End-user perspective of low-cost sensors for outdoor air pollution monitoring.

Low-cost sensor technology can potentially revolutionise the area of air pollution monitoring by providing high-density spatiotemporal pollution data. Such data can be utilised for supplementing traditional pollution monitoring, improving exposure estimates, and raising community awareness about air pollution. However, data quality remains a major concern that hinders the widespread adoption of low-cost sensor technology. Unreliable data may mislead unsuspecting users and potentially lead to alarming consequences such as reporting acceptable air pollutant levels when they are above the limits deemed safe for human health. This article provides scientific guidance to the end-users for effectively deploying low-cost sensors for monitoring air pollution and people's exposure, while ensuring reasonable data quality. We review the performance characteristics of several low-cost particle and gas monitoring sensors and provide recommendations to end-users for making proper sensor selection by summarizing the capabilities and limitations of such sensors. The challenges, best practices, and future outlook for effectively deploying low-cost sensors, and maintaining data quality are also discussed. For data quality assurance, a two-stage sensor calibration process is recommended, which includes laboratory calibration under controlled conditions by the manufacturer supplemented with routine calibration checks performed by the end-user under final deployment conditions. For large sensor networks where routine calibration checks are impractical, statistical techniques for data quality assurance should be utilised. Further advancements and adoption of sophisticated mathematical and statistical techniques for sensor calibration, fault detection, and data quality assurance can indeed help to realise the promised benefits of a low-cost air pollution sensor network.

Epoxy composite dusts with and without carbon nanotubes cause similar pulmonary responses, but differences in liver histology in mice following pulmonary deposition.

BACKGROUND: The toxicity of dusts from mechanical abrasion of multi-walled carbon nanotube (CNT) epoxy nanocomposites is unknown. We compared the toxic effects of dusts generated by sanding of epoxy composites with and without CNT. The used CNT type was included for comparison. METHODS: Mice received a single intratracheal instillation of 18, 54 and 162 µg of CNT or 54, 162 and 486 µg of the sanding dust from epoxy composite with and without CNT. DNA damage in lung and liver, lung inflammation and liver histology were evaluated 1, 3 and 28 days after intratracheal instillation. Furthermore, the mRNA expression of interleukin 6 and heme oxygenase 1 was measured in the lungs and serum amyloid A1 in the liver. Printex 90 carbon black was included as a reference particle. RESULTS: Pulmonary exposure to CNT and all dusts obtained by sanding epoxy composite boards resulted in recruitment of inflammatory cells into lung lumen: On day 1 after instillation these cells were primarily neutrophils but on day 3, eosinophils contributed significantly to the cell population. There were still increased numbers of neutrophils 28 days after intratracheal instillation of the highest dose of the epoxy dusts. Both CNT and epoxy dusts induced DNA damage in lung tissue up to 3 days after intratracheal instillation but not in liver tissue. There was no additive effect of adding CNT to epoxy resins for any of the pulmonary endpoints. In livers of mice instilled with CNT and epoxy dust with CNTs inflammatory and necrotic histological changes were observed, however, not in mice instilled with epoxy dust without CNT. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary deposition of epoxy dusts with and without CNT induced inflammation and DNA damage in lung tissue. There was no additive effect of adding CNT to epoxies for any of the pulmonary endpoints. However, hepatic inflammatory and necrotic histopathological changes were seen in mice instilled with sanding dust from CNT-containing epoxy but not in mice instilled with reference epoxy.

MWCNTs of different physicochemical properties cause similar inflammatory responses, but differences in transcriptional and histological markers of fibrosis in mouse lungs.

Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) are an inhomogeneous group of nanomaterials that vary in lengths, shapes and types of metal contamination, which makes hazard evaluation difficult. Here we present a toxicogenomic analysis of female C57BL/6 mouse lungs following a single intratracheal instillation of 0, 18, 54 or 162 µg/mouse of a small, curled (CNT(Small), 0.8 ± 0.1 µm in length) or large, thick MWCNT (CNT(Large), 4 ± 0.4 µm in length). The two MWCNTs were extensively characterized by SEM and TEM imaging, thermogravimetric analysis, and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller surface area analysis. Lung tissues were harvested 24h, 3 days and 28 days post-exposure. DNA microarrays were used to analyze gene expression, in parallel with analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, lung histology, DNA damage (comet assay) and the presence of reactive oxygen species (dichlorodihydrofluorescein assay), to profile and characterize related pulmonary endpoints. Overall changes in global transcription following exposure to CNT(Small) or CNT(Large) were similar. Both MWCNTs elicited strong acute phase and inflammatory responses that peaked at day 3, persisted up to 28 days, and were characterized by increased cellular influx in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, interstitial pneumonia and gene expression changes. However, CNT(Large) elicited an earlier onset of inflammation and DNA damage, and induced more fibrosis and a unique fibrotic gene expression signature at day 28, compared to CNT(Small). The results indicate that the extent of change at the molecular level during early response phases following an acute exposure is greater in mice exposed to CNT(Large), which may eventually lead to the different responses observed at day 28.

Transcriptional profiling identifies physicochemical properties of nanomaterials that are determinants of the in vivo pulmonary response.

We applied transcriptional profiling to elucidate the mechanisms associated with pulmonary responses to titanium dioxide (TiO2 ) nanoparticles (NPs) of different sizes and surface coatings, and to determine if these responses are modified by NP size, surface area, surface modification, and embedding in paint matrices. Adult C57BL/6 mice were exposed via single intratracheal instillations to free forms of TiO2 NPs (10, 20.6, or 38 nm in diameter) with different surface coatings, or TiO2 NPs embedded in paint matrices. Controls were exposed to dispersion medium devoid of NPs. TiO2 NPs were characterized for size, surface area, chemical impurities, and agglomeration state in the exposure medium. Pulmonary transcriptional profiles were generated using microarrays from tissues collected one and 28 d postexposure. Property-specific pathway effects were identified. Pulmonary protein levels of specific inflammatory cytokines and chemokines were confirmed by ELISA. The data were collapsed to 659 differentially expressed genes (P ≤ 0.05; fold change ≥ 1.5). Unsupervised hierarchical clustering of these genes revealed that TiO2 NPs clustered mainly by postexposure timepoint followed by particle type. A pathway-based meta-analysis showed that the combination of smaller size, large deposited surface area, and surface amidation contributes to TiO2 NP gene expression response. Embedding of TiO2 NP in paint dampens the overall transcriptional effects. The magnitude of the expression changes associated with pulmonary inflammation differed across all particles; however, the underlying pathway perturbations leading to inflammation were similar, suggesting a generalized mechanism-of-action for all TiO2 NPs. Thus, transcriptional profiling is an effective tool to determine the property-specific biological/toxicity responses induced by nanomaterials.

Application of nanoscale zero valent iron (NZVI) for groundwater remediation in Europe.

PURPOSE: Nanoscale zero valent iron (NZVI) is emerging as a new option for the treatment of contaminated soil and groundwater targeting mainly chlorinated organic contaminants (e.g., solvents, pesticides) and inorganic anions or metals. The purpose of this article is to give a short overview of the practical experience with NZVI applications in Europe and to present a comparison to the situation in the USA. Furthermore, the reasons for the difference in technology use are discussed. METHOD: The results in this article are based on an extensive literature review and structured discussions in an expert workshop with experts from Europe and the USA. The evaluation of the experiences was based on a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analysis. RESULT: There are significant differences in the extent and type of technology used between NZVI applications in Europe and the USA. In Europe, only three full-scale remediations with NZVI have been carried out so far, while NZVI is an established treatment method in the USA. Bimetallic particles and emulsified NZVI, which are extensively used in the USA, have not yet been applied in Europe. Economic constraints and the precautionary attitude in Europe raise questions regarding whether NZVI is a cost-effective method for aquifer remediation. Challenges to the commercialization of NZVI include mainly non-technical aspects such as the possibility of a public backlash, the fact that the technology is largely unknown to consultants, governments and site owners as well as the lack of long-term experiences. CONCLUSION: Despite these concerns, the results of the current field applications with respect to contaminant reduction are promising, and no major adverse impacts on the environment have been reported so far. It is thus expected that these trials will contribute to promoting the technology in Europe.

Nanofiltration and nanostructured membranes--should they be considered nanotechnology or not?

Nanofiltration is frequently associated with nanotechnology - obviously because of its name. However, the term "nano" in nanofiltration refers - according to the definition of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) - to the size of the particles rejected and not to a nanostructure as defined by the International Organisation of Standardisation (ISO) in the membrane. Evidently, the approach to standardisation of materials differs significantly between membrane technology and nanotechnology which leads to considerable confusion and inconsistent use of the terminology. There are membranes that can be unambiguously attributed to both membrane technology and nanotechnology such as those that are functionalized with nanoparticles, while the classification of hitherto considered to be conventional membranes as nanostructured material is questionable. A driving force behind the efforts to define nanomaterials is not least the urgent need for the regulation of the use of nanomaterials. Since risk estimation is the basis for nanotechnology legislation, the risk associated with nanomaterials should also be reflected in the underlying standards and definitions. This paper discusses the impacts of the recent attempts to define nanomaterials on membrane terminology in the light of risk estimations and the need for regulation.