Comparison of analytical error and sampling error for contaminated soil

Journal of Hazardous Materials

Volumn 138, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 252-260

  Gustavsson, Björn ^a   Luthbom, Karin ^b   Lagerkvist, Anders ^a  

^a LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b Ramböll Sverige AB ^*  (Sweden)

Author keywords

Metal; Sampling error; Soil contamination; Uncertainty; X ray fluorescence

Indexed keywords

CONCENTRATION (PROCESS); CONTAMINATION; ERROR ANALYSIS; FLUORESCENCE; PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS; SOILS;

SAMPLING ERROR; SOIL CONTAMINATION; X-RAY FLUORESCENCE;

SOIL POLLUTION;

CONCENTRATION (PROCESS); CONTAMINATION; ERROR ANALYSIS; FLUORESCENCE; PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS; SOIL POLLUTION; SOILS;

ANALYTICAL METHOD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ERROR ANALYSIS; SOIL POLLUTION;

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; ATOMIC EMISSION SPECTROMETRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; PARTICLE SIZE; SAMPLING ERROR; SOIL POLLUTANT; SOIL POLLUTION;

REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELECTION BIAS; SOIL POLLUTANTS; STATISTICS;

EID: 33750317018     PISSN: 03043894     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.01.082     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Magnusson A. Modell för inventering av förorenade områden: Exempel från Malmbanan (2004), Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå p. 85
2. USEPA. Method 6200, field portable X-ray spectrometry for the determination of elemental concentrations in soils and sediment (1998), United States Environmental Protection Agency p. 31
3. Niton Corporation. NITON 300 series & 700 series user's guide version 5.2 (1998), Niton Corporation, Bedford, MA p. 130
4. Shefsky S. Sample handling strategies for accurate lead-in-soil measurements in the fields and laboratory (1997), Niton Corporation, Las Vegas, NV, USA p. 14
5. Back P.-E. On uncertainity and data worth in decision analysis for contaminated soil (2003), Department of Geology, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg p. 130
6. Back P.-E. Sampling strategies and dataworth analysis for contaminated land-a literature review, SGI-VARIA 01/500 SE (2001), Statens Geologiska Institut, Linköping p. 96
7. Gerlach R.W., and Nocerino J.M. Guidance for obtaining representative laboratory analytical subsamples from particulate laboratory samples, EPA /600/R-03/027 (2003), United States Environmental Protection Agency p. 156
8. Gy P. Sampling for analytical purposes (1998), John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England p. 153
9. Gy P. Sampling of heterogeneous and dynamic material systems-theories of heterogeneity, sampling and homogenizing (1992), Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands p. 653
10. Gy P.M. Sampling of particulate materials-theory and practice (1979), Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands p. 431
11. Mason B.J. Preparation of soil sampling protocols: sampling techniques and strategies EPA 600/R-92-128, EPA/600/R-92/128 (1992), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA p. 169
12. Minkkinen P. Practical applications of sampling theory. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 74 (2004) 85-94
13. Myers J.C. Geostatistical error management: quantifying uncertainity for environmental sampling and mapping (1997), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York p. 571
14. Pitard F.F. Pierre Gy's sampling theory and sampling practice: heterogeneity, sampling correctness, and statistical process control (1993), CRC Press, Boca Raton p. 488
15. Minkkinen P. Evaluation of the fundamental sampling error in the sampling of particulate solids. Anal. Chim. Acta 196 (1986) 237-245
16. Ingersoll W. Environmental analytical measurement uncertainty estimation-nested hierarchical approach, ADA396946 (2001), Defense Technical Information Center p. 56
17. Luthbom K., Gustavsson B., Von Heijne P., Lagerkvist A., Bergman H., and Maurice C. Sampling strategy at a brownfield site. Manus (2004) 13
18. SIS. Soil quality-sampling-part 2: guidance on sampling techniques, SS 10 381-2, Stockholm, Sweden (2003) p. 23
19. Crumbling D.M. In search of representativeness: evolving the environmental data quality model. Qual. Assuran. 9 (2002) 179-190