Tag Archives: Claudia Som

New model to track flow of nanomaterials through our air, earth, and water

Leave a reply

Just how many tons of nanoparticles are making their way through the environment? Scientists at the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (Empa) have devised a new model which could help answer that question. From a May 12, 2016 news item on phys.org,

Carbon nanotubes remain attached to materials for years while titanium dioxide and nanozinc are rapidly washed out of cosmetics and accumulate in the ground. Within the National Research Program “Opportunities and Risks of Nanomaterials” (NRP 64) a team led by Empa scientist Bernd Nowack has developed a new model to track the flow of the most important nanomaterials in the environment.

A May 12, 2016 Empa press release by Michael Hagmann, which also originated the news item, provides more detail such as an estimated tonnage for titanium dioxide nanoparticles produced annually in Europe,

How many man-made nanoparticles make their way into the air, earth or water? In order to assess these amounts, a group of researchers led by Bernd Nowack from Empa, the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, has developed a computer model as part of the National Research Program “Opportunities and Risks of Nanomaterials” (NRP 64). “Our estimates offer the best available data at present about the environmental accumulation of nanosilver, nanozinc, nano-tinanium dioxide and carbon nanotubes”, says Nowack.

In contrast to the static calculations hitherto in use, their new, dynamic model does not just take into account the significant growth in the production and use of nanomaterials, but also makes provision for the fact that different nanomaterials are used in different applications. For example, nanozinc and nano-titanium dioxide are found primarily in cosmetics. Roughly half of these nanoparticles find their way into our waste water within the space of a year, and from there they enter into sewage sludge. Carbon nanotubes, however, are integrated into composite materials and are bound in products such as which are immobilized and are thus found for example in tennis racquets and bicycle frames. It can take over ten years before they are released, when these products end up in waste incineration or are recycled.

39,000 metric tons of nanoparticles

The researchers involved in this study come from Empa, ETH Zurich and the University of Zurich. They use an estimated annual production of nano-titanium dioxide across Europe of 39,000 metric tons – considerably more than the total for all other nanomaterials. Their model calculates how much of this enters the atmosphere, surface waters, sediments and the earth, and accumulates there. In the EU, the use of sewage sludge as fertilizer (a practice forbidden in Switzerland) means that nano-titanium dioxide today reaches an average concentration of 61 micrograms per kilo in affected soils.

Knowing the degree of accumulation in the environment is only the first step in the risk assessment of nanomaterials, however. Now this data has to be compared with results of eco-toxicological tests and the statutory thresholds, says Nowack. A risk assessment has not been carried out with his new model so far. Earlier work with data from a static model showed, however, that the concentrations determined for all four nanomaterials investigated are not expected to have any impact on the environment.

But in the case of nanozinc at least, its concentration in the environment is approaching the critical level. This is why this particular nanomaterial has to be given priority in future eco-toxicological studies – even though nanozinc is produced in smaller quantities than nano-titanium dioxide. Furthermore, eco-toxicological tests have until now been carried out primarily with freshwater organisms. The researchers conclude that additional investigations using soil-dwelling organisms are a priority.

Here are links to and citations for papers featuring the work,

Dynamic Probabilistic Modeling of Environmental Emissions of Engineered Nanomaterials by Tian Yin Sun†, Nikolaus A. Bornhöft, Konrad Hungerbühler, and Bernd Nowack. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2016, 50 (9), pp 4701–4711 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b05828 Publication Date (Web): April 04, 2016

Copyright © 2016 American Chemical Society

Probabilistic environmental risk assessment of five nanomaterials (nano-TiO2, nano-Ag, nano-ZnO, CNT, and fullerenes) by Claudia Coll, Dominic Notter, Fadri Gottschalk, Tianyin Sun, Claudia Som, & Bernd Nowack. Nanotoxicology Volume 10, Issue 4, 2016 pages 436-444 DOI: 10.3109/17435390.2015.1073812 Published online: 10 Nov 2015

The first paper, which is listed in Environmental Science & Technology, appears to be open access while the second paper is behind a paywall.

Few nanoparticles shed in nanopaint tests

Leave a reply

Empa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, led a 3.5 year project, NanoHouse, investigating whether or not nanoparticles added to paint used on building facades might prove a health hazard. From a Jan. 13, 2014 news item on Nanowerk (Note: A link has been removed),

 After 42 months the EU research project “NanoHouse” has ended, and the verdict is a cautious “all clear” – nanoparticles in the paint used on building façades do not represent a particular health risk. In the course of a “Technology Briefing” Empa researchers discussed these results with specialists from the construction industry.

Five Empa laboratories were involved in the EU NanoHouse project, along with four other European research institutes and four industrial partners. The aim of the project was to investigate the opportunities and risks presented by the nanomaterials used in the surface coatings applied to building façades. For the first time not only were freshly manufactured products studied to see if they set free nanoparticles, but also aged samples.

The January 13, 2014 Empa press release, which originated the news item, provides more details about the recent  NanoHouse technology briefing,

… Claudia Som briefly introduced the «NanoHouse» project, for which she acted as Empa coordinator. This project, which is financially supported through the EU’s 7th Research Framework Program, began in 2010 with the aim of investigating possible health effects caused by nanoparticles in building materials and houses. Various aspects of the research program included rubbing tests on model façades, attempts to wash out nanoparticles from surface coatings and an analysis of the biological effects on humans and the environment.

…

Tina Kuenniger, an Empa expert on the protection of wood surfaces against weathering, explained how nanoparticles work in paint. Some paints containing silicon dioxide are water repellent, easy to clean and scratch resistant. Nano titanium-dioxide has photocatalytic properties and can decompose air pollutants. Nano titanium-dioxide, along with nano zinc-oxide and nano-iron oxide, can be used to provide UV protection and, depending on the size of the particles used, also to protect against infrared radiation, i.e. heat. Similarly, nanoparticles can protect against attack by blue stain fungus and algae. Whilst many laboratory studies have confirmed the effectiveness of nanoparticles, in practice one question remains open: how much of the nanomaterial does one have to mix with the paint to ensure that it functions as expected? For this reason only a few products for external façades containing nano-materials are available on the market to date. The greatest opportunity nanoparticles offer lies in the combination of various functional properties, for example scratch resistance and easy (or self) cleaning characteristics.

The results of the tests surprised researchers from Empa and other consortium members (from the press release),

Bernd Nowack, head of Empa’s Environmental Risk Assessment and Management group, then presented the results of the investigations into how much nanomaterial is set free from façades. The release rate is generally very low – only 1 to 2% of the nanoparticles find their way into the environment. And in most cases they are released not as nanoparticles but bound to large paint particles, which significantly reduces their nano-scale effects. “We were very surprised at how few nanoparticles were actually set free”, Nowack admitted. The researchers had expected that the catalytically active nanoparticles would also attack the paint surrounding them, leading to more frequent release.

Jean–Pierre Kaiser showed by means of his toxicological studies that paints containing nanoparticles have the same effect on the behaviour of cells from the gastrointestinal tract and immune system as do similar paints which do not contain nanoparticles. The Empa researcher does not therefore expect that these nanoparticle-containing paints will represent a new, acute health risk. However, the investigations did at the same time show that nanoparticles are absorbed by the cells. Whether this accumulation of nanoparticles in the cells might lead to longer-term effects cannot yet be definitively determined.

Empa environmental scientist Roland Hischier made a plea for a reasonable balance in the assessment of the possible environmental damage. For a house with an assumed lifetime of eighty years, painting the façade with nanomaterial based paint would be more economic if this lasted for 30% longer than conventional coatings. Then, over the lifetime of the house, one would have to repaint the façade one time fewer, avoiding all the environmental effects caused by manufacturing the paint and disposing of the leftover material.

This theory remains somewhat controversial however –houses are frequently repainted for aesthetic reasons and not because a new coating is strictly necessary. In this case the advantage offered by the longer lifetime of nanoparticle-based coatings becomes completely irrelevant.

The researchers performed an industry survey revealing what professional paint companies believe to be true about nanoparticles in paint (from the press release),

… Ingrid Hincapie, a risk researcher on the Empa staff, reported on the results of her industrial survey. Many companies expected paint containing nanoparticles to have a longer lifetime than conventional paint. Some expected it to be easy to handle, for example because it dries faster. But exactly how one correctly disposes of leftover paint containing nanoparticles is something that only a handful of respondents knew.

Peter Seehafer of the Painter’s and Plasterer’s Association, gave the view from the sharp end, where quite simply the customer is king, and sometimes demands the latest in paint technology. On the other hand, about half of all painters are female, so protection from possibly unhealthy chemicals is therefore particularly important. “Our professional association needs more information, so that we can take up a clear position with respect to our customers and our employees”, demanded Seehafer.

Finally, André Hauser of the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment explained the current regulations covering the disposal of waste material containing nanoparticles. On its website www.bafu.admin.ch/abfall/01472/12850 the SFOE offers tips on how to dispose of such material properly. The current regulations relating to safe working practices with nanomaterials were explained by Kaspar Schmid of the Swiss government’s State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO). The essential point here is that the manufacturer of the material must provide a Material Safety Data Sheet, as is the case with other chemicals.

In addition to the NanoHouse link given earlier, there is this Empa NanoHouse webpage which provides more information about the work including the survey of nanopaint producers from the project’s Survey webpage,

A survey of industrial producers of nanoparticles and paints showed that the most mentioned potential benefits of nano-enhanced façade coatings are: water and dirt repellent “easy to clean”, followed by UV-protection, antimicrobial resistance and protection from mechanical wear (i.e. scratch resistance). The ENP [engineered nanopartilces], which are the most used in Europe to improve the different functionalities of the façade coatings were: Ag [silver], functionalised silanes, TiO2  [titanium dioxide] and SiO2.[silicon dioxide]

The quality of a nano-paint compared to a traditional paint could be gradually (25% of responses) and noticeably (25%) improved, but 50% of the respondents reported no functionality improvement. The companies gave relevance on studies from the specialised press (90%), on participating in dialogue events (80%) (e.g. with authorities or taking part in projects such as NanoHouse), on getting expert opinions (70%) and on toxicology test (20%).

The overall impression from the survey was that improvement of the environmental performance seems not yet to be in the focus of innovation of ENP in façade coatings.

It’s a bit disappointing that the environmental performance of nanocoatings does not, according to this project’s findings, does not live up to the promises made by the various purveyors of nanotechnology-enabled paint.