Airborne nanoparticle exposures associated with the manual handling of nanoalumina and nanosilver in fume hoods

Tsai, Su-Jung (Candace); Ada, Earl T.; Isaacs, Jacqueline A.; Ellenbecker, Michael J.

doi:10.1007/s11051-008-9459-z

Cited by 124 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2(a). In a previous report, it was shown that laboratory nanoparticle experiments should be performed inside the fume hood using the smallest quantity possible and the least energetic handling (Tsai et al, 2009). Thus, it is important to handle nanoparticles in a well-controlled environment such as an LEV or fume hood.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

Ham

Kim

Lee

et al. 2015

Aerosol Air Qual. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to investigate the concentrations and characteristics of nanoparticle exposure at various workplaces. We compared the concentration and characteristics of nanoparticles at nine workplaces of three types; i.e., small laboratories (LAB), large-scale engineered nanoparticle manufacturing workplaces (ENP), and unintended nanoparticle-emitting workplaces (UNP), using real-time monitoring devices including scanning mobility particle sizers (SMPS), condensation particle counters (CPC), surface area monitors (SAM), and gravimetric sampling. ANOVA and Scheffe's post hoc tests were performed to compare the concentration based on the type of workplace. The concentrations at UNPs were higher than those at other types of workplace for all measured metrics followed by (in order) ENP manufacturing workplaces and LAB (p < 0.01). Geometric means and geometric standard deviations of LAB, ENP, and UNP for total number concentration measured using SMPS were 8,458 (1.41), 19,612 (2.18), and 84,172 (2.80) particles cm , respectively. The characteristics of exposure and size distributions differed among the workplaces. Some tasks or processes at LAB exhibited higher concentrations than those at ENP or UNP workplaces, and LAB showed the lowest concentration. In conclusion, we observed different exposure characteristics at LAB, ENP, and UNP suggesting that different risk management strategies are required.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

Ham

Kim

Lee

et al. 2015

Aerosol Air Qual. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies have been conducted on the fate of ENMs in the workplace (Bello et al 2009;Curwin and Bertke 2011;Fujitani et al 2008;Lee et al 2012;Schneider and Jensen 2009;Seipenbusch et al 2008;Tsai et al 2009). These typically consider the release of ENMs to indoor air during the production of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) or products that contain ENPs.…”

Section: Fate and Transport In Airmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging patterns for engineered nanomaterials in the environment: a review of fate and toxicity studies

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive assessment of the environmental risks posed by engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) entering the environment is necessary, due in part to the recent predictions of ENM release quantities and because ENMs have been identified in waste leachate. The technical complexity of measuring ENM fate and transport processes in all environments necessitates identifying trends in ENM processes. Emerging information on the environmental fate and toxicity of many ENMs was collected to provide a better understanding of their environmental implications. Little research has been conducted on the fate of ENMs in the atmosphere; however, most studies indicate that ENMs will in general have limited transport in the atmosphere due to rapid settling. Studies of ENM fate in realistic aquatic media indicates that in general, ENMs are more stable in freshwater and stormwater than in seawater or groundwater, suggesting that transport may be higher in freshwater than in seawater. ENMs in saline waters generally sediment out over the course of hours to days, leading to likely accumulation in sediments. Dissolution is significant for specific ENMs (e.g., Ag, ZnO, copper ENMs, nano zero-valent iron), which can result in their transformation from nanoparticles to ions, but the metal ions pose their own toxicity concerns. In soil, the fate of ENMs is strongly dependent on the size of the ENM aggregates, groundwater chemistry, as well as the pore size and soil particle size. Most groundwater studies have focused on unfavorable deposition conditions, but that is unlikely to be the case in many natural groundwaters with significant ionic strength due to hardness or salinity. While much still needs to be better understood, emerging patterns with regards to ENM fate, transport, and exposure combined with emerging information on toxicity indicate that risk is low for most ENMs, though current exposure estimates compared with current data on toxicity indicates that at current production and release levels, exposure to Ag, nZVI, and ZnO may cause toxicity to freshwater and marine species.

show abstract

“…Recent research has shown that the laboratory fume hood may allow releases of nanomaterials during their handling and manipulation (Tsai, Ada et al 2009). Tsai et al evaluated exposures related to the handling (i.e., scooping and pouring) of powder nanoalumina and nanosilver in a constant air volume (CAV) hood, a bypass hood, and a variable air volume (VAV) hood.…”

Section: Background For This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

In-depth lab report: evaluation of a nanomaterial handling enclosure conducted at the Alice Hamilton Laboratories.

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airborne nanoparticle exposures associated with the manual handling of nanoalumina and nanosilver in fume hoods

Cited by 124 publications

References 8 publications

Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

Comparison of Nanoparticle Exposure Levels Based on Facility Type—Small-Scale Laboratories, Large-Scale Manufacturing Workplaces, and Unintended Nanoparticle-Emitting Workplaces

Emerging patterns for engineered nanomaterials in the environment: a review of fate and toxicity studies

In-depth lab report: evaluation of a nanomaterial handling enclosure conducted at the Alice Hamilton Laboratories.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About