3. Soil, Agriculture and ArcheologyNo Access

PIXE ANALYSIS OF COPPER, CHROMIUM AND ARSENIC DISTRIBUTIONS IN CCA-TREATED TIMBER

National Isotope Centre, GNS Science, P O Box 31312, Lower Hutt, New Zealand

HortResearch, Tennent Drive, private bag 11 030 Palmerston North, New Zealand

Environment and Ecology Division, National Institute of Agricultural and Science Technology, 249 Seodundong Suwon, Republic of Korea

Search for more papers by this author

, and

NANTHI BOLAN

School of Natural and Built Environment, University of South Australia, Australia

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129083508001600Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

PIXE is used for the elemental analysis of CCA treated timber samples, because of the simplicity of sample preparation, in-situ measurement of metal distribution, high sensitivity and the large number of samples which can be measured in a short time (typically less than 15 min per sample). The concentrations of Cr, Cu and As in the thin sections of treated poles from a vineyard were measured at 2 cm intervals from the centre of the pole. PIXE analysis indicated that in the case of fresh CCA treated timber the concentrations of Cu, Cr and As varied little with depth. In aged timber, the concentrations increased from the centre of the pole to the surface, indicating horizontal migration of these elements. The increase was greater for aged poles than for freshly treated poles, indicating surface migration of the CCA chemical with weathering. This was supported by data obtained in leaching experiments that indicated elevated concentrations of these metals in the extractants.

Keywords:

References

D. Read D, "Report on copper, chromium and arsenic (CCA) treated timber. New Zealand", Environmental Risk Management Authority Report. New Zealand: Wellington, 2003, ISBN: 0-478-21521-5 . Google Scholar
H. F. Hemond and H. M. Solo-Gabriele, Risk Analysis 24(1), 51 (2004), DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00411.x. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
N. S. Bolan and S. Thiagarajan, New Zealand Journal of Chemistry 61, 56 (1997). Google Scholar
P. A. Cooperet al., Forest Products Journal 51(10), 58 (2001). Google Scholar
J. A. Hingstonet al., Environmental Pollution 111(1), 53 (2001), DOI: 10.1016/S0269-7491(00)00030-0. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. Rajanderet al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 150, 510 (1999), DOI: 10.1016/S0168-583X(98)00997-5. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
V. J. Kennedy and A. Markwitz, Int. Journal of PIXE 12(3&4), 189 (2002), DOI: 10.1142/S0129083502000305. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. A. Maxwell, J. A. Campbell and W. J. Teesdale, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 43, 218 (1989), DOI: 10.1016/0168-583X(89)90042-6. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. N. R. Ruddicket al., Holzforschung 47(6), 458 (1993), DOI: 10.1515/hfsg.1993.47.6.458. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
P. L. Carey, R. G. McLaren and J. A. Adams, Water Air Soil. Pollut. 87, 189 (1996). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
E. D. Gezeret al., Build Environ. 40, 1684 (2005), DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.12.015. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. Morrell and J. Huffman, Wood Fiber Sci. 36, 119 (2004). Web of Science, Google Scholar
B. Robinsonet al., Sci. Total Environ. 364, 113 (2006). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
G. W. Zagury, R. Sampson and L. Deschenes, J. Environ Qual 32, 507 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. P. Levi, D. Huisingh and W. B. Nesbit, For Prod. J. 24, 97 (1974). Web of Science, Google Scholar
B. Koet al., Sci. Total Environ. 388, 35 (2007). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar