Contamination on AMS Sample Targets by Modern Carbon is Inevitable

Accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) measurements of the radiocarbon content in very old samples are often challenging and carry large relative uncertainties due to possible contaminations acquired during the preparation and storage steps. In case of such old samples, the natural surrounding levels of C-14 from gases in the atmosphere, which may well be the source of contamination among others, are 2-3 orders of magnitude higher than the samples themselves. Hence, serious efforts are taken during the preparation steps to have the samples pristine until measurements are performed. As samples often have to be temporarily stored until AMS measurements can be performed, storage conditions also become extremely crucial. Here we describe an assessment of this process of contamination in background AMS samples. Samples, both as pressed graphite (on AMS targets) and graphite powder, were stored in various storage conditions (CO2-spiked air) to investigate the extent of contamination. The experiments clearly show that the pressed targets are more vulnerable to contamination than the unpressed graphite. Experiments conducted with enriched CO2-spiked laboratory air also reveal that the contaminating carbon is not only limited to the target surface but also penetrates into the matrix. A combination of measurements on understanding the chemical nature of the graphitization product, combined with long-available knowledge on "adventitious carbon" from the surface science community, brought us to the conclusion that contamination is to a certain extent inevitable. However, it can be minimized, and should be dealt with by sputter-cleaning the samples individually before the actual measurement

Initial Results of an Intercomparison of AMS-Based Atmospheric 14CO2 Measurements

This article presents results from the first 3 rounds of an international intercomparison of measurements of Δ14CO2 in liter-scale samples of whole air by groups using accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). The ultimate goal of the intercomparison is to allow the merging of Δ14CO2 data from different groups, with the confidence that differences in the data are geophysical gradients and not artifacts of calibration. Eight groups have participated in at least 1 round of the intercomparison, which has so far included 3 rounds of air distribution between 2007 and 2010. The comparison is intended to be ongoing, so that: a) the community obtains a regular assessment of differences between laboratories; and b) individual laboratories can begin to assess the long-term repeatability of their measurements of the same source air. Air used in the intercomparison was compressed into 2 high-pressure cylinders in 2005 and 2006 at Niwot Ridge, Colorado (USA), with one of the tanks “spiked” with fossil CO2, so that the 2 tanks span the range of Δ14CO2 typically encountered when measuring air from both remote background locations and polluted urban ones. Three groups show interlaboratory comparability within 1‰ for ambient level Δ14CO2. For high CO2/low Δ14CO2 air, 4 laboratories showed comparability within 2‰. This approaches the goals set out by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) CO2 Measurements Experts Group in 2005. One important observation is that single-sample precisions typically reported by the AMS community cannot always explain the observed differences within and between laboratories. This emphasizes the need to use long-term repeatability as a metric for measurement precision, especially in the context of long-term atmospheric monitoring.