We recently published an article called: How Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) Is Used in Coal Ash Analysis. After tweeting out the article we received a direct message that asked: Why ICP-OES instead of ICP-MS?
Here’s the answer:
Inductively coupled plasma/optical emission spectrometry (ICP/OES) could be used, but due to the nature of the high acid extracts required, then additional, significant dilutions will be required. This would ultimately increase the sample preparation time/resources and increase error caused during measurement. Also, ICP/OES has lower accosted cost (less upfront and lower running costs). Thus, ICP/OES is preferred due to the high concentrations in the sample, high matrix nature of the sample digests and lower setup and running costs. Read the application note Analysis of Coal and Coal Ash using ICP-OES.
More questions? Just comment below and ask.
What Is Ambient Air?
Learn about ambient air, its significance, pollutants, and m...
Read More
PGNAA Improves Process and Quality Control in Cement Production
In the world of cement production, precision is key. Getting...
Read More
Don’t Abandon the Treasures: Fill Your Trick-or-Treat Bags with Free eBooks for Mining and Cement Operations
Ghost towns have more to do with the abandonment of mining t...
Read More
Making Sure Green Cement is Clean Cement
Alternative Fuels (AFs) are being increasingly used in cemen...
Read More
Is your answer backwards?
E.g, you said, “…Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) has lower accosted cost (less upfront and lower running costs).”
The way your response is worded seems to support ICP-MS over ICP-OES.
Further, my understanding of the facts & the article would favor ICP-OES due to cost & the higher concentration of metals in the ash.
This article has been modified. Our original article incorrectly stated the benefits of ICP-MS vs ICP-OES. We apologize for the error and thank our reader, Jack Burn, for pointing out our typo.