Assessing the potential exposure risk and control for airborne titanium dioxide and carbon black nanoparticles in the workplace
- 1.3k Downloads
This study assessed the potential exposure risks for workers in the workplace exposed to airborne titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2-NPs) and carbon black nanoparticles (CB-NPs). The risk management control strategies were also developed for the NP engineering workplace.
The method used in this study was based on the integrated multiple-path particle dosimetry model to estimate the cumulative dose of nanoparticles (NPs) in the human lung. The study then analyzed toxicological effects such as pulmonary cytotoxicity and inflammation and evaluated the health risk associated with exposure to NPs in the workplace. Risk control measures such as the use of ventilating systems and N95 respirator protection are also discussed.
Results and discussion
This study found that: (1) the cumulative dose of CB-NPs was greater than that of TiO2-NPs in human lungs; (2) there is a potential health risk to workers exposed to TiO2-NPs and CB-NPs in the absence of control measures in the workplace, with higher health risks associated with CB-NPs than TiO2-NPs; and (3) the use of a ventilating system and an N95 respirator offers greater protection in the workplace and significantly reduces the health risks associated with NP exposure.
The present risk management control strategy suggests that the most effective way to reduce airborne NPs is to incorporate the use of a ventilating system combined with N95 respirator protection. This will enable the concentrations of TiO2-NPs and CB-NPs to be reduced to acceptable exposure levels.
KeywordsTitanium dioxide Carbon black Nanoparticles Workplace Risk assessment
The study was financially supported by China Medical University, Taiwan (CMU 96-131).
- Bałazy A, Toivola M, Reponen T, Podgorski A, Zimmer A, Grinshpun SA (2006) Manikin-based performance evaluation of N95 filtering-facepiece respirators challenged with nanoparticles. Ann Occup Hyg 50:259–269Google Scholar
- Bartis JT, Landree E (2006) Nanomaterials in the workplace: Policy and Planning Workshop on Occupational Safety and Health. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, Prepared for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthGoogle Scholar
- CIIT Centers for Health Research (2006) Multiple-path particle dosimetry (MPPD) model version 2 software. http://www.ciit.org
- ECCHCP (European Commission Community Health and Consumer Protection) (2004) Nanotechnologies: a preliminary risk analysis on the basis of a workshop organized in Brussels on 1–2 March 2004 by the Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General of the European Commission. European Commission Community Health and Consumer Protection, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- Hill AV (1910) The possible effects of the aggregation of the molecules of haemoglobin on its dissociation curves. J Physiol 40:i–viiGoogle Scholar
- Huang SH, Chen CW, Yeh WY (2004) Collection of nanoparticles by commercial respirator filters. J Occup Saf Health 12:264–274 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
- ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) (1995) Human respiratory tract model for radiological protection. ICRP Publication 66, International Commission on Radiological Protection, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- IOSH, Taiwan (Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Taiwan) (2007) Capture efficiency of ventilation system for nanoparticles. Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Executive Yuan, TaipeiGoogle Scholar
- Oberdörster G, Finkelstein JN, Johnston C et al (2000) Acute pulmonary effects of ultrafine particles in rats and mice. Health Effects Institute, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
- RSRAE (The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering) (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, LondonGoogle Scholar
- USEPA (US Environment Protection Agency) (1995) Great lakes water quality initiative technical support document for wildlife criteria. EPA-820-B-95-009, Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water, USEPA, Washington DCGoogle Scholar