A review of exposure and toxicological aspects of carbon nanotubes, and as additives to fire retardants in polymers

Christou, Antonis; Stec, Anna A.; Ahmed, Waqar; Aschberger, Karin; Amenta, Valeria

doi:10.3109/10408444.2015.1082972

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 99 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study also found that in the SSTF polypropylene samples with intumescent fire retardant and/or CNTs, or both, produced much more CO compared to the pure polymer during all fire stages, and hydrocarbon yield from the pure polymer increased more with the equivalence ratio, indicating that CNTs promote the formation of smoke particulates from hydrocarbons. However, questions have also been raised about their long term safety, and whether airborne nanotubes (of similar dimensions to asbestos particles) could be equally hazardous [97].…”

Section: Fire Retardantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Stec

2017

Fire Safety Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fire toxicity is the largest cause of death and injury from unwanted fires, yet it is the least well studied area of fire science and engineering. Fire toxicity increases by factors up to 50, as the fire becomes underventilated. This has proved difficult, but not impossible, to replicate in a controlled way on a bench-scale. Clear correlations have been observed between the stoichiometric equivalence ratio, and the yields of the major asphyxiants, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. In addition, irritant components of fire effluents, which have an instantaneous effect, can incapacitate fire victims, trapping them in a fire. However, the longer term toxicants present in fire effluents, such as the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and the microscopic particulates which result from their agglomeration are probably responsible for hundreds or thousands more deaths than the acute asphyxiants and irritants.

show abstract

Section: Fire Retardantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Stec

2017

Fire Safety Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following burning of MWCNT-containing polymers at temperatures below 600 °C, MWCNT could not be destroyed and remained in the residual ashes which may be aerolised and potentially lead to exposure (Chivas-Joly et al, 2014, Christou et al, 2016). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical alternatives assessment of different flame retardants – A case study including multi-walled carbon nanotubes as synergist

Aschberger

Campia

Pesudo

et al. 2017

Environment International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flame retardants (FRs) are a diverse group of chemicals used as additives in a wide range of products to inhibit, suppress, or delay ignition and to prevent the spread of fire. Halogenated FRs (HFRs) are widely used because of their low impact on other material properties and the low loading levels necessary to meet the required flame retardancy. Health and environmental hazards associated with some halogenated FRs have driven research for identifying safer alternatives. A variety of halogen-free FRs are available on the market, including organic (phosphorus and nitrogen based chemicals) and inorganic (metals) materials. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) have been demonstrated to act as an effective/synergistic co-additive in some FR applications and could thereby contribute to reducing the loading of FRs in products and improving their performance.As part of the FP7 project DEROCA we carried out a chemical alternatives assessment (CAA). This is a methodology for identifying, comparing and selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern based on criteria for categorising human and environmental toxicity as well as environmental fate. In the project we assessed the hazard data of different halogen-free FRs to be applied in 5 industrial and consumer products and here we present the results for MWCNT, aluminium diethylphosphinate, aluminium trihydroxide, N-alkoxy hindered amines and red phosphorus compared to the HFR decabromodiphenylether. We consulted the REACH guidance, the criteria of the U.S.-EPA Design for Environment (DfE) and the GreenScreen® Assessment to assess and compare intrinsic properties affecting the hazard potential.A comparison/ranking of exposure reference values such as Derived No Effect Levels (DNELs) showed that FRs of concern are not identified by a low DNEL. A comparison based on hazard designations according to the U.S.-EPA DfE and GreenScreen® for human health endpoints, aquatic toxicity and environmental fate showed that the major differences between FRs of concern and their proposed alternatives are the potential for bioaccumulation and CMR (carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic) effects. As most alternatives are inorganic chemicals, persistence (alone) is not a suitable criterion.From our experiences in carrying out a CAA we conclude: i) REACH registration dossiers provide a comprehensive source of hazard information for an alternative assessment. It is important to consider that the presented data is subject to changes and its quality is variable. ii) Correct identification of the chemicals is crucial to retrieve the right data. This can be challenging for mixtures, reaction products or nanomaterials or when only trade names are available. iii) The quality of the data and the practice on how to fill data gaps can have a huge impact on the results and conclusions. iv) Current assessment criteria have mainly been developed for organic chemicals and create challenges when applied to inorganic solids, including nanomaterials. It is therefore crucial to analyse and report uncertain...

show abstract

“…Graphene is the strong surface bonding between 2D structures compared to carbon nanotubes (CNTs). such as graphene sheets, whereas there is only direct contact between CNTs and graphite [29], which has minimal frictional properties [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Graphene reinforced ceramic matrix composite (GRCMC) – state of the art

2024

Eng. Res. Express

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ceramic Matrix Composites (CMC) are widely used for manufacturing automobile parts aircraft components, biomedical and electronic devices. In recent years, graphene has found extensive applications in various fields like effective reinforcement in the development of metal matrix, polymer matrix and ceramic matrix composites. Literature reveals that more focus was on polymer and metal matrix composites reinforced with graphene when compared to ceramic matrix composites. In this manuscript, the effect and suitability of graphene as a reinforcement for fabricating ceramic matrix composite are presented. Further, the property evaluation, including mechanical and physical, characterization and microstructural evaluation of the CMCs developed with graphene as reinforcement is elaborated. The investigation of the reinforcing mechanisms and failure behavior of ceramic matrix composites reinforced with graphene, together with the development of novel processing techniques to solve manufacturing difficulties, are key areas of focus. Although many investigations have concentrated on enhancing the mechanical and electrical characteristics of ceramics by integrating graphene, more investigation is required to investigate the interfacial interaction between graphene and the ceramic matrix, as well as the influence of graphene size on the properties of the composite. Furthermore, there is a need for future research to explore the possibility of using graphene-reinforced ceramic composites in several multifunctional applications, including microwave absorption, electromagnetic interference shielding, ballistic armors, self-monitoring damage sensors, and energy storage and conversion. Future research should focus on developing innovative processing procedures that guarantee the uniform distribution and precise alignment of graphene sheets within the ceramic matrix. The incorporation of graphene into ceramic matrix composites presents novel prospects for augmenting the characteristics and capabilities of ceramics, rendering it a very interesting area for further investigation.

show abstract

A review of exposure and toxicological aspects of carbon nanotubes, and as additives to fire retardants in polymers

Cited by 11 publications

References 99 publications

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Chemical alternatives assessment of different flame retardants – A case study including multi-walled carbon nanotubes as synergist

Graphene reinforced ceramic matrix composite (GRCMC) – state of the art

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About