DOCSLIB.ORG

Compilation and Analysis of Types and Concentrations of Airborne 3 Chemicals Measured in Various Indoor and Outdoor Human 4 Environments 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 10 J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Compilation and Analysis of Types and Concentrations of Airborne 3 Chemicals Measured in Various Indoor and Outdoor Human 4 Environments 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 10 J Chemosphere,127,70-86,2015 1 2 Compilation and Analysis of Types and Concentrations of Airborne 3 Chemicals Measured in Various Indoor and Outdoor Human 4 Environments 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 10 J. Enrique Cometto-Muñiz and Michael H. Abraham 11 1 12 University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA and 2 13 Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, UK 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Address for correspondence: 21 22 J. Enrique Cometto-Muñiz, Ph.D. 23 Research Scientist Emeritus, UCSD 24 8950 Villa La Jolla Drive, Suite C135 25 La Jolla, CA 92037 26 USA 27 28 29 Phone: (858) 622-5832 30 e-mail: [email protected] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Running head: Airborne Chemical Concentrations Indoors and Outdoors 41 1 41 Abstract 42 43 The main purpose of this article is to summarize and illustrate the results of a literature search on 44 the types, levels, relative concentrations, concentration spread of individual chemicals, and number of 45 airborne compounds (mostly volatile organic compounds, VOCs) that have been found, measured, and 46 reported both indoors and outdoors. Two broad categories of indoor environments are considered: 1) 47 Home/School, and 2) Commercial spaces. Also, two categories of outdoor environments are considered: 48 1) Non-industrial and 2) Industrial (the latter represented by the vicinity of a pig farm and the vicinity of an 49 oil refinery). The outcome is presented as a series of graphs and tables containing the following statistics: 50 geometric mean, arithmetic mean, median, standard deviation, variance, standard error, interquartile 51 distance, minimum value, maximum value, and number of data (data count) for the air concentration of 52 each reported compound in a given environment. A Supplementary Table allows interested readers to 53 match each single value included in this compilation with its corresponding original reference. 54 55 56 Keywords: Environmental Chemical Exposures - Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) – Home/School 57 VOC Concentrations – Commercial Buildings VOC Concentrations – Outdoor VOC 58 Concentrations 59 2 59 1. Introduction 60 61 Humans are exposed to a wide variety of airborne chemicals both indoors and outdoors. Acute 62 awareness of such exposures often arises from chemosensory sensations, principally odor, nasal 63 chemesthesis (i.e., nasal pungency or irritation), and ocular chemesthesis (i.e., eye irritation). These 64 human chemosensations are the focus of our research interest (Cometto-Muniz and Abraham, 2008, 65 2010a; Cometto-Muñiz et al., 2010), with special emphasis on the search for quantitative structure-activity 66 relationships in terms of detection thresholds (Abraham et al., 2003; Abraham et al., 2007, 2012; Abraham 67 et al., 2010; Cometto-Muniz and Abraham, 2010b; Cometto-Muniz et al., 2005). In general, no matter what 68 the particular focus might be for the study of environmental chemical exposures, previous knowledge of 69 the kind and levels of airborne compounds that have been found in different types of broad environments 70 constitute an important piece of information. This reasoning led us to mine the scientific literature for data 71 on the types and concentration-ranges of airborne chemicals that have been found and measured in 72 indoor and outdoor environments. The questions addressed include: What compounds have been found in 73 various types of indoor and outdoor environments? At what concentrations where they found? Which 74 compounds are common to different indoor environments and which to different outdoor environments? 75 Which compounds are common between indoor and outdoor environments? For compounds common to 76 two environments, in which are they higher and by what concentration ratio? What spread of 77 concentrations have been reported for a given compound within and across these various environments? 78 This compilation presents the gathered data in the form of illustrative graphs and tables and can serve as 79 a useful and practical information guide for a wide range of investigators interested in the many aspects of 80 the topic. 81 82 83 2. Materials and Methods 84 3 85 Two main databases were used to collect data: PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) 86 and Web of Knowledge (https://apps.webofknowledge.com). The search terms entered alone and in 87 combination included, among others: “Air Pollution”, “Air Pollution, Indoor”, “Volatile Organic Compounds”, 88 “Environmental Exposure”, “VOC levels”. Some of these terms were searched on PubMed via the MeSH 89 (Medical Subject Headings) from the NLM (National Library of Medicine) controlled vocabulary thesaurus. 90 From this literature search, 47 references were selected by focusing on those articles tracking a large 91 number of volatiles, typically more than a dozen, and by filtering the results by “Species: Humans”. The set 92 contained quantitative data on the concentration and identity of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and 93 other airborne chemicals, present in a variety of indoor and outdoor environments. The geographical 94 distribution of the studies was very broad. It included areas and cities in the United States, European 95 Union (north, central and south countries), Japan, China (Hong Kong), Taiwan, Korea, Australia and 96 Argentina (La Plata). The references are listed at the end of this article under the title “Data Sources 97 References”, but readers interested in consulting the specific citation for each single value used in this 98 compilation can do so in a Supplementary Table accessible on the web. These papers constituted the 99 source to calculate the following statistics: geometric mean, arithmetic mean, median, standard deviation, 100 variance, standard error, interquartile distance, minimum value, maximum value, and number of data (data 101 count) for the air concentration of each reported compound in a given environment. The values presented 102 immediately below are geometric means across studies that measured a particular compound in a specific 103 environment (Tables 1 to 4, and Figures 1 to 6). In fact, as a rule, each value reported in a given study 104 was itself an average of a number of measurements. In this review, initial selection of the geometric mean 105 served to minimize the excessive weight on the mean of occasional extreme high or low individual values. 106 Further into the article, when analyzing the range of values reported for each chemical in specific 107 environments (Tables 5 to 7, and Figures 7 to 8), the rest of the statistical parameters mentioned above 108 are introduced. 109 110 3. Results and Discussion 111 4 112 3.1. Indoors 113 114 Indoor environments comprised two broad categories: 1) Home and School, and 2) Commercial. 115 The first category included homes new and old, with and without air quality complaints, homes and 116 schools located in industrial, urban, suburban, residential, semi-rural and rural environments. The second 117 category included car cabins, restaurants (non-smoking, smoking, and both), stores, non-residential 118 spaces (offices and non-offices) and newspaper stands. It did NOT include the air inside a pig farm’s 119 fattening house. 120 121 In the home/school environments, 152 volatiles were measured and reported (Figure 1, left side). 122 22 of them (14%) were present at concentrations ranging from approximately 10 to 200 µg/m3. 44 123 compounds (29%) were present at concentrations ranging from about 3 to 10 µg/m3. Another 44 124 substances (29%) were present at concentrations ranging from 0.55 to about 3 µg/m3. The remaining 42 125 chemicals (28%) were present at concentrations ranging from 0.01 to about 0.55 µg/m3. 126 5 1000 1000 Indoor Home/School GeoMean(!g/m3) Indoor Commercial GeoMean(!g/m3) VOCs 1 to 22 VOCs 1 to 22 g/m3) g/m3) ! ! ( ( 100 100 Concentration Concentration Mean Mean 10 10 Geometric Geometric 126 Ethanol Toluene Nonanal Xylenes Acetone 3-Carene Ammonia 1-Butanol n-Decane Limonene Isobutane n-Heptane VOC Ethanol Toluene 2-Propanol Nicotine Acetone Acetic Acid p-Xylene Isoprene m-Xylene Ammonia Ethylacetate Dodecane VOC Acetaldehyde m/p-Xylene Formaldehyde Ethylacetate Propylene glycol Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Isobutyl acetate Nonane (n-Nonane) Tetrahydrofuran Dichloromethane Tetrachloroethylene 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) MTBE (methyl tert-butyl ether) 2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy) ethanol Isobutylketone (diisobutyl ketone) Isopropyl alcohol (Isopropanol) Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) 10 10 Indoor Home/School GeoMean(!g/m3) Indoor Commercial GeoMean(!g/m3) VOCs 23 to 66 VOCs 23 to 66 8 8 g/m3) g/m3) ! ! 6 6 4 4 I 2 2 n d Indoor Commercial GeoMean( Indoor Home/School GeoMean( o 0 0 o r H o m e Xylene Octanal Xylene Heptanal Isoprene p-Xylene n-Octane n-Hexane Nonanal Xylenes Isooctane Dodecane / Benzene o-Xylene n-Octane Isopentane Camphene n-Decane n-Hexane 1-Butanol m/p-Xylene Limonene n-Heptane Nitrous acid n-Tridecane n-Undecane Chloroform alpha-Pinene Cyclohexane Acetic Acid 2-Butanone n-Undecane Hexanoic acid Benzaldehyde S Cyclohexane alpha-Pinene Ethylbenzene Ethylene glycol n-Butyl acetate 1,3-Butadiene Hexanoic acid Benzaldehyde p-Chlorotoluene Trichloroethene m-Chlorotoluene n-Butyl acetate 1,2-Propanediol Trichloroethylene Furfuryl aldehyde 3-Ethenylpyridine Methylcyclohexane 2-Methyl-1-propanol 2-Ethoxyethylactate 1,1-Dichloropropene Cyclopropylbenzene 2,3-Dimethylpentane 2,4-Dimethylpentane Methylcyclohexane Dichlorofluoromethane Hexaldehyde (Hexanal) 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene c Dichlorodifluoromethane 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)
    Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 78-93-3 Hazard Summary Methyl ethyl ketone is used as a solvent. Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure to methyl ethyl ketone in humans results in irritation to the eyes, nose, and throat. Limited information is available on the chronic (long-term) effects of methyl ethyl ketone in humans. Chronic inhalation studies in animals have reported slight neurological, liver, kidney, and respiratory effects. No information is available on the developmental, reproductive, or carcinogenic effects of methyl ethyl ketone in humans. Developmental effects, including decreased fetal weight and fetal malformations, have been reported in mice and rats exposed to methyl ethyl ketone via inhalation and ingestion. EPA has classified methyl ethyl ketone as a Group D, not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity. Please Note: The main sources of information for this fact sheet are EPA's Health Effects Assessment for Methyl Ethyl Ketone (1) and EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) (6), which contains information on inhalation chronic toxicity of methyl ethyl ketone and the RfC and oral chronic toxicity and the RfD. Uses The primary use of methyl ethyl ketone is as a solvent in processes involving gums, resins, cellulose acetate, and cellulose nitrate. (1) Methyl ethyl ketone is also used in the synthetic rubber industry, in the production of paraffin wax, and in household products such as lacquer and varnishes, paint remover, and glues. (1) Sources and Potential Exposure Methyl ethyl ketone has been detected in both indoor and outdoor air. Methyl ethyl ketone can be produced in outdoor air by the photooxidation of certain air pollutants, such as butane and other hydrocarbons.
    [Show full text]
  • Methyl Isopropyl Ketone Safety Data Sheet According to Federal Register / Vol
    Methyl isopropyl ketone Safety Data Sheet according to Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Rules and Regulations Date of issue: 05/25/2015 Version: 1.0 SECTION 1: Identification 1.1. Identification Product form : Substance Substance name : Methyl isopropyl ketone CAS-No. : 563-80-4 Product code : (US) W1814 Formula : C5H10O Synonyms : 3-Methylbutane-2-one / Isopropyl methyl ketone / Methyl-2-butanone, 3- / 2-Acetylpropane / 3- Methylbutanone-2 / 3-Methylbutanone / 3-Methylbutan-2-one / 3-Methyl-2-butanone / 2- Butanone, 3-methyl- / Butan-2-one, 3-methyl- 1.2. Recommended use and restrictions on use No additional information available 1.3. S upplie r Synerzine 5340 Hwy 42 S Ellenwood, Georgia 30294 - USA T 404-524-6744 - F 404-577-1651 [email protected] - www.synerzine.com 1.4. Emergency telephone number Emergency number : Infotrac 1-800-535-5053 (Contract# 102471) Dial +1-352-323-3500 when outside the US SECTION 2: Hazard(s) identification 2.1. Classification of the substance or mi xt ure GHS -US classification Flammable liquids Category H225 Highly flammable liquid and vapour 2 Specific target organ toxicity H336 May cause drowsiness or dizziness (single exposure) Category 3 Hazardous to the aquatic H402 Harmful to aquatic life environment - Acute Hazard Category 3 Full text of H statements : see section 16 2.2. GHS Label elements, including precautionary statements GHS-US labeling Hazard pictograms (GHS-US) : Signal word (GHS-US) : Danger Hazard statements (GHS-US) : H225 - Highly flammable liquid and vapour H336 - May cause drowsiness or dizziness H402 - Harmful to aquatic life Precautionary statements (GHS-US) : P210 - Keep away from heat, hot surfaces, sparks, open flames and other ignition sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Information for “Oligomeric Models for Estimation of Polydimethylsiloxane
    Electronic Supplementary Material (ESI) for Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016 Supplementary Information for “Oligomeric models for estimation of polydimethylsiloxane- water partition ratios with COSMO-RS theory: Impact of the combinatorial term on absolute error” by J. Mark Parnis and Donald Mackay. Contents: 1) The complete set of chemicals, with the published values of log K(PDMS-w), and the abbreviated reference, corresponding to references given in the principle text. 1) The complete set of chemicals, with the published values of log KPDMS-w. Hsieh 2011 CHAO 2014 PCB18 4.91 PCB203 7.09 PCB16 5.12 PCB195 6.89 PCB32 5.12 PCB194 6.79 PCB28,31 5.17 Benzyl alcohol -0.35 PCB33,53 5.18 4-Fluorophenol -0.28 PCB22 5.30 m-Cresol -0.03 PCB52 5.48 Phenethyl alcohol 0.12 PCB47,48 5.49 3-Methylbenzyl alcohol 0.17 PCB44 5.44 3-Chlorophenol 0.31 PCB71 5.49 3,5-Dimethylphenol 0.42 PCB41 5.49 3-Bromophenol 0.46 PCB70 5.79 4-Ethylphenol 0.60 PCB66 5.70 4-Chloroaniline 0.84 PCB95 5.77 Phenyl acetate 0.86 PCB56,60 5.86 Benzonitrile 1.04 PCB101 6.01 Acetophenone 1.04 PCB99 6.17 4-Chloroacetophenone 1.64 PCB83 6.02 Methyl benzoate 1.65 PCB97 6.05 Benzene 1.76 PCB87 6.19 Ethylbenzoate 2.12 PCB85 6.38 Toluene 2.28 PCB110 6.03 4-Chloroanisole 2.37 PCB151 6.31 Chlorobenzene 2.40 PCB135 6.48 Bromobenzene 2.51 PCB149 6.42 o-Xylene 2.69 PCB118 6.23 m-Xylene 2.73 PCB146 6.66 Iodobenzene 2.73 PCB153 6.62 p-Xylene 2.75 PCB105,132 6.40 Ethylbenzene 2.75 PCB179 6.73 Phenol -0.18 PCB141 6.73 Naphthalene 2.83 PCB138 6.61 Cyclopentane 2.85 PCB163 6.56 4-Chlorotoluene 2.87 PCB158 6.83 Methylcyclopentane 3.13 PCB187 6.96 Propylbenzene 3.14 PCB182 6.96 Isopropylbenzene 3.15 PCB183 6.26 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3.16 PCB128 6.61 1-Methyl-4-Ethylbenzene 3.20 PCB185 6.86 Cyclohexane 3.20 PCB174 7.04 1-Methylnaphthalene 3.26 PCB177 7.02 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3.34 PCB171,202 6.78 tert-Butylbenzene 3.34 PCB180 6.89 Biphenyl 3.37 PCB170 6.82 2,3-Dimethylbutane 3.37 PCB201 7.06 2-Methylpentane 3.51 CHAO 2014 Kang et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicological Profile for 2-Butanone Released for Public Comment in May 2019
    Toxicological Profile for 2-Butanone October 2020 2-BUTANONE ii DISCLAIMER Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the Public Health Service, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2-BUTANONE iii FOREWORD This toxicological profile is prepared in accordance with guidelines* developed by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The original guidelines were published in the Federal Register on April 17, 1987. Each profile will be revised and republished as necessary. The ATSDR toxicological profile succinctly characterizes the toxicologic and adverse health effects information for these toxic substances described therein. Each peer-reviewed profile identifies and reviews the key literature that describes a substance's toxicologic properties. Other pertinent literature is also presented, but is described in less detail than the key studies. The profile is not intended to be an exhaustive document; however, more comprehensive sources of specialty information are referenced. The focus of the profiles is on health and toxicologic information; therefore, each toxicological profile begins with a relevance to public health discussion which would allow a public health professional to make a real-time determination of whether the presence of a particular substance in the environment poses a potential threat to human health. The adequacy of information to determine a substance's
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the IUPAC Chemical Nomenclature and Structure Representation Division (VIII) Committee Meeting Boston, MA, USA, August 18, 2002
    Minutes of the IUPAC Chemical Nomenclature and Structure Representation Division (VIII) Committee Meeting Boston, MA, USA, August 18, 2002 Members Present: Dr Stephen Heller, Prof Herbert Kaesz, Prof Dr Alexander Lawson, Prof G. Jeffrey Leigh, Dr Alan McNaught (President), Dr. Gerard Moss, Prof Bruce Novak, Dr Warren Powell (Secretary), Dr William Town, Dr Antony Williams Members Absent: Dr. Michael Dennis, Prof Michael Hess National representatives Present: Prof Roberto de Barros Faria (Brazil) The second meeting of the Division Committee of the IUPAC Division of Chemical Nomenclature and Structure Representation held in the Great Republic Room of the Westin Hotel in Boston, Massachusetts, USA was convened by President Alan McNaught at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday, August 18, 2002. 1.0 President McNaught welcomed the members to this meeting in Boston and offered a special welcome to the National Representative from Brazil, Prof Roberto de Barros Faria. He also noted that Dr Michael Dennis and Prof Michael Hess were unable to be with us. Each of the attendees introduced himself and provided a brief bit of background information. Housekeeping details regarding breaks and lunch were announced and an invitation to a reception from the U. S. National Committee for IUPAC on Tuesday, August 20 was noted. 2.0 The agenda as circulated was approved with the addition of a report from Dr Moss on the activity on his website. 3.0 The minutes of the Division Committee Meeting in Cambridge, UK, January 25, 2002 as posted on the Webboard (http://www.rsc.org/IUPAC8/attachments/MinutesDivCommJan2002.rtf and http://www.rsc.org/IUPAC8/attachments/MinutesDivCommJan2002.pdf) were approved with the following corrections: 3.1 The name Dr Gerard Moss should be added to the members present listing.
    [Show full text]
  • References on Use of CO2 for Medical
    Some References on the Use of CO2 for Medical Entomology Survey Becker N et al. Comparison of carbon dioxide, octenol and a host-odour as mosquito attractants in the Upper Rhine Valley, Germany. Med Vet Entomol 1995;9:377-80. Abstract: Field studies were conducted in the Upper Rhine Valley to determine the responses of mosquitoes to CDC traps baited with either CO2, octenol, light or paired combinations of these. Among eight mosquito species caught, the attractant effect on trap catches was studied in the four most abundant: Aedes vexans, Ae. rossicus, Ae. cinereus and Culex pipiens. Traps baited only with light or octenol caught few mosquitoes, whereas many were caught by traps baited with CO2 alone or in combination with either of the other candidate attractants. CO2 baited traps, with or without light, caught the most Aedes. The combination of CO2 and octenol attracted most Cx pipiens, but this apparent synergy was not significant. Using a caged hamster compared to CO2 as bait in a CDC light-trap with only intermittent fan suction, the hamster attracted less mosquitoes than CO2 emitted at a rate of 225 g/h on days 1 and 2, whereas on days 3 and 4 the smell from the hamster's cage became significantly more attractive than this rate of CO2 for all species of mosquitoes. Canyon DV, Hii JL. Efficacy of carbon dioxide, 1-octen-3-ol, and lactic acid in modified Fay- Prince traps as compared to man-landing catch of Aedes aegypti. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 1997;13:66-70. Abstract: The attractants 1-octen-3-ol and lactic acid significantly decreased catches of Aedes aegypti in Townsville, Australia, by 50% in a controlled laboratory environment and by 100% in the field when compared to carbon dioxide baited bidirectional Fay-Prince trap catches.
    [Show full text]
  • Combined PIANO Standard
    Combined PIANO Standard Product #: VHG-PIANO-COM-0.1 Lot #: 711069047B Concentration Concentration Component Component (Wt.%) (Wt.%) Isoparaffins Isopentane 0.3371 4-Methylheptane 0.4939 2,3-Dimethylbutane 0.0691 3-Methylheptane 0.8406 2-Methylpentane 0.5031 3-Ethylhexane 0.1097 3-Methylpentane 0.8271 3,3-Dimethylheptane 0.2590 2,2-Dimethylpentane 0.2746 2,5-Dimethylheptane 0.8678 2,4-Dimethylpentane 0.5679 3,5-Dimethylheptane 0.1169 2,2,3-Trimethylbutane 0.6042 2,3-Dimethylheptane 0.2288 3,3-Dimethylpentane 0.2873 3,4-Dimethylheptane 0.5668 2-Methylhexane 0.3643 2-Methyloctane 0.5791 2,3-Dimethylpentane 0.2751 3-Methyloctane 0.8645 3-Methylhexane 0.2475 3,3-Diethylpentane 0.2424 3-Ethylpentane 0.0813 2,2-Dimethyloctane 0.5024 2,2-Dimethylhexane 0.2027 3,3-Dimethyloctane 0.4902 2,5-Dimethylhexane 0.5727 2,3-Dimethyloctane 0.5927 2,2,3-Trimethylpentane 0.2658 3-Ethyloctane 0.5694 2,4-Dimethylhexane 0.2542 2-Methylnonane 0.5727 2,3-Dimethylhexane 0.2492 3-Methylnonane 0.8889 2-Methylheptane 0.6744 Aromatics Benzene 1.6808 1-Methyl-3-n-propylbenzene 0.4972 Toluene 1.0772 1-Methyl-4-n-propylbenzene 0.5237 Ethylbenzene 1.5918 n-Butylbenzene 0.5198 m-Xylene 0.5341 1,2-Diethylbenzene 0.2577 p-Xylene 1.1328 1-Methyl-2-n-propylbenzene 0.5282 o-Xylene 0.5315 1,4-Dimethyl-2-ethylbenzene 0.5379 Isopropylbenzene 0.5235 1,3-Dimethyl-5-ethylbenzene 0.5176 n-Propylbenzene 1.0731 1,2-Dimethyl-4-ethylbenzene 0.5310 1-Methyl-3-ethylbenzene 0.5181 1,3-Dimethyl-2-ethylbenzene 0.2695 1-Methyl-4-ethylbenzene 0.5104 1,2-Dimethyl-3-ethylbenzene 0.5151 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
    [Show full text]
  • Hydroxyethoxyphenyl Butanone’ (HEPB)
    SCCS/1582/16 Final version Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety SCCS OPINION ON Ethylzingerone – ‘Hydroxyethoxyphenyl Butanone’ (HEPB) (Cosmetics Europe No P98) The SCCS adopted this Opinion by written procedure on 7 April 2017 SCCS/1582/16 Final Opinion on Ethylzingerone - ‘Hydroxyethoxyphenyl Butanone’ (HEPB) - Cosmetics Europe No P98 About the Scientific Committees Three independent non-food Scientific Committees provide the Commission with the scientific advice it needs when preparing policy and proposals relating to consumer safety, public health and the environment. The Committees also draw the Commission's attention to the new or emerging problems which may pose an actual or potential threat. They are: the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS), the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) and the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) and are made up of external experts. In addition, the Commission relies upon the work of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the European Centre for Disease prevention and Control (ECDC) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). SCCS The Committee shall provide Opinions on questions concerning all types of health and safety risks (notably chemical, biological, mechanical and other physical risks) of non-food consumer products (for example: cosmetic products and their ingredients, toys, textiles, clothing, personal care and household products such as detergents, etc.) and services (for example: tattooing, artificial sun tanning, etc.). Scientific Committee members Ulrike Bernauer, Laurent Bodin, Leonardo Celleno, Qasim Chaudhry, Pieter Jan Coenraads, Maria Dusinska, Janine Ezendam, Eric Gaffet, Corrado Lodovico Galli, Berit Granum, Eirini Panteri, Vera Rogiers, Christophe Rousselle, Maciej Stepnik, Tamara Vanhaecke, Susan Wijnhoven.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Evaluation of Thermochemical Properties of C1–C4 Species; Updated Group-Contributions to Estimate Thermochemical Properties
    Provided by the author(s) and NUI Galway in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite the published version when available. Critical evaluation of thermochemical properties of C-1-C-4 Title species: updated group-contributions to estimate thermochemical properties Author(s) Burke, S. M.; Simmie, J. M.; Curran, Henry J. Publication Date 2015-01-05 Burke, S. M., Simmie, J. M., & Curran, H. J. (2015). Critical Publication evaluation of thermochemical properties of C-1-C-4 species: Information updated group-contributions to estimate thermochemical properties. Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 44(1), 013101. Publisher AIP Publishing Link to publisher's http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4902535 version Item record http://hdl.handle.net/10379/6119 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4902535 Downloaded 2021-09-25T06:51:18Z Some rights reserved. For more information, please see the item record link above. C1–C4 thermochemical properties: updated group additivity groups Critical evaluation of thermochemical properties of C1–C4 species; updated group-contributions to estimate thermochemical properties. S. M. Burke, J. M. Simmie, and H. J. Currana) Combustion Chemistry Centre, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland (Dated: 26 September 2014) A review of literature enthalpies of formation and molar entropies for alkanes, alkenes, alcohols, hydroperox- ides, and their associated radicals has been compiled and critically evaluated. By comparing literature values the overall uncertainty in thermochemical properties of small hydrocarbons and oxygenated hydrocarbons can be highlighted. In general there is good agreement between heat of formation values in the literature for stable species, however there is greater uncertainty in the values for radical species and for molar entropy values.
    [Show full text]
  • Dose–Response Assay for Synthetic Mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae) Attractant Using a High-Throughput Screening System
    insects Article Dose–Response Assay for Synthetic Mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae) Attractant Using a High-Throughput Screening System Dae-Yun Kim 1, Theerachart Leepasert 2, Michael J. Bangs 1 and Theeraphap Chareonviriyaphap 1,* 1 Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture, Kasetsart Univeristy, Bangkok 10900, Thailand; [email protected] (D.-Y.K.); [email protected] (M.J.B.) 2 Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Simple Summary: Entomological surveillance is important to evaluate vector management inter- ventions. However, collecting adult mosquitoes using direct human bait is controversial and often discouraged because of potential infection risk. Alternatively, active and passive trapping methods are available. Female mosquitoes detect human host cues such as body heat, carbon dioxide, and other volatile body emanations using olfactory sensilla to direct movement to a host. Attractive chemical lures have been identified and evaluated using a variety of olfactometric methods to in- crease trap production and efficiency. In this study, we evaluated a simple olfactometer without need of airflow. To ‘optimize’ a commercial mosquito attractant, 10 different doses of product, the TM Biogents-lure (BG-lure ), were compared. Results showed dose-dependent responses with 0.005 g with the highest attraction for Aedes aegypti, while doses of 0.2 g and above produced a repellent Citation: Kim, D.-Y.; Leepasert, T.; response. There was no significantly different response behavior between permethrin-susceptible Bangs, M.J.; Chareonviriyaphap, T. and -resistant Ae. aegypti. Culex quinquefasciatus showed significantly different responses compared Dose–Response Assay for Synthetic to Ae.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Listed Wastes Table 1: Maximum Concentration of Contaminants For
    EPA Listed Wastes Table 1: Maximum concentration of contaminants for the toxicity characteristic, as determined by the TCLP (D list) Regulatory HW No. Contaminant CAS No. Level (mg/L) D004 Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.0 D005 Barium 7440-39-3 100.0 D0018 Benzene 71-43-2 0.5 D006 Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0 D019 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 0.5 D020 Chlordane 57-74-9 0.03 D021 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 100.0 D022 Chloroform 67-66-3 6.0 D007 Chromium 7440-47-3 5.0 D023 o-Cresol 95-48-7 200.0** D024 m-Cresol 108-39-4 200.0** D025 p-Cresol 106-44-5 200.0** D026 Cresol ------------ 200.0** D016 2,4-D 94-75-7 10.0 D027 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 7.5 D028 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 0.5 D029 1,1-Dichloroethylene 75-35-4 0.7 D030 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 0.13* D012 Endrin 72-20-8 0.02 D031 Heptachlor 76-44-8 0.008 D032 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 0.13* D033 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 0.5 D034 Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 3.0 D008 Lead 7439-92-1 5.0 D013 Lindane 58-89-9 0.4 D009 Mercury 7439-97-6 0.2 D014 Methoxychlor 72-43-5 10.0 D035 Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 200.0 D036 Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 2.0 D037 Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 100.0 D038 Pyridine 110-86-1 5.0* D010 Selenium 7782-49-2 1.0 D011 Silver 7740-22-4 5.0 D039 Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 0.7 D015 Toxaphene 8001-35-2 0.5 D040 Trichloroethylene 79-01-6 0.5 D041 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 400.0 D042 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 2.0 D017 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 93-72-1 1.0 D043 Vinyl Chloride 74-01-4 0.2 * Quantitation limit is greater than the calculated regulatory level.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D MEK Product Brochure
    Appendix D MEK Product Brochure PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 1 of 2 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone, MEK) O ll MW = 72.11 CH3CCH2CH3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone, Chemical Abstracts Registry Number 78-93-3 Wiswesser Line Formula Chemical Notation 2V1 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) is a accounts for its largest use. Other important applications are as clear, colorless, low-boiling organ- Nitrocellulose lacquers consume an extraction solvent for the ic liquid with a typical ketone large volumes of Methyl Ethyl dewaxing of lube oil and as an odor. It is a fast evaporating sol- Ketone and solubilization of intermediate in the production of vent with an evaporation rate simi- acrylic coatings also contributes to antioxidants, perfumes and cata- lar to ethyl acetate. Although not the overall use of Methyl Ethyl lysts. Methyl Ethyl Ketone is also as volatile as acetone, Methyl Ketone by the surface coatings used by the hard wood pulping Ethyl Ketone is similar to acetone industry. MEK is preferred as a industry and in the production of in many respects. It is miscible lacquer solvent, because high con- smokeless powder. It is routinely with most organic solvents and is centrations of resins possessing used in printing inks, degreasing an excellent solvent for most natu- superior aliphatic and aromatic and cleaning fluids and as a com- ral and synthetic resins. diluent tolerance can be readily ponent of the solvent system used achieved as low viscosity solu- in producing magnetic tape. Methyl Ethyl Ketone is a highly tions. versatile organic compound but Methyl Ethyl Ketone as a chemi- finds its greatest utility as a sol- Methyl Ethyl Ketone is also com- cal intermediate will undergo the vent in the surface coatings indus- monly used as a solvent for rubber typical reactions associated with try.
    [Show full text]