Comparative efficiency of soxhlet and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) methods for dioxin/furan analysis in ash samples: A green chemistry perspective

Xuan Hung Nguyen , Duc Nam Vu , Quang Minh Bui , Quang Trung Nguyen , Anh Tuan Nguyen
{"title":"Comparative efficiency of soxhlet and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) methods for dioxin/furan analysis in ash samples: A green chemistry perspective","authors":"Xuan Hung Nguyen ,&nbsp;Duc Nam Vu ,&nbsp;Quang Minh Bui ,&nbsp;Quang Trung Nguyen ,&nbsp;Anh Tuan Nguyen","doi":"10.1016/j.greeac.2025.100227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Soxhlet extraction method was developed several hundred years ago, remains the standard method for dioxin/furan extraction today. Accelerated solvent extraction (ASE), a modern technique, was designed to address some of the limitations of Soxhlet extraction, including longer extraction times, excessive solvent use, and limited automation. Fly ash and bottom ash samples collected from an aluminum scrap smelter were analyzed for dioxins and furans using both ASE and Soxhlet methods, followed by analysis on HRGC/HRMS equipment. The TEQ values of PCDD/Fs in the fly ash and bottom ash samples were found to be 3,689 ng TEQ/kg and 13.7 ng TEQ/kg, respectively. The congeners OCDF, OCDD, and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD were the most dominant in the fly ash samples. The recovery efficiency of the spiked 13C isotope standards and native standards, used to assess the extraction efficiency, was high and met the requirements set forth in US EPA 1613b method. Deviations in the results for the 17 dioxin/furan congeners in the fly ash and bottom ash samples extracted by the two methods ranged from -15.5 % to 25.6 % and -15.0 % to 32.9 %, respectively, both of which fall within the acceptable range according to AOAC guidelines for method performance. ASE extraction, performed under high temperature and pressure conditions, yields faster extraction times, reduced solvent usage, enhanced operator safety, lower energy consumption, and higher automation compared to Soxhlet extraction. The green score assessment results using AGREE Prep software indicate that the ASE extraction method is more environmentally friendly and safer than Soxhlet extraction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100594,"journal":{"name":"Green Analytical Chemistry","volume":"12 ","pages":"Article 100227"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Green Analytical Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577425000242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Soxhlet extraction method was developed several hundred years ago, remains the standard method for dioxin/furan extraction today. Accelerated solvent extraction (ASE), a modern technique, was designed to address some of the limitations of Soxhlet extraction, including longer extraction times, excessive solvent use, and limited automation. Fly ash and bottom ash samples collected from an aluminum scrap smelter were analyzed for dioxins and furans using both ASE and Soxhlet methods, followed by analysis on HRGC/HRMS equipment. The TEQ values of PCDD/Fs in the fly ash and bottom ash samples were found to be 3,689 ng TEQ/kg and 13.7 ng TEQ/kg, respectively. The congeners OCDF, OCDD, and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD were the most dominant in the fly ash samples. The recovery efficiency of the spiked 13C isotope standards and native standards, used to assess the extraction efficiency, was high and met the requirements set forth in US EPA 1613b method. Deviations in the results for the 17 dioxin/furan congeners in the fly ash and bottom ash samples extracted by the two methods ranged from -15.5 % to 25.6 % and -15.0 % to 32.9 %, respectively, both of which fall within the acceptable range according to AOAC guidelines for method performance. ASE extraction, performed under high temperature and pressure conditions, yields faster extraction times, reduced solvent usage, enhanced operator safety, lower energy consumption, and higher automation compared to Soxhlet extraction. The green score assessment results using AGREE Prep software indicate that the ASE extraction method is more environmentally friendly and safer than Soxhlet extraction.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信