, King A E, Sieburth J M. Mar.
Chem., 1985, 16: 61. [14] Johnson K M, Dickson A G., Eischeid G et al.
Marine Chemistry, 1998, 63: 21. [15] Ishii M. Bunseki, 2000, 311:
658. [16] Linares P, Lugue de Castro M D, Valcarcel M. Anal. Chim.
Acta, 1985, 225: 443. [17] Motomizu S, Toei K, Kuwaki T et al.
Anal.Chem., 1987, 59: 2930. [18] Kuwki T, Toei K, Akiba M et al.
Bunseki Kagaku, 1987, 36: T132. [19] Sanada M, Oshima M, Motomizu S.
Bunseki Kagaku, 1993, 42: T123. [20] Kuwaki T, Akiba M, Oshima M et al.
Bunseki Kagaku, 1987, 36: T81. [21] Kuban V, Dasgupta P K. Talanta,
1993, 40: 831. [22] Aoki T, Fujimura Y, Oka Y et al. Anal. Chim. Acta,
1993, 284: 167. [23] Carlson R M. Anal. Chem., 1978, 50: 1528. [24]
Jardim W F, Pasquini C, Guimaraes J R et al. Water Res., 1990, 24:
351. [25] Pasquini C, de Faria L C. Anal. Chim. Acta, 1987, 193:
19. [26] Hall P O J, Aller R C. Limnol. Oceanogr., 1992, 37:
1113. [27] Higuchi K, Inoue A, Tsuboi T et al. Bunseki Kagaku, 1999,
48: 253. [28] Oshima M, Wei Y, Yamamoto M et al. Anal. Sci., 2001, 17:
1285. [29] Wei Y, Oshima M, Motomizu S. Analyst, 2002, 127:
424. [30] Wei Y, Oshima M, Takayanagi T et al. J. Flow Injection Anal.,
2001, 18: 156. [31] Ma L, Oshima M, Takayanagi T et al. J. Flow
Injection Anal., 2000, 17: 188. [32] Thomas O, El Khorassani H, Touraud
E et al. Talanta, 1999, 50: 743. [33] Stoll M H C, Bakker K, Nobbe G H
et al. Anal. Chem., 2001, 73: 4111. [34]
APHA-AWWA
¡ª Standard
methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th Edition.
American Public Health Association, 1995. [35] G¨¢cs I, Payer K. Anal.
Chim. Acta, 1989, 220: 1. [36] Fung Y S, Wu Z, Dao K L. Anal. Chem.
1996, 68: 2186. [37] Pickering W F. Environmental Science and
Technology Series. Vol. 2. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1977. [38] McKenna
J H, Doering P H. Mar. Chem., 1995, 48: 109. [39] Matthews R W,
Abdullah M, Low G K. Anal. Chim. Acta, 1990, 233: 171. [40] Abdullah M
I, Eek E. Wat. Res. 1996, 30: 1813. [41] Goulden P D, Brooksbank P.
Anal. Chem. 1975, 47: 1943. [42] Van Steenderen R A, Lin J S. Anal.
Chem. 1981, 53: 2157. [43] Johnson K M, Wills K D, Butler D B et al.
Mar. Chem. 1993, 44: 167. [44] Spyres G, Nimmo M, Worsfold P J et al.
Trends Anal. Chem. 2000, 19: 498. [45] Maestre S E, Mora J, Hemandis V
et al. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75: 111. [46] Paniz J N G, Flores E M M,
Dressler V L et al. Anal. Chim. Acta, 2001, 445: 139. [47] Dobbs R A,
Wise R H, Dean R B. Anal. Chem. 1967, 39: 1255. [48] JIS K0805,
Continuous Total Organic Carbon Analyzer. Tokyo: Japanese Industrial
Standards Committee, 1993. [49] APHA-AWWA ¡ª
Standard methods for the
examination of water and wastewater. 19th Edition. American Public Health
Association, 1995. [50] Thomas O, Khorassani H El, Touraud E et al.
Talanta, 1999, 50: 743. [51] Nelson D W, Sommers L E. Methods of Soil
Analysis. Part 2, Madison, Wis., LISA: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.,
1986, p. 1349. [52] Allinson L E, Bollen W B, Moodie C D. Methods of
Soil Analysis. Part 2, Madison, Wis., LISA: American Society of Agronomy,
Inc., 1986, p. 1346. [53] Kubala S W, Tilotta D C, Busch M A. Anal.
Chem. 1989, 61: 1841. [54] Huber S A, Frimmel F H. Anal. Chem. 1991,
63: 2122. [55] Sugimura Y, Suzuki Y. Mar. Chem. 1988, 24: 105. [56]
Wu M, Carnahan J W. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. 1992, 7: 1249.
¡¡ |