Lead (Pb) is a toxic heavy metal and common environmental contaminant which can represent significant threats to public health at high concentration levels (Kachenko and Singh
2006; WHO
2010). Due to frequent hand-to-mouth childish behaviour, elevated blood lead levels (BPb) in children can result from elevated Pb concentration in dust and soil. (Zia et al.
2011). The accumulation of Pb in the kidney, liver, teeth and bones can be associated with negative health effects including inhibited brain development and haematological effects, such as anaemia (Bray et al.
2009; WHO
2010). Since 1889 the emission of dust particles from South Australia’s smelter led to identify three different area, according to levels of risk: high, medium and low, based on the mean BPb, an accurate bioindicator of environmental lead exposure detected on children under five years (Maynard et al.
2005). From a previous survey in south Australia, which included 1239 children, representing 50% of the elementary school population near the lead smelter, 7% of them showed a lead capillary blood level equal to or greater than 30 μg/dL, which is considered by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (ANHMRC) as “level of concern” (Wilson et al.
1986). A comparison between energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) and ICP-OES after microwave digestion of some major and minor elements (K, Ca, Mn, Fe, Cu, Sr, Pb and Zn) in four higher plants growing on the waste landfills surrounding and abandoned Pb–Zn ore concentration factory was performed using (EDXRF) instrument, where no statistically significant differences at the 98% confiner level were found between EDXRF and Dig A results concerning some elements like Ca, Pb, while significant differences were found for others elements like K, Mn due to the presence of a silica residue (Margui et al.
2005). A summary of the lead issues and factors influencing perception of risk related to environmental lead exposure in Port Pirie (early 1980s) and Esperance (2007/2008) areas was presented by University of Wollongong (Australia) (Heyworth et al.
2009). A comparison study of ICP-OES and XRF for Pb and As performed for soil samples in Chihuahua City (Chihuahua, Mexico) showed no significant differences between the instrumental techniques for As concentrations, while in Pb case there were significant differences between these instruments (Delgado et al.
2011). XRF could provide less expensive, on-site measurements of soil Pb with the advantage of allowing chemical assessment of contamination in close to real time (Rouillon and Taylor
2016).