This study addresses the need to transition WWTPs from energy-intensive operations to carbon-neutral and energy-efficient systems by examining VFAs' concentrations, which vary significantly with different types of wastewater. The analytical performance of the liquid–liquid extraction (LLE) method using two solvents – methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) and dichloromethane (DCM) – followed by injection into a gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) system is evaluated. The limit of quantification (LOQ) and limit of detection (LOD) for VFAs ranged from 3 to 7.41 mg/L and 0.91 to 2.25 mg/L, respectively. Precision for lower VFAs (ethanoic (C2), propanoic (C3), 2-methyl-propanoic (iC4), butanoic (C4), methyl-butanoic (iC5), and pentanoic acids (C5)) using DCM and MTBE ranged from 1.99% to 8.64% and 1.21% to 6.68%, respectively, with accuracies of 90.35% to 107.27% and 81.55% to 105.96%, respectively. For higher VFAs (iC6, C6, and C7) using DCM, precision ranged from 18.44% to 27.06%, and accuracy ranged from 70.1% to 101.4%. In contrast, MTBE failed to detect VFAs iC6, C6, and C7. These findings underscore the importance of solvent selection in VFA analysis and its implications for optimising WWTP operations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sremački et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: