Nov. 14, 2006 — The first international survey of nanotechnology workplace safety practices commissioned by the International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON) finds companies and labs often use conventional environmental, health and safety (EHS) practices when handling nanomaterials, even though they generally believe they may pose special risks for workers.
Companies are reporting they are developing special programs and procedures for mitigating risks to workers and consumers, the report produced by researchers at University of California, Santa Barbara, noted.
The researchers collected data this summer from 64 organizations in North America, the European Union, Asia and Australia, out of 337 invited to participate. North American and Japanese respondents each represented 39 percent of those surveyed, while 17 percent came from the European Union and 5 percent from Australia. Roughly 80 percent of responses were from private sector companies.
Few organizations reported monitoring their workplaces for nanoparticles or providing formal guidance to downstream users on the safe disposal of nanomaterials. When asked, organizations generally recommended disposal of products as hazardous waste, though they did not frequently report conveying this information to their customers.
“The use of conventional practices for handling nanomaterials appears to stem from a lack of information on the toxicological properties of nanomaterials, as well as nascent regulatory guidance regarding the proper environmental, health and safety practices that should be used with them,” said ICON director Kristen Kulinowski.
Nano-specific EHS programs and training were more often reported by organizations that had worked with nanomaterials longer, had more employees handling nanomaterials, and believed there are risks related to their nanomaterials. There also appeared to be geographical variations in reported practices, with North American organizations more frequently reporting nano-specific EHS programs including training as well as monitoring of the work environment than organizations in other parts of the world.
Similarly, North American organizations more often reported using high capital cost engineering controls such as clean rooms, closed piping systems and separate HVAC systems, compared to Asian organizations that indicated more widespread use of glove boxes, glove bags and respirators. A relatively higher percentage of European organizations reported either conducting or funding toxicological research.
Most organizations reported that the biggest impediment to improving their nano-specific EHS programs was a lack of information regarding nanomaterial toxicology. Nearly half of the organizations that reported implementing a nano-specific EHS programs described them as precautions against unknown hazards.
The report suggested there is a strong demand for both more toxicological research on nanomaterials and additional industry and governmental guidance in risk assessment and nano-related EHS practices.
The researchers noted future studies should incorporate additional steps such as site visits to determine how well workplace safety and product stewardship practices actually are carried out, as well as investigating practices beyond the research lab or manufacturing facility, such as consumer and waste management practices.
“This report highlights some key obstacles to the responsible and successful development of nanotechnology. While a majority of companies report a lack of environmental health and safety information to guide good risk management, few companies conduct their own studies to develop this information,” said Tracy Godfrey, a project analyst with Environmental Defense. “Environmental Defense is working to address these important gaps through our efforts to increase risk research, improve government policy, and develop proactive corporate standards.”
This latest report, offers a snapshot of industry practices currently in use. It builds on an October report from the same researchers that offered a review and analysis of existing efforts to develop best practices for workplace safety in the nascent nanotech industry.
– Charles Choi