LISTSERV - ISOGEOCHEM Archives

ISOGEOCHEM Archives

Stable Isotope Geochemistry

ISOGEOCHEM@LIST.UVM.EDU

LISTSERV Archives

ISOGEOCHEM Home

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives

Options:

Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message:

[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Topic:

[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Author:

[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Sender:

Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 23 May 2000 17:47:30 -0500

Reply-To:

Stable Isotope Geochemistry <[log in to unmask]>

Content-type:

text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Subject:

kerogen vs. TOC

MIME-Version:

1.0

Content-transfer-encoding:

7BIT

Organization:

Univ of/d'Ottawa (Science)

From:

Graham Shields <[log in to unmask]>

Parts/Attachments:

text/plain (32 lines)

Hi all,

Regarding d13Corg. in limestones, I have noticed that some
isotopists combust kerogen (i.e. extraction with HCl, then HF +
HCl, then +/- sodum borohydride) and others simply decarbonate
their samples with HCl and combust the insoluble residue.

Are there comparative studies on the difference between these two
techniques?

Can we assume that the HCl-soluble TOC is kerogen or is the full
blown method somehow safer?

Cheers,

Graham

Graham Shields
Carleton-Ottawa Geoscience Centre
University of Ottawa
365 Nicholas Street
PO Box 450, Stn. A
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 6N5
Canada
email: [log in to unmask]
html: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8200

home tel: +1 613 562 21 25
work tel: +1 613 562 5800 ext. 6339
work fax: +1 613 562 51 92

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LIST.UVM.EDU