Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Interference

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Interference

In atomic emission spectroscopy (AES), high-temperature atomizers excite a broad range of elements and molecules that generate complex emissions from sources such as oxides, hydroxides, and flame combustion products in the flame or plasma. Several strategies can be employed to minimize spectral interferences caused by overlapping emission lines or bands. These include increasing instrument resolution, choosing alternative emission lines, optimally placing the detector in low-background regions,...

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Instrumentation

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Instrumentation

The instrumentation of atomic emission spectrometry (AES) involves various components, including atomization devices that convert samples into gas-phase atoms and ions. There are two main types of atomization devices: continuous and discrete atomizers. Continuous atomizers, like plasmas and flames, introduce samples in a constant stream, while discrete atomizers inject individual samples using syringes or autosamplers. The most common discrete atomizer is the electrothermal atomizer.

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Lab

Atomic Emission Spectroscopy: Lab

AES is a powerful analytical technique, especially effective when used with plasma sources, producing abundant spectra in characteristic emission lines. The Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP), in particular, yields superior quantitative analytical data due to its high stability, low noise, low background, and minimal interferences under optimal experimental conditions. However, newer air-operated microwave sources are emerging as promising alternatives that could be more cost-effective than...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

An integrated socio-economic agent-based modeling framework towards assessing farmers' decision making under water scarcity and varying utility functions.

Journal of environmental management·2022

Same author

Corrigendum to Detection of influenza virus in air samples of patient rooms Journal of Hospital Infections 108 (2021) 33-42/10.1016.

The Journal of hospital infection·2022

Same author

Airborne bacterial and PM characterization in intensive care units: correlations with physical control parameters.

Air quality, atmosphere, & health·2022

Same author

SWOT risk analysis towards sustainable aquifer management along the Eastern Mediterranean.

Journal of environmental management·2020

Same author

Detection of influenza virus in air samples of patient rooms.

The Journal of hospital infection·2020

Same author

Impact of SRT on the performance of MBRs for the treatment of high strength landfill leachate.

Waste management (New York, N.Y.)·2017

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 23, 2026

Measuring Sub-23 Nanometer Real Driving Particle Number Emissions Using the Portable DownToTen Sampling System

Measuring Sub-23 Nanometer Real Driving Particle Number Emissions Using the Portable DownToTen Sampling System

Published on: May 22, 2020

Simulating industrial emissions using atmospheric dispersion modeling system: model performance and source emission

M El-Fadel¹, L Abi-Esber

¹Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. mfadel@aub.edu.lb

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (1995)

|April 10, 2012

Summary

This study evaluated the Gaussian Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling System (ADMS4) using real-world air quality data. While satisfactory in some scenarios, the model struggled to accurately predict pollutant concentrations, highlighting issues with standard emission factors.

More Related Videos

Combustion Chemistry of Fuels: Quantitative Speciation Data Obtained from an Atmospheric High-temperature Flow Reactor with Coupled Molecular-beam Mass Spectrometer

Combustion Chemistry of Fuels: Quantitative Speciation Data Obtained from an Atmospheric High-temperature Flow Reactor with Coupled Molecular-beam Mass Spectrometer

Published on: February 19, 2018

Production and Measurement of Organic Particulate Matter in the Harvard Environmental Chamber

Production and Measurement of Organic Particulate Matter in the Harvard Environmental Chamber

Published on: November 18, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 23, 2026

Measuring Sub-23 Nanometer Real Driving Particle Number Emissions Using the Portable DownToTen Sampling System

Measuring Sub-23 Nanometer Real Driving Particle Number Emissions Using the Portable DownToTen Sampling System

Published on: May 22, 2020

Combustion Chemistry of Fuels: Quantitative Speciation Data Obtained from an Atmospheric High-temperature Flow Reactor with Coupled Molecular-beam Mass Spectrometer

Combustion Chemistry of Fuels: Quantitative Speciation Data Obtained from an Atmospheric High-temperature Flow Reactor with Coupled Molecular-beam Mass Spectrometer

Published on: February 19, 2018

Production and Measurement of Organic Particulate Matter in the Harvard Environmental Chamber

Production and Measurement of Organic Particulate Matter in the Harvard Environmental Chamber

Published on: November 18, 2018

Area of Science:

Environmental Science
Atmospheric Chemistry
Computational Modeling

Background:

Industrial complexes release various air pollutants.
Atmospheric dispersion models are crucial for air quality assessment.
Regulatory bodies provide emission factors for modeling.

Purpose of the Study:

To test the applicability of European Environment Agency (EEA) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) emission factors.
To evaluate the performance of the Gaussian Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling System (ADMS4) at an industrial complex.
To assess the sensitivity of the model to input emission factors.

Main Methods:

Coupling ADMS4 with field observations of meteorology and air quality indicators (NOx, CO, PM10, SO2).
Statistical analysis of simulated versus observed data.
Grouping data based on receptor location, terrain type, and wind speed.

Main Results:

Satisfactory model performance in specific downwind scenarios (d=0.58, FB≈0, MG≈1, NMSE=2.17).
Inadequate replication of observed pollutant variations (median Cp/Co ratios: 0.01-0.76, FAC2 < 0.5).
Significant model sensitivity to input emission factors.

Conclusions:

Standard emission factors may not be universally applicable for industrial complexes.
Regulatory compliance modeling needs to validate emission factors.
Further refinement of atmospheric dispersion models and emission inventories is necessary.