PowerPointprsentation

1
Particle Size distribution, mass concentration,
chemistry and toxicity of fine particles in the
furnace tower hall and the receiving hall of a
waste recycling energy plant A.K. Sharmaab
(ash_at_ami.dk), H. Wallina, N.R. Jakobsena , J.
Rankb and K.A. Jensena a National Institute of
Occupational Health, Lersø Parkallé 105, DK-2100
Copenhagen, Denmark b Roskilde University,
Universitetsvej 1, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Introduction Great concern has been addressed to
health effects of urban particulate
air-pollution. However, high concentrations of
fine and ultrafine particles are also generated
in certain occupational environments, but
knowledge about exposure levels and particle size
distributions are very limited. The aim of this
study was to compare the particle concentrations
of PM2.5, the particle size distribution (0.01
10 ?m), chemistry and in vitro toxicity of
particles sampled in the waste receiving hall and
the furnace tower hall of a waste recycling
energy plant with similar analysis of samples
collected in a high-traffic street in Copenhagen,
Denmark.

• Summary and conclusions
• Air pollution levels of PM2.5 Furnace tower hall
  (11017 ?g/m3) gt receiving hall (598 ?g/m3)
  gtstreet air (179 ?g/m3).
• Particle size distribution Furnace tower hall
  maximum mode at 147 nm and almost all particles lt
  1 ?m. Receiving hall was episodically highly
  influenced by diesel truck emissions maximum
  mode at 26 nm and almost all particles were lt 1
  ?m. In street air, the concentrations were lower,
  but the size distribution was comparable to that
  in the receiving hall.
• Metal chemistry Receiving hall and street air
  had comparable compositions. At the receiving
  hall and street air there were higher
  concentrations of Fe, Ni, Ba and V, which are
  most likely generated from road/tyres, brakes and
  combustion of fossil fuels. The metal composition
  in the furnace hall had higher concentrations of
  the heavy metals Zn, Pb, Cd which are most likely
  present as impurities in the waste.
• Toxicity in mass-dose For both DNA damage and
  inflammatory response Receiving hall street
  air gtgt furnace tower hall.
• Toxicity in mass-dose per m3 air DNA damage
  Furnace tower hall gtgt receiving hall gt street
  air. For inflammatory response Furnace tower
  hall receiving hall street air.

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

A
r
e
a
(?m)
(?m)
Comet assay results. n8, mean SEM.
significant difference from control, plt0.001. a
significant difference from receiving hall and
street air, plt0.05. b significant difference from
receiving hall and street air, plt0.001.
Particle- size distributions
Major elements. Mean SEM (ppm), n4.
Significant difference from Receiving hall and
Street air, (plt0.05) . (plt0.001). S, N and C
not analysed.
Selected minor trace elements. Mean SEM
(ppm), n4. Significant difference from
Receiving hall and Street air, (plt0.05).
(plt0.01). (plt0.001)
IL-8 results. n4, meanSEM. significant
difference from control plt0.05.
significant difference from control, plt0.001. a
significant difference from receiving hall and
street air, plt0.001 and plt0.03, respectively.
Materials and Methods Particles (dp50 2.2 0.2
µm) were sapmled with a high-volume electrostatic
field-sampler (Sharma et al. submitted). Four
7-days samples were collected in a furnace tower
hall and the receiving hall of a waste recycling
energy plant. Four 10-13 days urban samples were
collected from a high-traffic street in
Copenhagen. Particle size distributions were
measured by an APS-3321 (TSI Inc., USA) and a
SMPSC (Model 5.400, Grimm, Germany). PM2.5 was
collected using Triplex cyclones (BGI, USA)
mounted with 1.0 µm D37 mm teflon filters and
determined with a 2-3 days resolution. Elements
were analysed by ICP-MS (ELAN 6100DRC, PE, USA).
Sample toxicity was tested in human lung
epithelial cell assay A549 at 0.25 mg/ml for 24
h. For comet assay the cell-agarose mixtures
were prepared on GelBond films and comets were
scored by Comet assay III software (Perceptive
Instruments, UK) IL-8 analysis was done by
RT-PCR (ABI prism 75000, Applied Biosystems,
Denmark). Statistical analysis was done by one
way ANOVA with Tukeys studentized range test
for pairwise comparisons.