Airborne microplastics in indoor and outdoor environments of a coastal city in Eastern China

Abstract

Microplastics (MPs) in marine and terrestrial environments have been intensively studied, but the dynamics of airborne MPs remains limited. Existing studies on atmospheric MPs are mostly derived from collection of atmospheric deposition, whereas direct measurements of airborne MPs are scarce. However, the abundance of airborne MPs is more relevant for evaluating human inhalation exposure risk. Herein, airborne MPs in indoor and outdoor environments from urban and rural areas of a coastal city in eastern China were investigated. MP concentrations (mean±SD) in indoor air (1583 ± 1180 n/m 3 ) were an order of magnitude higher than outdoor air (189 ± 85 n/m 3 ), and airborne MP concentrations in urban areas (224 ± 70 n/m 3 ) were higher than rural areas (101 ± 47 n/m 3 ). MPs smaller than 100 µm dominated airborne MPs, and the predominant shape of airborne MPs was fragments, as opposed to fibers. The larger MP size fractions contained a higher proportion of fibers, whereas the smaller size fractions were nearly exclusively composed of fragments. The health risk caused by ubiquitous airborne MPs should not be discounted as the maximum annual outdoor exposure of airborne MPs can reach 1 million/year, while indoor exposure may be even higher due to higher indoor airborne MP concentrations.

Environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation, and interactions with climate change: UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, Update 2021

“…Photodegradation of plastics by solar UV radiation is primarily responsible for the generation of secondary micro- and nanoplastics [ 164 ], which are taken up by humans via inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact [ 165 , 166 ]. Airborne levels of microplastics (predominantly smaller than 100 µm in size) of 224 ± 70 particles/m 3 and 101 ± 47 particles/m 3 have been found in urban and rural air, respectively [ 167 ]. Inhaled microplastics and microfibres detected in lung tissue [ 166 ] may potentially access systemic circulation [ 168 ], resulting in adverse effects.…”

Face Mask Wastes as Cementitious Materials: A Possible Solution to a Big Concern

“…WHO estimated that nearly 89 million masks were needed to control COVID-19 each month [4]. Face masks are a source of microplastic contaminants in water ecosystems [5][6][7][8][9] and in indoor and outdoor air [10,11], as polypropylene and other plastics-polystyrene, polycarbonate, polyethylene, or polyester, among others-are used in making face masks. This constitutes a big problem related to health for different living beings, including humans and the environment as a whole [12].…”

Microplastics in the atmosphere: a review

“…There are 48 studies (as of November 2021) reporting MPs in dust, aerosols, wet and dry atmospheric deposition, snow, etc. [11,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] . MPs in the air are released from wear and tear of clothing material [27][28][29] , by washing and drying [30] , erosion of synthetic rubber tires, deterioration of house furniture, emissions from the synthetic textile industry, emissions from vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) industries, and contamination from city dust [18][19][20][21] [Figure 1].…”

“…[11,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] . MPs in the air are released from wear and tear of clothing material [27][28][29] , by washing and drying [30] , erosion of synthetic rubber tires, deterioration of house furniture, emissions from the synthetic textile industry, emissions from vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) industries, and contamination from city dust [18][19][20][21] [Figure 1]. In addition, substantial quantities of plastics are being burned in open landfills on a daily basis, which results in the volatilization of various harmful compounds that inevitably integrate into the atmospheric aerosol [31,32] .…”