The Distribution, Fate, and Effects of Propylene Glycol Substances in the Environment

  • Robert West
  • Marcy Banton
  • Jing Hu
  • Joanna Klapacz
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology book series (RECT, volume 232)

Abstract

The family of synthetic organic substances known as “propylene glycols” consists of the 1,2-propanediol substance (monopropylene glycol, MPG) and its dimer (dipropylene glycol, DPG), trimer (tripropylene glycol, TPG) and tetramer (tetrapropylene glycol, TePG) forms. The formal identities of these substances are summarized in Table 1. Collectively, these substances are produced on a scale of approximately three million metric tons per year, and are among the most important group of synthetic organic chemicals in commerce today (Chinn and Kumamoto 2011). Produced and used globally, the propylene glycol (PG) substances have functional properties that enable their application in the manufacture of polyester resins and their formulation into functional fluids (e.g., anti-freeze, aircraft anti-icing and de-icing fluids), cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, personal care products, pesticides, liquid detergents, paints and coatings, and foods used for human and animal consumption. The PG substances also have more minor uses as a humectant for tobacco, plasticizers, and solvents used in fragrance, agricultural and ink formulations. Considering the sheer volume consumed in these broad and dispersive applications, a variety of scenarios can be envisioned for their emission to the environment. Thus, there is a need to understand the potential hazards of and exposures associated with the manufacture, transport, use and disposal of products containing or manufactured from the PG substances.

Keywords

Terrestrial Organism Water Flea Dipropylene Glycol Environmental Monitoring Data Ready Biodegradability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the American Chemistry Council Propylene Oxide/Propylene Glycol Panel, and its Director, Mr. Jonathon Busch, for funding and administrative support for preparation of this review. All conclusions presented herein are those of the authors, and not necessarily of the American Chemistry Council or its sponsor companies.

References

  1. Adrian NR, Arnett CM (2007) Anaerobic biotransformation of explosives in aquifer slurries amended with ethanol and propylene glycol. Chemosphere 66:1849–1856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AIChE (2012) DIPPR project 801. Design Institute for Physical Properties Research, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, NY, Available at: http://www.aiche.org/dippr/projects/801 Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson R (1986) Kinetics and mechanisms of the gas-phase reactions of the hydroxyl radical with organic compounds under atmospheric conditions. Chem Rev 86:69–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bridie A, Wolff CJM, Winter M (1979) The acute toxicity of some petrochemicals to goldfish. Water Res 13:623–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown ES, Hauser CF, Ream BC, Berthold RV (1980) Glycols. In: Kirk-Othmer encyclopedia of chemical technology, Band 11, 3.Aufl. Wiley, New York, NY, pp 933–956Google Scholar
  6. Calamari D, Jones K, Kannon K, Lecloux A, Olsson M, Thurman M, Zannetti P (2000) Monitoring as an indicator of persistence and long-range transport. In: Klecka G, Boethling R, Franklin J, Grady L Jr, Graham D, Howard PH, Kannan K, Larson B, Mackay D, Muir D, van de Meent D (eds) Evaluation of persistence and long-range transport of organic chemicals in the environment. SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL, p 103Google Scholar
  7. CEMC (2004) Level III fugacity-based multimedia environmental model, v2.80.1. Canadian Environmental Modelling Centre, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Available from: htpp://trentu.ca/cemc/Google Scholar
  8. CERHR (2004) Monograph on the potential human reproductive and developmental effects of propylene glycol. National Toxicology Program, Center for Evaluation of Risk to Human Reproduction. United States National Institutes of Health Publication No. 04-4482Google Scholar
  9. CERI (1977) Bioconcentration study for propoxylated glycerol, reported in: Biodegradation and bioaccumulation data for existing chemicals. Chemicals Evaluation and Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan, Available at: http://www.safe.nite.go.jp/english/db.html Google Scholar
  10. Chinn H, Kumamoto T (2011) Chemical economics handbook (CEH) product review: propylene glycols. SRI Consulting, Menlo Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  11. Cornell JS, Pillard DA, Hernandez MT (2000) Comparative measures of the toxicity of component chemicals in aircraft deicing fluid. Environ Toxicol Chem 19:1465–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cox RA, McCartney MJ, Culkin F (1970) The specific gravity/salinity/temperature relationship in natural sea water. Deep-Sea Res 17:679–689Google Scholar
  13. De Zwart D, Slooff W (1987) Toxicity of mixtures of heavy metals and petrochemicals to Xenopus laevis. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 38:345–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dimitrov S, Dimitrova N, Parkerton T, Comber M, Bonnell M, Mekenyan O (2005) Base-line model for identifying the bioaccumulation potential of chemicals. SAR QSAR Environ Res 16:531–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunlap WJ, Shew DC (1976) Organic pollutants contributed to ground water by a landfill. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Report No. EPA-600/9-76-004. pp 96–110.Google Scholar
  16. EC (2008) Council Regulation (EC) No 440/2008. Off J Eur Union L142:1–739Google Scholar
  17. ECHA (2013a) Information on chemicals registered under REACh; 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene, CAS Registry No. 127-18-4. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland, Available at: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances Google Scholar
  18. ECHA (2013b) Information on chemicals registered under REACh, 1-(1-methyl-2-propoxyethoxy)propan-2-ol, CAS Registry No. 29911-27-1. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland, Available at: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances Google Scholar
  19. ECHA (2013c) Information on chemicals registered under REACh, oxydipropanol, CAS Registry No. 25265-71-8. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland, Available at: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances Google Scholar
  20. ECHA (2013d) Information on chemicals registered under REACh, 1,2-propanediol, propoxylated, CAS Registry No. 25322-16-4. European Chemicals Agency, Helsinki, Finland, Available at: http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/information-on-chemicals/registered-substances Google Scholar
  21. Environment Agency Japan (1992) Investigation of the ecotoxicological effects of OECD high production volume chemicals. Office of Health Studies, Environmental Health Department, Environment Agency, JapanGoogle Scholar
  22. Fincher EL, Payne WJ (1962) Bacterial utilization of ether glycols. Appl Microbiol 10:542–547Google Scholar
  23. Fowles JR, Banton MI, Pottenger LH (2013) A toxicological review of the propylene glycols. Crit Rev Toxicol 43(4):363–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaston LW, Stadtman ER (1963) Fermentation of ethylene glycol by Clostridium glycolicum. J Bacteriol 85:356–362Google Scholar
  25. Gebhardt DOE, Van Logten MJ (1968) The chick embryo test as used in the study of the toxicity of certain dithiocarbamates. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 13:316–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gotvajn AZ, Zagorc-Koncan J (1999) Laboratory simulation of biodegradation of chemicals in surface waters: closed bottle and respirometric test. Chemosphere 38:1339–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jaesche P, Totsche KU, Kogel-Knabner I (2006) Transport and anaerobic biodegradation of propylene glycol in gravel-rich soil materials. J Contam Hydrol 85(3–4):271–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jin P, Droy BF, Manale F, Liu S, Copeland R, Creber C, Klecka G (2002) Monitoring the effectiveness of large-scale in situ anaerobic bioremediation. In: Remediation of chlorinated and recalcitrant compounds—2002. Proceedings of the international conference on remediation of chlorinated and recalcitrant compounds, 3rd, Monterey, CA, United States, 20–23 May. pp. 797–805Google Scholar
  29. Kaplan DL, Walsh JT, Kaplan AM (1982) Gas chromatographic analysis of glycols to determine biodegradability. Environ Sci Technol 16:723–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kawai F (1987) The biochemistry of degradation of polyethers. Crit Rev Biotechnol 6:273–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klecka GM (1996) Method for stimulating anaerobic biotransformation of halogenated hydrocarbons. United States patent No. 5578210. The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MIGoogle Scholar
  32. Klecka GM, Carpenter C, Landenberger BD (1993) Biodegradation of aircraft deicing fluids in soil at low temperatures. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 25:280–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuhn R, Pattard M, Pernak K, Winter A (1989) Results of the harmful effects of selected water pollutants (anilines, phenols, aliphatic compounds) to Daphnia magna. Water Res 23:495–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Landolt-Bornstein (1980) Numerical data and functional relationships in physics, chemistry, geophysics, and technology, vol IV, 6th edn. Springer, New York, NY, pp 101–102Google Scholar
  35. Larson R, Forney L, Grady L Jr, Klecka G, Masunaga S, Peijneburg W, Wolfe L (2000) Quantitation of persistence in soil, water, and sediments. In: Klecka G, Boethling R, Franklin J, Grady L Jr, Graham D, Howard PH, Kannan K, Larson B, Mackay D, Muir D, van de Meent D (eds) Evaluation of persistence and long-range transport of organic chemicals in the environment. SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL, p 103Google Scholar
  36. Lin DDD, Melton RG, Kopfler FC, Lucas SV (1981) Glass capillary gas chromatographic/mass spectrometric analyses of organic concentrates from drinking and advanced waste treatment water. In: Keith LH (ed) Advances in the identification and analysis of organic pollutants in water, vol 2. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI, pp 861–906Google Scholar
  37. Lyman WJ (1990) Adsorption coefficient for soils and sediments. In: Lyman WJ, Reehl WF, Rosenblatt DH (eds) Handbook of chemical property estimation methods. American Chemical Society, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  38. Mackay D (2001) Multimedia environmental models: the fugacity approach, 2nd edn. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FLCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Majewski H, Klaverkamp J, Scott D (1978) Acute mortality and sub-lethal effects of acetone, ethanol and propylene glycol on the cardiovascular and respiratory systems of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri). Water Res 13:217–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mayer FL, Ellersieck MR (1986) Manual of acute toxicity: interpretation and database for 410 chemicals and 66 species of freshwater animals. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Mekenyan O, Serafimova R (2009) Mechanism based modeling of estrogen receptor binding affinity: a common reactivity pattern (COREPA) implementation. In: Devillers J (ed) Endocrine disruption modeling. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 259–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mekenyan OG, Dimitrov SD, Pavlov TS, Veith GD (2004) A systematic approach to stimulating metabolism in computational toxicology. I. The TIMES heuristic modelling framework. Curr Pharm Des 10:1273–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ministry of Environment Japan (2013) Repot on environmental survey and wildlife monitoring of chemicals. Chemical Risk Information Platform, Ministry of Environment, Japan, Available at: http://www.safe.nite.go.jp/english/db.html
  44. MITI (1995) Biodegradation and bioconcentration of existing chemical substances under the chemical substances control law. Japan Chemical Industry Ecology Toxicology & Information Center, JapanGoogle Scholar
  45. Moermond C, Janssen M, de Knecht J, Montforts M, Peijenburg W, Zweers P, Sijm D (2011) PBT assessment using the revised Annex XIII of REACH: a comparison with other regulatory frameworks. Integr Environ Assess Manag 8:359–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moran MJ, Delzer GC (2006) Contamination of ground water by PCE—a national perspective. In: Petroleum hydrocarbons and organic chemicals in ground water: prevention, assessment, and remediation conference, Houston, TX, 6–7 Nov 2006. United States Geological Survey (USGS), Publication No. 70033577. Available from: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov
  47. Nalco Company (2008) Safety data sheet for product COREXIT (R) EC9500A. Nalco Company, Naperville, ILGoogle Scholar
  48. OECD (1991) Second meeting of the OECD expert group on polymer definition: Chairman’s report [ENV/MC/CHEM(91)18]. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, October 1991Google Scholar
  49. OECD (1994) SIDS initial assessment report for tripropylene glycol. UN Publication. Available at: http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/sidspub.html
  50. OECD (2001a) SIDS initial assessment report for 1,2-dihydroxypropane. UN Publication. Available at: http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/sidspub.html
  51. OECD (2001b) SIDS initial assessment report for dipropylene glycol. UN Publication. Available at: http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/sidspub.html
  52. OECD (2003) OECD principles on good laboratory practice, No. 1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France. Revised 13 Feb 2003. Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
  53. OECD (2012) OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals—guideline, Section 1: Physical-chemical properties. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France. Updated 02 Oct 2012Google Scholar
  54. OSAT (2010) Summary report for sub-sea and sub-surface oil and dispersant detection: sampling and monitoring. Operational Science Advisory Team, Unified Area Command. Available at: http://www.restorethegulf.gov
  55. Ouattara AS, Cuzin N, Traore AS, Garcia JL (1992) Anaerobic degradation of 1,2-propanediol by a new Desulfovibrio strain and D. alcoholovorans. Arch Microbiol 158:218–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pillard DA (1995) Comparative toxicity of formulated glycol deicers and pure ethylene and propylene glycol to Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas. Environ Toxicol Chem 14:311–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pillard DA, DuFresne DL (1999) Toxicity of formulated glycol deicers and ethylene and propylene glycol to Lactuca sativa, Lolium perenne, Selenastrum capricornutum, and Lemna minor. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 37:29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Price K, Waggy GT, Conway RA (1974) Brine shrimp bioassay and seawater BOD of petrochemicals. J Water Pollut Control Fed 46:63–77Google Scholar
  59. Puck WS, Tamplin WS (1952) Physical properties of propylene glycol. In: Curme GO, Johnston F (eds) Glycols. Reinhold Publishing Company, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  60. Reynolds T (1977) Comparative effects of aliphatic compounds on inhibition of lettuce fruit germination. Ann Bot 41:637–648Google Scholar
  61. Roberts DW, Costello JF (2003) Mechanisms of action for general and polar narcosis: a difference in dimension. QSAR Comb Sci 22:226–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sabljic A, Gusten H, Verhaar H, Hermens J (2005) QSAR modeling of soil sorption. Improvements and systematics of log Koc vs. log Kow correlations. Chemosphere 31:4489–4514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. SETAC (1993) Guidance document on sediment toxicity tests and bioassays for freshwater and marine environments. In: Hill I, Mathiessen P, Heimbach F (eds) Workshop on sediment toxicity assessment, Renesse, Netherlands, 8–10 Nov 1993. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  64. Sezgin N, Tomuk GU (2013) Anaerobic treatability of wastewater contaminated with propylene glycol. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 91:320–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sills RD, Blakeslee PA (1992) The environmental impact of deicers in airport stormwater runoff. In: D’Itri FM (ed) Chemical deicers and the environment. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 323–340Google Scholar
  66. Sullivan CJ (1993) Propanediols. In: Ullmann’s encyclopedia of industrial chemistry, vol A-22, 5th edn. VCH, Deerfield Beach, FLGoogle Scholar
  67. Tarkpea M, Hansson M, Samuelsson B (1986) Comparison of the microtox test with the 96-hour LC50 test for the harpacticoid Nitocra spinies. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 11:127–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. The Dow Chemical Company (2003) A guide to glycols. The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, Available at: http://www.dow.com/PublishedLiterature Google Scholar
  69. The Dow Chemical Company (2013) Dow UCAR™ aircraft deicing and anti-icing fluids: delivering on-time flight performance safety. The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, Available at: http://www.dow.com/aircraft/index.htm Google Scholar
  70. Tsuji S, Tonogai Y, Ito Y, Kanoh S (1986) The influence of rearing temperatures on the toxicity of various environmental pollutants for killifish (Oryzias latipes). J Hyg Chem (Eisei Kagaku) 32:46–53Google Scholar
  71. Turoski VE, Woltman DL, Vincent BF (1983) Determination of organic priority pollutants in the paper industry by GC/MS. Tappi J 66:89–90Google Scholar
  72. USEPA (2000) Preliminary data summary: airport deicing operations (Revised). Office of Water, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA-821-R-00-016Google Scholar
  73. USEPA (2006) Reregistration eligibility decision document—propylene glycol and dipropylene glycol. Office of Pesticide Programs, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA-739-R-06-002Google Scholar
  74. USEPA (2012) Estimation programs interface for windows (EPI Suite), version 4.10. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm Google Scholar
  75. Verschueren K (2001) Handbook of environmental data on organic chemicals, 4th edn. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  76. Weast RC, Astle MJ (1985) Handbook of data on organic compounds. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  77. West RJ, Davis JW, Pottenger LH, Banton MI, Graham C (2007) Biodegradability relationships among propylene glycol substances in the organization for economic cooperation and development ready- and seawater biodegradability tests. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:862–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zgola-Grzeskowiak A, Grzeskowiak T, Zembrzuska J, Lukaszewski Z (2006) Comparison of biodegradation of poly(ethylene glycol)s and poly(propylene glycol)s. Chemosphere 64:803–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zgola-Grzeskowiak A, Grzeskowiak T, Zembrzuska J, Franska M, Franski R, Kozik T, Lukaszewski Z (2007) Biodegradation of poly(propylene glycol)s under the conditions of the OECD screening test. Chemosphere 67:928–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zgola-Grzeskowiak A, Grzeskowiak T, Zembrzuska J, Franska M, Franski R, Lukaszewski Z (2008) Bio-oxidation of tripropylene glycol under aerobic conditions. Biodegradation 19:365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert West
    • 1
  • Marcy Banton
    • 2
  • Jing Hu
    • 1
  • Joanna Klapacz
    • 1
  1. 1.Toxicology and Environmental Research & Consulting (TERC)The Dow Chemical CompanyMidlandUSA
  2. 2.Lyondell Chemical CompanyHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations