Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?How do I convert salinity measured in mg/L Cl into parts per thousand as NaCl?IUPAC Recommendations for Concentration Units (ppb, ppm)Amount of substance of a molecule in a solute the same as amount of substance of constituent elements?Interpreting notation format 1.64E-02 from particulate emission dataWhat was the lithium concentration in 1940's 7-Up?Why are osmoles not considered SI units?Should residual sodium be considered in measuring sodium content of sweat?Concentration of mercury in bodyConversion from a PPB value to µg/m3 of IsobutyleneIUPAC Recommendations for Concentration Units (ppb, ppm)What does “at%” mean and how it differs from “mol%”?

Is it better to deliver many low-value stories or few high-value stories?

Source for "everyone has a specific area of Torah that they're naturally drawn to"

Host telling me to cancel my booking in exchange for a discount?

Is it better to merge "often" or only after completion do a big merge of feature branches?

Quickest way to move a line in a text file before another line in a text file?

Can a creature sustain itself by eating its own severed body parts?

Does a "melee spell attack" use my spellcasting ability, or my Strength?

Why are Oscar, India, and X-Ray (O, I, and X) not used as taxiway identifiers?

How does mathematics work?

Magic is the twist

Can "Taking algebraic closure" be made into a functor?

Cargo capacity of a kayak

Stellen - Putting, or putting away?

What would be the effects of (relatively) widespread precognition on the stock market?

How can I show that the speed of light in vacuum is the same in all reference frames?

Adding gears to my grandson's 12" bike

Does switching on an old games console without a cartridge damage it?

How can I disable a reserved profile?

As the Ferris wheel turns

Has Iron Man made any suit for underwater combat?

Why did modems have speakers?

Counterexample finite intersection property

How do you structure large embedded projects?

Capture SQL Server queries without third-party tooling and without using deprecated features?



Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?


How do I convert salinity measured in mg/L Cl into parts per thousand as NaCl?IUPAC Recommendations for Concentration Units (ppb, ppm)Amount of substance of a molecule in a solute the same as amount of substance of constituent elements?Interpreting notation format 1.64E-02 from particulate emission dataWhat was the lithium concentration in 1940's 7-Up?Why are osmoles not considered SI units?Should residual sodium be considered in measuring sodium content of sweat?Concentration of mercury in bodyConversion from a PPB value to µg/m3 of IsobutyleneIUPAC Recommendations for Concentration Units (ppb, ppm)What does “at%” mean and how it differs from “mol%”?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








15












$begingroup$


In an article I recently submitted, a reviewer asked that I provide a concentration in μg/kg instead of ppb (parts per billion), and mentions that the later is not correct. I am not a chemist, and I thought that 1 μg/kg = 1 ppb.



Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg ? What is a reason to consider ppb as incorrect ?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
    $endgroup$
    – matt_black
    Apr 15 at 8:56

















15












$begingroup$


In an article I recently submitted, a reviewer asked that I provide a concentration in μg/kg instead of ppb (parts per billion), and mentions that the later is not correct. I am not a chemist, and I thought that 1 μg/kg = 1 ppb.



Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg ? What is a reason to consider ppb as incorrect ?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
    $endgroup$
    – matt_black
    Apr 15 at 8:56













15












15








15


1



$begingroup$


In an article I recently submitted, a reviewer asked that I provide a concentration in μg/kg instead of ppb (parts per billion), and mentions that the later is not correct. I am not a chemist, and I thought that 1 μg/kg = 1 ppb.



Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg ? What is a reason to consider ppb as incorrect ?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




In an article I recently submitted, a reviewer asked that I provide a concentration in μg/kg instead of ppb (parts per billion), and mentions that the later is not correct. I am not a chemist, and I thought that 1 μg/kg = 1 ppb.



Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg ? What is a reason to consider ppb as incorrect ?







concentration notation units






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Apr 15 at 1:32









andselisk

21.7k8 gold badges75 silver badges144 bronze badges




21.7k8 gold badges75 silver badges144 bronze badges










asked Apr 15 at 1:18









NakxNakx

1816 bronze badges




1816 bronze badges







  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
    $endgroup$
    – matt_black
    Apr 15 at 8:56












  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
    $endgroup$
    – matt_black
    Apr 15 at 8:56







8




8




$begingroup$
Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
Apr 15 at 8:56




$begingroup$
Just using ppb is ambiguous unless you state the basis (eg w/w for mass %). ppb could also be referring to molar proportion or volume proportion.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
Apr 15 at 8:56










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















36












$begingroup$

You are correct suggesting that 1 μg/kg implies 1 ppb, however the reverse is not true. For instance, 1 ppb can also be 1 nmol/mol, and the reader will never have a chance to deduce which one is it unless you explicitly define the usage of the "parts per something" in the text.
This clutters the manuscript with redundant notes and causes overall confusion.



IUPAC also lists all similar symbols (ppm, ppt, ppb etc.) as deprecated; from IUPAC's “Green Book” [1, p. 98]:




Although ppm, ppb, ppt and alike are widely used in various applications of
analytical and environmental chemistry, it is suggested to abandon completely their use because of the ambiguities involved. These units are unnecessary and can be easily replaced by SI-compatible quantities such as pmol/mol (picomole per mole), which are unambiguous. The last column contains suggested replacements (similar replacements can be formulated as mg/g, μg/g, pg/g etc.).



$$
beginarraylllll
hline
textName & textSymbol & textValue & textExamples & textReplacement \
hline
ldots & & & & \
textpart per billion & textppb & 10^-9 & textThe air quality standard for ozone is a & punmol/mol \
& & & textvolume fraction of~varphi = 120~textppb & \
ldots & & & & \
hline
endarray
$$




References



  1. IUPAC “Green Book” Quantities, Units, and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Cohen, R. E., Mills, I., Eds.; IUPAC Recommendations; RSC Pub: Cambridge, UK, 2007. (PDF)





share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
    $endgroup$
    – Loong
    Apr 15 at 6:59






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
    $endgroup$
    – hBy2Py
    Apr 15 at 19:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 19:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
    $endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Apr 15 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    @andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 20:38













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112760%2fis-1-ppb-equal-to-1-%25ce%25bcg-kg%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









36












$begingroup$

You are correct suggesting that 1 μg/kg implies 1 ppb, however the reverse is not true. For instance, 1 ppb can also be 1 nmol/mol, and the reader will never have a chance to deduce which one is it unless you explicitly define the usage of the "parts per something" in the text.
This clutters the manuscript with redundant notes and causes overall confusion.



IUPAC also lists all similar symbols (ppm, ppt, ppb etc.) as deprecated; from IUPAC's “Green Book” [1, p. 98]:




Although ppm, ppb, ppt and alike are widely used in various applications of
analytical and environmental chemistry, it is suggested to abandon completely their use because of the ambiguities involved. These units are unnecessary and can be easily replaced by SI-compatible quantities such as pmol/mol (picomole per mole), which are unambiguous. The last column contains suggested replacements (similar replacements can be formulated as mg/g, μg/g, pg/g etc.).



$$
beginarraylllll
hline
textName & textSymbol & textValue & textExamples & textReplacement \
hline
ldots & & & & \
textpart per billion & textppb & 10^-9 & textThe air quality standard for ozone is a & punmol/mol \
& & & textvolume fraction of~varphi = 120~textppb & \
ldots & & & & \
hline
endarray
$$




References



  1. IUPAC “Green Book” Quantities, Units, and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Cohen, R. E., Mills, I., Eds.; IUPAC Recommendations; RSC Pub: Cambridge, UK, 2007. (PDF)





share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
    $endgroup$
    – Loong
    Apr 15 at 6:59






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
    $endgroup$
    – hBy2Py
    Apr 15 at 19:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 19:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
    $endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Apr 15 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    @andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 20:38















36












$begingroup$

You are correct suggesting that 1 μg/kg implies 1 ppb, however the reverse is not true. For instance, 1 ppb can also be 1 nmol/mol, and the reader will never have a chance to deduce which one is it unless you explicitly define the usage of the "parts per something" in the text.
This clutters the manuscript with redundant notes and causes overall confusion.



IUPAC also lists all similar symbols (ppm, ppt, ppb etc.) as deprecated; from IUPAC's “Green Book” [1, p. 98]:




Although ppm, ppb, ppt and alike are widely used in various applications of
analytical and environmental chemistry, it is suggested to abandon completely their use because of the ambiguities involved. These units are unnecessary and can be easily replaced by SI-compatible quantities such as pmol/mol (picomole per mole), which are unambiguous. The last column contains suggested replacements (similar replacements can be formulated as mg/g, μg/g, pg/g etc.).



$$
beginarraylllll
hline
textName & textSymbol & textValue & textExamples & textReplacement \
hline
ldots & & & & \
textpart per billion & textppb & 10^-9 & textThe air quality standard for ozone is a & punmol/mol \
& & & textvolume fraction of~varphi = 120~textppb & \
ldots & & & & \
hline
endarray
$$




References



  1. IUPAC “Green Book” Quantities, Units, and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Cohen, R. E., Mills, I., Eds.; IUPAC Recommendations; RSC Pub: Cambridge, UK, 2007. (PDF)





share|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
    $endgroup$
    – Loong
    Apr 15 at 6:59






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
    $endgroup$
    – hBy2Py
    Apr 15 at 19:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 19:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
    $endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Apr 15 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    @andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 20:38













36












36








36





$begingroup$

You are correct suggesting that 1 μg/kg implies 1 ppb, however the reverse is not true. For instance, 1 ppb can also be 1 nmol/mol, and the reader will never have a chance to deduce which one is it unless you explicitly define the usage of the "parts per something" in the text.
This clutters the manuscript with redundant notes and causes overall confusion.



IUPAC also lists all similar symbols (ppm, ppt, ppb etc.) as deprecated; from IUPAC's “Green Book” [1, p. 98]:




Although ppm, ppb, ppt and alike are widely used in various applications of
analytical and environmental chemistry, it is suggested to abandon completely their use because of the ambiguities involved. These units are unnecessary and can be easily replaced by SI-compatible quantities such as pmol/mol (picomole per mole), which are unambiguous. The last column contains suggested replacements (similar replacements can be formulated as mg/g, μg/g, pg/g etc.).



$$
beginarraylllll
hline
textName & textSymbol & textValue & textExamples & textReplacement \
hline
ldots & & & & \
textpart per billion & textppb & 10^-9 & textThe air quality standard for ozone is a & punmol/mol \
& & & textvolume fraction of~varphi = 120~textppb & \
ldots & & & & \
hline
endarray
$$




References



  1. IUPAC “Green Book” Quantities, Units, and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Cohen, R. E., Mills, I., Eds.; IUPAC Recommendations; RSC Pub: Cambridge, UK, 2007. (PDF)





share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



You are correct suggesting that 1 μg/kg implies 1 ppb, however the reverse is not true. For instance, 1 ppb can also be 1 nmol/mol, and the reader will never have a chance to deduce which one is it unless you explicitly define the usage of the "parts per something" in the text.
This clutters the manuscript with redundant notes and causes overall confusion.



IUPAC also lists all similar symbols (ppm, ppt, ppb etc.) as deprecated; from IUPAC's “Green Book” [1, p. 98]:




Although ppm, ppb, ppt and alike are widely used in various applications of
analytical and environmental chemistry, it is suggested to abandon completely their use because of the ambiguities involved. These units are unnecessary and can be easily replaced by SI-compatible quantities such as pmol/mol (picomole per mole), which are unambiguous. The last column contains suggested replacements (similar replacements can be formulated as mg/g, μg/g, pg/g etc.).



$$
beginarraylllll
hline
textName & textSymbol & textValue & textExamples & textReplacement \
hline
ldots & & & & \
textpart per billion & textppb & 10^-9 & textThe air quality standard for ozone is a & punmol/mol \
& & & textvolume fraction of~varphi = 120~textppb & \
ldots & & & & \
hline
endarray
$$




References



  1. IUPAC “Green Book” Quantities, Units, and Symbols in Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Cohen, R. E., Mills, I., Eds.; IUPAC Recommendations; RSC Pub: Cambridge, UK, 2007. (PDF)






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Apr 15 at 12:40

























answered Apr 15 at 1:31









andseliskandselisk

21.7k8 gold badges75 silver badges144 bronze badges




21.7k8 gold badges75 silver badges144 bronze badges







  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
    $endgroup$
    – Loong
    Apr 15 at 6:59






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
    $endgroup$
    – hBy2Py
    Apr 15 at 19:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 19:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
    $endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Apr 15 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    @andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 20:38












  • 8




    $begingroup$
    Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
    $endgroup$
    – Loong
    Apr 15 at 6:59






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
    $endgroup$
    – hBy2Py
    Apr 15 at 19:08










  • $begingroup$
    @ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 19:39






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
    $endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Apr 15 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    @andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Farooq
    Apr 15 at 20:38







8




8




$begingroup$
Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
$endgroup$
– Loong
Apr 15 at 6:59




$begingroup$
Similarly in the related standard ISO 80000: "Abbreviations such as ppm, pphm, ppb and ppt are language-dependent and ambiguous and shall not be used. Instead, the use of powers of 10 is recommended."
$endgroup$
– Loong
Apr 15 at 6:59




3




3




$begingroup$
This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
$endgroup$
– hBy2Py
Apr 15 at 19:08




$begingroup$
This difficulty with "parts-per" notations should probably be extended to percentages as well (given that, really, 'percent' is just 'parts per hundred'). I can't tell you how many times I've struggled to identify what kind of percentage is meant: % w/w? % w/v? at. %? % v/v? For % v/v, what are the bases? Is 10% one volume A for every 9 volumes of B? For every 10 volumes of B? For 10 volumes of final mixture/solution? Headaches, headaches, headaches, every dang time.
$endgroup$
– hBy2Py
Apr 15 at 19:08












$begingroup$
@ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
$endgroup$
– M. Farooq
Apr 15 at 19:39




$begingroup$
@ andselisk, I am slightly confused by this new recommendation. My question is related to the denominator in nmol/mols. Suppose I prepare 100 ppb NaCl in water. Do I have 100 nmol of NaCl in 1 mol of water? How we practically prepare it. What if my solvent is a mixture such as air. How will we calculate moles of air? This new definition does not seem to be any better than the previous ones.
$endgroup$
– M. Farooq
Apr 15 at 19:39




1




1




$begingroup$
@M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
$endgroup$
– andselisk
Apr 15 at 19:49




$begingroup$
@M.Farooq I'm not sure I understand, and this is not a novel directive, part-per-somehing has never been a favored/preferred notation as long as I remember myself. ppb is just a fraction, use whatever quantities of the same dimensions; you have to find out the amounts to calculate ppb anyways, why is this suddenly a problem?
$endgroup$
– andselisk
Apr 15 at 19:49












$begingroup$
@andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
$endgroup$
– M. Farooq
Apr 15 at 20:38




$begingroup$
@andselisk, I am actually wondering about different scenarios. There is a very subtle difference in using nmol/mol vs. ug/kg. The typical definition of ppb is ug X in a kg of solution not the solvent. 100 ppb NaCl in water mean 100 ug NaCl "in" 1 liter of water solution. The total volume is 1 L. The analyte is a part of the solvent weight. With 100 ppm NaCl as 100 nmol NaCl dissolved in 1 mol water. In this case, NaCl is not a part of solvent. Similarly if I have a mixture as a solvent, whose moles should we use? The 1 L and kg definition do not care about the identity of the solvent system.
$endgroup$
– M. Farooq
Apr 15 at 20:38

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112760%2fis-1-ppb-equal-to-1-%25ce%25bcg-kg%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

Where does the image of a data connector as a sharp metal spike originate from?Where does the concept of infected people turning into zombies only after death originate from?Where does the motif of a reanimated human head originate?Where did the notion that Dragons could speak originate?Where does the archetypal image of the 'Grey' alien come from?Where did the suffix '-Man' originate?Where does the notion of being injured or killed by an illusion originate?Where did the term “sophont” originate?Where does the trope of magic spells being driven by advanced technology originate from?Where did the term “the living impaired” originate?