Inter-comparison of personal monitors for nanoparticles exposure at workplaces and in the environment

Todea, Ana Maria; Beckmann, Stefanie; Kaminski, Heinz; Bard, Delphine; Bau, Sébastien; Clavaguera, Simon; Dahmann, D.; Dozol, Hélène; Dziurowitz, Nico; Elihn, Karine; Fierz, Martin; Lidén, Göran; Meyer‐Plath, Asmus; Monz, Christian; Neumann, Volker; Pelzer, Johannes; Simonow, Barbara Katrin; Thali, Patrick; Tuinman, Ilse; Vleuten, Arjan van der; Vroomen, Huub; Asbach, Christof

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.041

Cited by 40 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This clearly shows that with an easy change in the handling procedure, the particle emissions and exposures can be lowered by as much as a factor 10 (for example seen with the Partector where the lung deposited surface area went from 92 µm 2 /cm 3 during the first day to only 9 µm 2 /cm 3 during the second day). The Partector has also previously been shown to be an important tool for personal exposure assessments to improve workplace monitoring [60][61][62].…”

Section: Measurements Of Airborne Titanium Dioxide Nanofibers and Nanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions and exposures of graphene nanomaterials, titanium dioxide nanofibers, and nanoparticles during down-stream industrial handling

Lovén

Franzén

Isaxon

et al. 2020

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, engineered nanomaterials are frequently used. Nanosized titanium dioxide (TiO 2) has been extensively used for many years and graphene is one type of emerging nanomaterial. Occupational airborne exposures to engineered nanomaterials are important to ensure safe workplaces and to extend the information needed for complete risk assessments. The main aim of this study was to characterize workplace emissions and exposure of graphene nanoplatelets, graphene oxide, TiO 2 nanofibers (NFs) and nanoparticles (NPs) during downstream industrial handling. Surface contaminations were also investigated to assess the potential for secondary inhalation exposures. In addition, a range of different sampling and aerosol monitoring methods were used and evaluated. The results showed that powder handling, regardless of handling graphene nanoplatelets, graphene oxide, TiO 2 NFs, or NPs, contributes to the highest particle emissions and exposures. However, the exposure levels were below suggested occupational exposure limits. It was also shown that a range of different methods can be used to selectively detect and quantify nanomaterials both in the air and as surface contaminations. However, to be able to make an accurate determination of which nanomaterial that has been emitted a combination of different methods, both offline and online, must be used.

show abstract

Section: Measurements Of Airborne Titanium Dioxide Nanofibers and Nanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions and exposures of graphene nanomaterials, titanium dioxide nanofibers, and nanoparticles during down-stream industrial handling

Lovén

Franzén

Isaxon

et al. 2020

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different principles of operation were under discussion to be applied as particle number detectors [4]. The most commonly used PM sensors, such as those in ambient air monitoring [28,29], exposure assessment [30][31][32][33][34], vehicle cabin air quality [35], or even filter monitoring in diesel exhaust [36][37][38], were not applicable to vehicle exhaust due to their relatively large lower size, high detection limit, or slow response time. Currently, there are two concepts for the particle sensors (detectors) inside the on-board systems: condensation particle counters (CPCs), similar to those in laboratory systems, and advanced diffusion chargers (DCs) [4,39,40].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a 10 nm Particle Number Portable Emissions Measurement System (PEMS)

Giechaskiel

Mamakos

Woodburn

et al. 2019

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On-board portable emissions measurement systems (PEMS) are part of the type approval, in-service conformity, and market surveillance aspects of the European exhaust emissions regulation. Currently, only solid particles >23 nm are counted, but Europe will introduce a lower limit of 10 nm. In this study, we evaluated a 10-nm prototype portable system comparing it with laboratory systems measuring diesel, gasoline, and CNG (compressed natural gas) vehicles with emission levels ranging from approximately 2 × 1010 to 2 × 1012 #/km. The results showed that the on-board system differed from the laboratory 10-nm system on average for the tested driving cycles by less than approximately 10% at levels below 6 × 1011 #/km and by approximately 20% for high-emitting vehicles. The observed differences were similar to those observed in the evaluation of portable >23 nm particle counting systems, despite the relatively small size of the emitted particles (with geometric mean diameters <42 nm) and the additional challenges associated with sub-23 nm measurements. The latter included the presence of semivolatile sub-23 nm particles, the elevated concentration levels during cold start, and also the formation of sub-23 nm artefacts from the elastomers that are used to connect the tailpipe to the measurement devices. The main conclusion of the study is that >10 nm on-board systems can be ready for introduction in future regulations.

show abstract

“…Portable instruments used to measure particle concentration in the atmosphere are still not accurate enough to count these particles and to differentiate them from the background concentrations. [147,148] Asbach et al have made a complete review of personal monitors and samplers to assess the exposure of workers to airborne NM. [149] Unfortunately, reducing the size of the measurement instrument often corresponds to a loss in accuracy compared to conventional aerosol measurement equipment.…”

Section: Occupational Exposurementioning

confidence: 99%

Third‐Generation Solar Cells: Toxicity and Risk of Exposure

Buitrago

Novello

Meyer

2020

Helvetica Chimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar energy is considered clean energy, and its use is predicted to increase in the near future. Most installed units today are crystalline solar cells, but the field is in constant development, and when the first dye sensitized solar cell was published by Grätzel and O'Reagan a new, third‐generation, solar power was born. Highly toxic metals are used to produce the photovoltaic units today, and with the predicted increase in solar cell installation, the human health hazards of these panels could become an issue. Additionally, many of these materials are used in their nanoform, which is associated with an additional risk. In this article, we discuss the technology behind the third‐generation solar cells with its valuable use of nanotechnology as well as the possible health hazard when such nanomaterials are used in solar power units. We will show that the main exposure will occur either during the development and production phases or at the end‐of‐life stage of the solar cells, where toxic material can leach into landfills, and subsequently into the environment and impact the ecosystem directly, or humans indirectly through edible plants or drinking water.

show abstract

Inter-comparison of personal monitors for nanoparticles exposure at workplaces and in the environment

Cited by 40 publications

References 39 publications

Emissions and exposures of graphene nanomaterials, titanium dioxide nanofibers, and nanoparticles during down-stream industrial handling

Emissions and exposures of graphene nanomaterials, titanium dioxide nanofibers, and nanoparticles during down-stream industrial handling

Evaluation of a 10 nm Particle Number Portable Emissions Measurement System (PEMS)

Third‐Generation Solar Cells: Toxicity and Risk of Exposure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About