Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Oil refinery dusts: morphological and size analysis by TEM

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 25 August 2013

Abstract

The objectives of this work were to develop a means of sampling atmospheric dusts on the premises of an oil refinery for electron microscopic study to carry out preliminary morphological analyses and to compare these dusts with those collected at sites beyond the refinery limits. Carbon and collodion membranes were used as a support for collection of dust particles straight on transmission electron microscopy (TEM) grids. Micrographs of the dust particles were taken at magnifications from ×4,000 to ×80,000 with a Tesla BS500 transmission electron microscope. Four parameters were defined on the basis of the micrographs: surface area, Feret diameter, circumference, and shape coefficient. The micrographs and literature data were used to classify the atmospheric dusts into six groups: particles with an irregular shape and rounded edges; particles with an irregular shape and sharp edges; soot and its aggregates; spherical particles; singly occurring, ultrafine dust particles; and particles not allocated to any of the previous five groups. The types of dusts found in all the samples were similar, although differences did exist between the various morphological parameters. Dust particles with the largest Feret diameter were present in sample 3 (mean, 0.739 μm)—these were collected near the refinery's effluent treatment plant. The particles with the smallest diameter were found in the sample that had been intended to be a reference sample for the remaining results (mean, 0.326 μm). The dust particles collected in the refinery had larger mean Feret diameters, even 100% larger, than those collected beyond it. Particles with diameters from 0.1 to 0.2 μm made up the most numerous group in all the samples collected in the refinery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gualtieri M, Mantecca P, Corvaja V, Longhin E, Perrone MG, Bolzacchini E, Camatini M (2009) Toxicol Lett 188:52–62

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Vallius M (2005) Characteristics and sources of fine particulate matter in urban air. National Public Health Institute, Department of Environmental Health, Kuopio

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sondreal EA, Benson SA, Pavlish JH, Ralston NVC (2004) Fuel Process Technol 85:425–440

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sillanpää M (2006) Chemical and source characterisation of size-segregated urban air particulate matter. Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ferris BG, Speizer FE, Spengler JD, Dockery D, Bishop YMM, Wolfson M, Humble C (2006) Am Rev Respir Dis 120:767–779

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pope CA, Dockery DW (2006) J Air Waste Manage 56:709–742

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Dockery DW, Pope CA, Xu XP, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, Ferris BG, Speizer FE (1993) New Engl J Med 329:1753–1759

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mastalerz M, Glikson M, Simpson RW (1998) Int J Coal Geol 37:143–153

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Shi Z, Shao L, Jones TP, Whittaker AG, Lu S, Berube KA, He T, Richards RJ (2003) Atmos Environ 37:4097–4108

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lorenzo R, Kaegi R, Gehrig R, Grobety B (2006) Atmos Environ 40:7831–7841

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Diociaiuti M, Balduzzi M, De Berardis B, Cattani G, Stacchini G, Ziemacki G, Marconi A, Paoletti L (2001) Environ Res A86:254–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kocbach A, Li Y, Yttri KE, Cassee FR, Schwarze PE, Namork E (2006) Part Fibre Toxicol 3:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ketzel M, Wahlin P, Kristensson A, Swietlicki E, Berkowicz R, Nielsen OJ, Palmgren F (2004) Atmos Chem Phys 4:281–292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Niemi JV, Saarikoski S, Tervahattu H, Makela T, Hillamo R, Vehkamaki H, Sogacheva L, Kulmala M (2006) Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 6:6753–6799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Perrone MR, Turnone A, Buccolieri A (2006) J Environ Monit 8:183–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Barone TL, Zhu Y (2008) Atmos Environ 42:6749–6758

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Casuccio GS, Schlaegle SF, Lersch TL, Huffman GP, Chen Y, Shah N (2004) Fuel Process Technol 85:763–779

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kandler K, Benker N, Bundke U, Cuevas E, Ebert M, Knippertz P, Rodriguez S, Schutz L, Weinbruch S (2007) Atmos Environ 41:8058–8074

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rao BPS, Faiyaz Ansari M, Pipalatkar P, Kumar A, Nema P, Devotta S (2007) Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 79:197–201

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Abdul-Wahab SA, Worthing MA, Al-Maamari S (2005) Environ Monit Assess 107:313–327

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Rao BPS, Faiyaz Ansari M, Pipalatkar P, Kumar A, Nema P, Devotta S (2008) Environ Monit Assess 137:387–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sarica DY, Akim D, Ozden T (2002) TUrk J Chem 26:263–270

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nagorka R, Ullrich D (2003) Gefahrst Reinhalt L 63:79–84

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mogo S, Cachorro VE, de Frutos A (2005) Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 5:3921–3957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rutter AP, Schauer JJ (2007) Environ Sci Technol 41:3934–3939

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Falkovich AH, Rudich Y (2001) Environ Sci Technol 35:2326–2333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Pawlyta M, Rouzaud JN, Duber S (2005) Karbo 4:269–272

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Polymer Technology, Chemical Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology, Gabriela Narutowicza 11/12, 80-233, Gdansk, Poland

    Przemysław Sielicki, Helena Janik & Agnieszka Guzman

  2. Environmental Protection Office, Lotos Group, Elblaska 135, 80-718, Gdansk, Poland

    Mieczysław Broniszewski

  3. Department of Analytical Chemistry, Chemical Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology, Gabriela Narutowicza 11/12, 80-233, Gdansk, Poland

    Jacek Namieśnik

Authors
  1. Przemysław Sielicki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helena Janik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Agnieszka Guzman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mieczysław Broniszewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jacek Namieśnik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Przemysław Sielicki.

Additional information

Published in the special issue Focus on Analytical Science in Poland (VIIIth Polish Conference on Analytical Chemistry) with Guest Editor Pawel Koscielniak.

An erratum to this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-013-7285-3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sielicki, P., Janik, H., Guzman, A. et al. Oil refinery dusts: morphological and size analysis by TEM. Anal Bioanal Chem 399, 3261–3270 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-010-4416-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-010-4416-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation