In the context of assessing potential risks of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs), life cycle thinking can represent a holistic view on the impacts of ENPs through the entire value chain of nano-enhanced products from production, through use, and finally to disposal. Exposure to ENPs in consumer or environmental settings may either be to the original, pristine ENPs, or more likely, to ENPs that have been incorporated into products, released, aged and transformed. Here, key product-use related aging and transformation processes affecting ENPs are reviewed. The focus is on processes resulting in ENP release and on the transformation(s) the released particles undergo in the use and disposal phases of its product life cycle for several nanomaterials (Ag, ZnO, TiO2, carbon nanotubes, CeO2, SiO2 etc.). These include photochemical transformations, oxidation and reduction, dissolution, precipitation, adsorption and desorption, combustion, abrasion and biotransformation, among other biogeochemical processes. To date, few studies have tried to establish what changes the ENPs undergo when they are incorporated into, and released from, products. As a result there is major uncertainty as to the state of many ENPs following their release because much of current testing on pristine ENPs may not be fully relevant for risk assessment purposes. The goal of this present review is therefore to use knowledge on the life cycle of nano-products to derive possible transformations common ENPs in nano-products may undergo based on how these products will be used by the consumer and eventually discarded. By determining specific gaps in knowledge of the ENP transformation process, this approach should prove useful in narrowing the number of physical experiments that need to be conducted and illuminate where more focused effort can be placed.

For exposure and risk assessment in occupational settings involving engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), it is important to understand the mechanisms of release and how they are influenced by the ENM, the matrix material, and process characteristics. This review summarizes studies providing ENM release information in occupational settings, during different industrial activities and using various nanomaterials. It also assesses the contextual information - such as the amounts of materials handled, protective measures, and measurement strategies - to understand which release scenarios can result in exposure. High-energy processes such as synthesis, spraying, and machining were associated with the release of large numbers of predominantly small-sized particles. Low-energy processes, including laboratory handling, cleaning, and industrial bagging activities, usually resulted in slight or moderate releases of relatively large agglomerates. The present analysis suggests that process-based release potential can be ranked, thus helping to prioritize release assessments, which is useful for tiered exposure assessment approaches and for guiding the implementation of workplace safety strategies. The contextual information provided in the literature was often insufficient to directly link release to exposure. The studies that did allow an analysis suggested that significant worker exposure might mainly occur when engineering safeguards and personal protection strategies were not carried out as recommended.

Exposure to airborne agents needs to be assessed in the personal breathing zone by the use of personal measurement equipment. Specific measurement devices for assessing personal exposure to airborne nanomaterials have only become available in the recent years. They can be differentiated into direct-reading personal monitors and personal samplers that collect the airborne nanomaterials for subsequent analyses. This article presents a review of the available personal monitors and samplers and summarizes the available literature regarding their accuracy, comparability and field applicability. Due to the novelty of the instruments, the number of published studies is still relatively low. Where applicable, literature data is therefore complemented with published and unpublished results from the recently finished nanoIndEx project. The presented data show that the samplers and monitors are robust and ready for field use with sufficient accuracy and comparability. However, several limitations apply, e.g. regarding the particle size range of the personal monitors and their in general lower accuracy and comparability compared with their stationary counterparts. The decision whether a personal monitor or a personal sampler shall be preferred depends strongly on the question to tackle. In many cases, a combination of a personal monitor and a personal sampler may be the best choice to obtain conclusive results.