Ultrafine Particle Metrics and Research Considerations: Review of the 2015 UFP Workshop

Abstract

In February 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sponsored a workshop in Research Triangle Park, NC, USA to review the current state of the science one missions, air quality impacts, and health effects associated with exposures to ultrafine particles[1].[...]

Metallic Fumes at Indoor Military Shooting Ranges: Lead, Copper, Nickel, and Zinc in Different Fractions of Airborne Particulate Matter

“…Particulate matter (PM) differs in size and nano-sized ultrafine particles (< 100 nm) are considered most harmful, because of their high penetrability to the lungs [25,26]. When interacting with cells, PM nanoparticles can induce lipid peroxidation, cause intracellular oxidative stress, in -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 crease cytosolic calcium ion concentration, activate EGF receptors, and disrupt normal electron transport leading to oxidative stress [27].…”

Exposure to ultrafine particles in children until 18 years of age: A systematic review

“…This could be explained by technical limitations in the technology available, as well as by the fact that there was no agreement on a definition of UFP until 2015. For example, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reached a consensus in February 2015 to consider UFP as those particles with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 200‐500 nm . Within the instruments used in the selected studies, the ones whose size detection ranges were closer to the definition of UFP were the testo DiSCmini (Matter Aerosol; Wohlen) and the Philips Aerasense NanoTracers (NTs).…”

“…9 However, as shown in the results, particle size sensitivities in the studies differ For example, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reached a consensus in February 2015 to consider UFP as those particles with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 200-500 nm. 19 Within the instruments used in the selected studies, the ones whose size detection ranges were closer to the definition of UFP were the testo DiSCmini (Matter Aerosol; Wohlen) and the Philips Aerasense NanoTracers (NTs). This, again, highlights the need to continue researching using the most accurate technology available.…”

“…15 The results from those analyses are not conclusive, but suggest a relationship between UFP exposure and respiratory illnesses, inflammation processes, 15,16 cardiovascular effects such as variations in blood pressure, 16,17 or even cognitive developmental alterations. 15,17,18 The sources of emission of UFP are present in both outdoor and indoor environments, 19,20 road transport being the main anthropic outdoor source. [21][22][23] A study conducted in Europe estimated that the main primary sources of UFP emission were road and non-road transport (51%), followed by commercial and residential heating systems (21%) and several industrial processes (16%).…”

“…23 Compared to other pollutants, such as traffic-related air pollutants (eg, NO 2 ), the correlations between indoor and outdoor levels are usually lower for UFP. 19,22 In comparison with larger-sized particles, the UFP fraction in air by volume is significant considering the total number of particles, while they are not representative in mass. Thus, UFP concentrations are preferentially measured as total number of particles/volume.…”