Field analyzers for lead quantification in drinking water samples

Abstract

Field analyzers for the measurement of lead in drinking water samples are gaining interest from states, water utilities and building managers as rapid, inexpensive and simple tools to quantify lead concentrations. This literature review compares data quality by field analyzers to established laboratory methods and provides practical information (e.g. costs, ease-of-use) on commercial lead analyzers that are based on: (1) Electrochemistry, (2) Colorimetry and (3) Fluorescence. Between and within these three general field analyzer categories, manufacturers specify a variety of protocols to prepare the samples, which differ from the standard acidification in laboratory methods. Review of the literature raised concerns that without adequate sample preparation, field analyzers may not always fully quantify the total lead concentration, including particulate lead, thereby resulting in underestimations. Nonetheless, field analyzers have been used to quickly obtain experimental results in the laboratory, or in the field when access to laboratory equipment was limited, expensive or otherwise impractical. Field analyzers were also successfully used to detect lead from service lines, by a water utility where lead was mostly in the dissolved form. Overall, intrinsic strengths and weaknesses of field analyzers are discussed, to better balance practical convenience and adequate data quality depending on the objective.

Keywords:

• Lead
• field analyzer
• colorimetry
• anodic stripping voltammetry
• fluorescence
• laboratory methods

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Kenneth Pelletier (retired, previously with Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection) for sharing information on lead field analyzers and engaging in early discussions. The authors thank Dawn Webb, Denise Patrick and James Nelson (Greater Cincinnati Water Works) for providing information on ICP-MS analysis and demonstrating the use of some field analyzers. The authors would also like to acknowledge Andrea Porter (U.S. EPA Region 5) and William Adams (U.S. EPA Office of Water) for their technical reviews of the manuscript, as well as Julius Enriquez (U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development) for providing information on the ETV process. This project was supported in part by an appointment to the Research Participation Program at the Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. EPA. This article has been reviewed in accordance with the EPA’s policy and approved for publication. Any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not, necessarily, reflect the official positions and policies of the U.S. EPA. Any mention of products or trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. EPA.