4.8 Article

Determination of copper speciation in highway stormwater runoff using competitive ligand exchange - Adsorptive cathodic stripping voltammetry

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 17, 页码 5788-5798

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.08.008

关键词

Copper; Speciation; Organic matter; Stormwater; Voltammetry; Modeling

资金

  1. Oregon Department of Transportation
  2. Federal Highway Administration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Low concentrations of dissolved copper have been shown to adversely affect the olfactory system of salmonid species, impairing their ability to avoid predators and likely increasing mortality. These studies have resulted in increased regulatory scrutiny of stormwater discharges to surface waters inhabited by threatened and endangered salmonid species. Because it is primarily the free ionic (Cu2+) and weakly complexed forms of copper that are bioavailable, it is critical to understand the speciation of copper in stormwater. This paper reports on the characterization of copper binding ligands and copper speciation in composite samples of highway stormwater runoff collected at four sites in Oregon, USA using competitive ligand exchange - adsorptive cathodic stripping voltammetry (CLE-ACSV). Although the concentration and strength of copper binding ligands in stormwater varied considerable between sites and storms, the vast majority (>99.9%) of the total dissolved copper in composite samples was complexed by organic ligands in stormwater. Although total dissolved copper concentrations range from 2 to 20 mu g/L, the analytically determined free ionic copper concentrations did not exceed 10(-10) M (6.3 ng/L) in any of the fully characterized samples, suggesting that much of the copper in highway stormwater is not bioavailable. Analytically determined free ionic copper concentrations were compared with those predicted by a readily available chemical equilibrium models and found to be in reasonable agreement. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据