Regulation, Risk, and the Global Nanotechnology Workplace ...nano.dguv.de/.../textfiles/BGETEM/_13__Engeman_NanoSafe2012.pdf · SES 0938099 SES 0531184 Regulation, Risk, and the Global

SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Regulation, Risk, and the Global

Nanotechnology Workplace

Cassandra Engeman, Terre Satterfield,

Patricia Holden, Barbara Herr Harthorn

Journal of Nanoparticle Research (2012) 14:749-760

University of California, Santa Barbara

University of British Columbia

SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Source: PCAST report Mar 2010: 19, from Lux Report 2009

Rapidly growing industry

55% 32%

12%

1%

Global Nano Final Products by Sector in 2009

Total value $224B

Materials & manufacturing

Electronics & IT

Healthcare & life sciences

Energy & environment

JAPAN

SWITZERLAND RRRRRRRRRRLLLL U.K.

AUSTRALIA

GERMANY

UNITED STATES

SES 0938099

SES 0531184

1. How are companies that use and/or produce

engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) adapting practices

for safe development of ENMs?

Research questions:

2. What are ENM companies’ views on ENM risk and

regulation? What do they believe to be the roles

of government(s) and private industry in ensuring

the safe development of nanotechnology?


SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Company characteristics

• Number of employees

• Employees working with nanomaterials

• Age of company

• Type of nanoparticles handled

EHS practices

• EHS programs

• Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

• Engineered & administrative controls

• Waste management

• Product stewardship

Views on risk and regulation

SURVEY: Main Sections

• Structured interviews

• Administered through a 45-

minute phone interview

• Available online in English,

Japanese and Chinese

• Confidential participation


SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Other

1.3%

Europe

15.4%

Asia

24.4% North America

59%

Response Rate: 19%

N = 78

Survey Sample



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Metal Oxides Other

carbonaceous

materials

Quantum dots Dry powders Heavy metals Carbon

nanotubes

Moderate - high risk Don't know Almost no risk - slight risk

Pe

rce

nt

of

com

pa

nie

s


1. It is reasonable to assume that industries working

with nanomaterials will adapt or alter their safe-

handling practices when new hazards are discovered.

2. Businesses are better informed about their own

workplace safety needs than are government agencies.

3. Industries working with nanomaterials can be trusted

to regulate the safe-handling of these materials.

4. Voluntary reporting approaches for risk

management are effective for protecting human

health and the environment.

5. Employees are ultimately responsible for their

own safety at work.

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Lack of Information Lack of Regulation Budget Constraints Internal Enforcement

Pe

rce

nt

of

Co

mp

an

ies 48%

36%

14%

Reported impediments to implementing

nano-specific health and safety practices

61%


General EH&S and

Nano-specific EH&S

Programs Percent of

Participants with a

General EHS

Program

Percent of

Participants with a

Nano-specific EHS

Program 54%

46%

Have a

nano- EHS

Program

N=76

13%

87%

Have EHS Program


Nano-specific health and safety program

Monitoring the workplace for nanoparticles

Use of respiratory protection

Nano-specific waste program

Disposes nanomaterials as hazardous waste

Uses separate disposal containers for nanomaterials

Lists nanomaterials separately on waste manifests

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

What methods are used for cleaning areas in

which nanomaterials are handled?

Pe

rce

nt

of

Co

mp

an

ies

86%

42% 34% 32%

30% 24%

17% 13%

Wet

wiping

HEPA

vacuum

Absorbent

materials

Soaps/

cleaning

oils

House-

hold/shop

vacuum

Sweeping Liquid

traps

Compressed

air

SES 0938099

SES 0531184

U.S. Sample:

How are companies that use and/or produce

engineerednanomaterials (ENMs) adapting practices for

safe development of ENMs?

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Reported use of Personal Protective Equipment

U.S. Sample

100%

88% 85%

72% 69% 61%

45% 43% 34%

19%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Co

mp

an

ies

Nano-specific health and safety program

Monitoring the workplace for nanoparticles

Use of respiratory protection

Nano-specific waste program

Disposes nanomaterials as hazardous waste

Uses separate disposal containers for nanomaterials

Lists nanomaterials separately on waste manifests

41% YES

(n = 18) 59% NO

(n = 26)

U.S. Sample

Monitoring the workplace for

nanoparticles

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

What methods are used for cleaning areas in

which nanomaterials are handled?

Pe

rce

nt

of

Co

mp

an

ies

90%

44% 39% 37%

24% 24% 22%

12%

Wet

wiping

HEPA

vacuum

Absorbent

materials

Soaps/

cleaning

oils

House-

hold/shop

vacuum

Sweeping Liquid

traps

Compressed

air

U.S. Sample

Nanomaterials

Waste

Management

Separate disposal containers

for nanomaterials?

Dispose nanomaterials as

hazardous waste?

Nanomaterials listed separately in

waste manifests?

Yes

26% No

74%

Yes

38% No

62%

No

36% Yes

64%

U.S. Sample

SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Implications for nanotechnology policy and governance:

• Narrow conceptualization of nano-specific health and safety programs

• Caution regarding efficacy of further guidance and information alone to

protect environment and workers

• Diminished attention to safety measures toward product end-of-life

• Workers as stewards of their own safety


SES 0938099

SES 0531184

Thank you! Thanks also to our survey participants.

This work is supported by the NSF and the EPA under Coop. Agreement DBI0830117 to the UC CEIN and from

NSF in Coop. Agreement SES 0531184 & SES 093809 to the CNS at UCSB. Any opinions, findings, and

conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily

reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the Environmental Protection Agency. This work has

not been subjected to EPA review and no official endorsement should be inferred.

Support from our colleagues: Dr. Richard Appelbaum, Dr. Sara Anderson, Dr. Yasuyuki

Motoyama, University of California-Santa Barbara (UCSB); Dr.

Magali Delmas, University of California-Los Angeles; Dr. Joseph

Conti, the University of Wisconsin-Madison; Dr. Stacey

Frederick, North Carolina State College/Duke University.

Advice from governments and

industry: Dr. Kristin Kulinowski (ICON), Dr. Charles Geraci (NIOSH), Dr. Fred

Klaessig (Degussa of North America), Dr. Matthew Hull

(Nanosafe, Inc.), and Dr. Masafumi Ata and Mizuki Sekiya

(nanotechnology working group, AIST, Japan); Dr. Khiang Wan Lee

(A*STAR, Singapore)

Translation services: Silke Werth and Qian Yang with additional support from Yuan Ge.

Financial support: UC CEIN and the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at UCSB

Regulation, Risk, and the Global Nanotechnology Workplace ...nano.dguv.de/.../textfiles/BGETEM/_13__Engeman_NanoSafe2012.pdf · SES 0938099 SES 0531184 Regulation, Risk, and the Global

Documents