2018
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-19275-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Risks, Release and Concentrations of Engineered Nanomaterial in the Environment

Abstract: For frequently used engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) CeO 2 -, SiO 2 -, and Ag, past, current, and future use and environmental release are investigated. Considering an extended period (1950 to 2050), we assess ENMs released through commercial activity as well as found in natural and technical settings. Temporal dynamics, including shifts in release due to ENM product application, stock (delayed use), and subsequent end-of-life product treatment were taken into account. We distinguish predicted concentrations or… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
206
1
3

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 352 publications
(215 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
5
206
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In (Gondikas et al, 2018;Gondikas et al, 2014) (state-of-the-art equipment, expert handling, …) that is unfit for general or standardized use. As a consequence, the current knowledge regarding potential consumer and environmental exposure relies heavily on modeling efforts that entail considerable uncertainty stemming from assumptions on production volumes, product use, human behavior, transformation processes, release rates, and myriad other processes that may determine exposure concentrations (Giese et al, 2018;Gottschalk et al, 2015;Sun et al, 2016).…”
Section: Addressing Post Manufacturing Life Cycle Stagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In (Gondikas et al, 2018;Gondikas et al, 2014) (state-of-the-art equipment, expert handling, …) that is unfit for general or standardized use. As a consequence, the current knowledge regarding potential consumer and environmental exposure relies heavily on modeling efforts that entail considerable uncertainty stemming from assumptions on production volumes, product use, human behavior, transformation processes, release rates, and myriad other processes that may determine exposure concentrations (Giese et al, 2018;Gottschalk et al, 2015;Sun et al, 2016).…”
Section: Addressing Post Manufacturing Life Cycle Stagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It therefore reflects much better the variability of responses that may occur in the environment. This PSSD approach has been applied to several compounds such as nanomaterials (Coll et al 2016;Wang et al 2016;Giese et al 2018;Wang and Nowack 2018;Wigger and Nowack 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The linear range obtained with ETAAS covers the concentration ranges that are predicted for nanomaterials in environmental samples based on probabilistic or material ow algorithms. 4,41 The detection limit, dened as three times the signal to noise ratio, was 19 fmol L À1 , corresponding to 4.6 ng L À1 gold ions (calculated on the basis of spherical AuNPs of an average diameter of 20 nm), which is better than or comparable to the LODs reported in previous studies. [11][12][13][14][17][18][19][20]31,42 The LOD can conceivably be improved by increasing the ratio of the sample to extractant volume (i.e.…”
Section: Analytical Gures Of Meritmentioning
confidence: 49%
“…1,2 It is therefore reasonable that great concern has been raised regarding their potential release into the environment and their effects on ecosystems and living organisms. 3,4 For this reason several regulation authorities have classied nanoparticles as emerging environmental pollutants and try to formulate a basis for potential preservation measures. 5,6 The rst step is assessing the fate, transportation and potential risks of nanoparticles in the environment and their determination in various environmental compartments such as wastewater and natural waters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%