Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:38:10.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reproducibility of CO2 Absorption Method for measurement of Radiocarbon using a PARR Bomb and LSC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2019

Irina Vagner ,
Carmen Varlam ,
Denisa Faurescu ,
Diana Bogdan  and
Ionut Faurescu Open the ORCID record for Ionut Faurescu [Opens in a new window]
Irina Vagner*
Affiliation:
National R&D Institute for Cryogenics and Isotopic Technologies – ICSI, Rm. Valcea, Romania
Carmen Varlam
Affiliation:
National R&D Institute for Cryogenics and Isotopic Technologies – ICSI, Rm. Valcea, Romania
Denisa Faurescu
Affiliation:
National R&D Institute for Cryogenics and Isotopic Technologies – ICSI, Rm. Valcea, Romania
Diana Bogdan
Affiliation:
National R&D Institute for Cryogenics and Isotopic Technologies – ICSI, Rm. Valcea, Romania
Ionut Faurescu
Affiliation:
National R&D Institute for Cryogenics and Isotopic Technologies – ICSI, Rm. Valcea, Romania
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The CO2 absorption and liquid scintillation counting (LSC) are methods used in radioactivity monitoring programs of nuclear facilities for 14C measurements due to high number of samples and relatively high expected level of 14C concentration. The paper describes the chemical sample preparation applied to a quality control material (IAEA-C3 Cellulose), in order to evaluate the reproducibility of CO2 absorption method for this type of material. Consequently, in the experiments we used two home-made scintillation cocktails, containing two amines, 2-methoxyethylamine (MEA) and 3-methoxypropyl amine (MPA), which detained CO2 as carbamates. Due to the fact that the material used in the dedicated experiments is cellulose (contained in all vegetable materials), the method can be considered as appropriate for 14C determination from biological and vegetable materials.

Keywords

celluloseCO2 direct absorption methodcombustion Parr bomb
Type
Conference Paper
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 61 , Issue 6: Radiocarbon 2018 Conference Proceedings Trondheim, Norway, June 17–22, 2018 Part 2 of 2 , December 2019 , pp. 1835 - 1842
Copyright
© 2019 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Selected Papers from the 23rd International Radiocarbon Conference, Trondheim, Norway, 17–22 June, 2018

References

REFERENCES

Burchuladze, AA, Pagava, SV, Povinec, P, Togonidze, GI, Usačev, S. 1980. Radiocarbon variations with the 11-year solar cycle during the last century. Nature 287:320–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canducci, C, Bartolomei, P, Magnani, G, Rizzo, A, Piccoli, A, Tositti, L, Esposito, M. 2013. Upgrade of the CO2 direct absorption method for low-level 14C liquid scintillation counting. Radiocarbon 55(2–3):260–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galeriu, D, Melintescu, A, Beresford, NA, Crout, NMJ, Peterson, R, Takeda, H. 2007. Modeling 3H and 14C transfer to farm animals and their products under steady state conditions. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 98:205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). 2004. Management of waste containing tritium and carbon-14. Technical Reports, Series 421.Google Scholar
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). 2014. Reference Sheet for Quality Control Materials. RS_IAEA-C1 to IAEA-C9.Rev.01 / 2014-03-24.Google Scholar
IRSN (Institute de Radioprotection et de Surete Nucleaire). 2018. Radionuclide fact sheet—carbon-14 and the environment. Available at: https://www.irsn.fr/EN/Research/publications-documentation/radionuclides-sheets/environment/Pages/carbon14-environment.aspx. Accessed 22 August 2018.Google Scholar
Harms, A, Gilligan, C. 2009. Environmental radioactivity proficiency test exercise 2008. NPL Report IR 15. Available at : http://www.npl.co.uk/upload/pdf/2008_final_report.pdf. Accessed 22 January 2019.Google Scholar
Horvatinčić, N, Barešic, J, Krajcar Bronić, I, Obelić, B. 2004. Measurement of low 14C activities in a liquid scintillation counter in the Zagreb radiocarbon laboratory. Radiocarbon 46(1):105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hua, Q, Barbetti, M, Rakowski, AJ. 2013. Atmospheric radiocarbon for the period 1950–2010. Radiocarbon 55(4):2059–2072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotzer, TG, Watson, WL. 1999. Spatial and temporal distribution of 14C in cellulose in tree rings in central and eastern Canada: comparison with long-term atmospheric and environmental data. AECL-12002.Google Scholar
Krajcar Bronić, I, Horvatinčić, N, Baresić, J, Obelić, B. 2009. Measurement of 14C activity by liquid scintillation counting. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 67:800–804 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molnár, M, Nagy, S, Svingor, É, Svetlik, I. 2006. Refining the CO2 absorption method for low-level 14C liquid scintillation counting in the ATOMKI. In: Chalupnik, S, Schönhofer, F, Noakes, J, editors. LSC 2005: Advances in Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry. Tucson (AZ): Radiocarbon. p. 407–415.Google Scholar
Moore, JB, Noakes, JE, Spaulding, JD. 1993. Environmental monitoring of 14C in milk and agricultural samples. In: Noakes, JE, Schönhofer, F, Polach, HA, editors. Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry 1992. Tucson (AZ): Radiocarbon. p. 447–453.Google Scholar
Ota, M, Nagai, H, Koarashi, J. 2012. A land surface 14C transfer model and numerical experiments on belowground 14C accumulation and its impact on vegetation 14C level. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 107:13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxen, R, Hanste, UM. 2009. Anoxidizer/LSC method for the determination of 14C in foodstuff samples. In: Eikenberg, J, Jäggi, M, Beer, H, Baehrle, H, editors. LSC 2008: Advances in Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry. Tucson (AZ): Radiocarbon. p. 279–285.Google Scholar
Singleton, DL, Sanchez, AL, Woods, C. 2002. A comparison of two techniques to determine carbon-14 in environmental samples. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 251(3):353–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNSCEAR (United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation). 2000. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly. Volume I: Sources, Annex A. New York: United Nations. p. 51–53.Google Scholar
Vagner, I, Varlam, C, Faurescu, I, Faurescu, D. 2015. Organically bound tritium level in vegetation at ICIT tritium removal facility. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 303:2559–2563.Google Scholar
Vagner, I, Varlam, C, Faurescu, I, Faurescu, D, Bucura, F. 2017. Comparison of two methods for 14C analysis from essential oils using LSC. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 314:709–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varlam, C, Stefanescu, I, Varlam, M, Popescu, I, Faurescu, I. 2007. Applying the direct absorption method and LSC for 14C concentration measurement in aqueous samples. Radiocarbon 49(2):281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrezen, F, Loots, H, Hurtgen, C. 2008. A performance comparison of nine selected liquid scintillation cocktails. Open Report of the Belgian Nuclear Research Center, SCK-CEN-BLG-1052.Google Scholar
Wu, SG. 2017. Variation of atmospheric 14CO2 and its spatial distribution. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 169–170:116–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed