Occupational exposure of firefighters to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in non-fire work environments

Abstract

This work aims to characterize personal exposure of firefighters to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in non-fire work environments (fire stations), and assesses the respective risks. Eighteen PAHs (16 considered by USEPA as priority pollutants, dibenzo[a,l]pyrene and benzo[j]fluoranthene) were monitored in breathing zones of workers at five Portuguese fire stations during a normal shift. The obtained levels of PAHs fulfilled all existent occupational exposure limits as well as air quality guidelines with total concentrations (ΣPAHs) in range of 46.8-155ngm. Light compounds (2-3 rings) were the most predominant congeners (74-96% of ΣPAHs) whereas PAHs with 5-6 rings accounted 3-9% of ΣPAHs. Fuel and biomass combustions, vehicular traffic emissions, and use of lubricant oils were identified as the main sources of PAHs exposure at the studied fire corporations. Incremental lifetime cancer risks were below the recommend USEPA guideline of 10 and thus negligible for all the studied subjects, but WHO health-based guideline level of 10 was exceeded (9-44 times) at all fire corporations. These results thus show that even during non-fire situations firefighters are exposed to PAHs at levels that may promote some adverse health outcomes; therefore the respective occupational exposures to these compounds should be carefully controlled.

Firefighters exposure to fire emissions: Impact on levels of biomarkers of exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and genotoxic/oxidative-effects

“…Climate changes and global warming have substantially contributed to increase forest fire episodes, with longer fire season and more potent fires (de Rigo et al, 2017;San-Miguel-Ayanz et al, 2018). Forest fire emissions release large amounts of several hazardous gaseous and particulate pollutants: particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and volatile organic compounds (including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, benzene, toluene, phenol, xylene, acrolein, and ethylbenzene) (Abrard et al, 2019;Adame et al, 2018;de la Barrera et al, 2018;McClure and Jaffe, 2018;Wentworth et al, 2018;Oliveira et al, 2015Oliveira et al, , 2017aOliveira et al, 2017b;Fent et al, 2013Fent et al, , 2014Fent et al, 2017Fent et al, , 2015Park et al, 2015;Keir et al, 2017;Hsu et al, 2011;Pleil et al, 2014). Some of these compounds are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as potential/possible carcinogens to humans.…”

Assessment of Ambient Exposures Firefighters Encounter While at the Fire Station

“…One, by Baxter et al (2014), measured PM 2.5 in fire stations in Cincinnati, Ohio over an 8-hour period on a single day and found values higher than what was observed in this study (average PM 2.5 in truck bay was 55μg/m 3 compared to our values of 14-42μg/m 3 ). [22] Two other recent studies by Oliveira et al [23, 24] examined levels of particle-bound PAHs in breathing zones in firefighters at fire stations in Portugal. They indicated that the likely source of PAHs was the vehicular emissions in the fire stations, although they noted observed levels of PAHs fell below many relevant occupational exposure limits.…”

“…Furthermore, these recent studies collected data from sampling periods of either 4 or 8 hours, much less than the 24-hour shifts experienced by Massachusetts firefighters, which limits the generalizability of these previous studies to our study population. In addition, neither Baxter et al [22], nor the two studies by Oliveria et al [23, 24] include data on contaminant levels outside, which can serve as an important comparison to understand general background levels. There is a lack of information in the scientific literature and limited information available on firefighter exposure to PM 2.5 and PAHs in the fire station, which highlights the need for further research on this topic.…”

“…[17] Few studies have examined the effect of station-level exposures on firefighter health, and those that did are several decades old, [16] assessed exposures using only qualitative methods, [18, 19], dust samples [20] or used only fire-truck run data and building design characteristics to assess exposure. [21] Several recent studies examined levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [22-24], however, the sampling periods in these studies were either 4 or 8 hours. This is much less time that the 24-hour shifts of Massachusetts firefighters and therefore may not accurately represent their exposures.…”

Characterization of Secondary Exposure to Chemicals and Indoor Air Quality in Fire Station

“…Michelle 등은, 봄, 여름, 가을 3개 계절에 걸쳐 아틀란타 도 심지역 소방청사 내 PM 10 , PM 2.5 농도를 모니터링 한 결과, 가을에 PM 10 이 유의하게 높았음을 확인하였고 (7) , Diane Ivy 등은 소방장비를 작동할 때 디젤배출물로부터 PM 10 이 배 출되는것이 확인되었는데 (8) , 본 연구에서 측정된 미세먼지 (12) . Oliveria의 연구에서는 소방서에 서 소방관들의 다환방향족탄화수소의 개인적 노출특성과 위험도 평가를 실시한 결과 연료, 차량배기가스, 윤활유 사 용 등이 PAH노출의 주요 원인으로 확인되었다.…”