石棉暴露于天花板和其他建筑材料的风险

K. Guth, U. Desai, J. McCluskey, R. Harbison
{"title":"石棉暴露于天花板和其他建筑材料的风险","authors":"K. Guth, U. Desai, J. McCluskey, R. Harbison","doi":"10.5897/JTEHS2020.0467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although much research has been conducted regarding asbestos removal and worker exposure, there are gaps in our understanding of the extent of asbestos-containing materials still present in building materials and the effectiveness of exposure controls used during the removal of these materials. We conducted a review of third party surveys and exposure assessment reports to: (1)  Evaluate the exposure levels measured by personal and area asbestos air sampling during abatement of ceiling and other building materials to measure the effectiveness of site controls, (2) summarize the type and concentration of asbestos identified in residential and commercial buildings’ building materials. A literature research was performed using Bing, Google, and Yahoo search engines to identify (commercially) unpublished asbestos survey reports and air sampling reports during asbestos removal to assess exposure potentials. The data extracted resulted in 3012 bulk samples assessed for concentration and type; 617 contained asbestos. Forty-one types of Asbestos-containing material (ACM) were identified. All ACMs identified were chrysotile. The chrysotile concentration in the bulk samples ranged from non-detectable to 100%. Air sampling exposure data from two asbestos abatement projects were assessed. The maximum unweighted (time) personal exposure measured was 0.0201 f/cc. Based on our evaluation of the exposure records from the removal of ACM in both commercial and residential settings where type and concentration of asbestos was known, the risk for overexposure is low based on the effectiveness of implemented risk management strategies.    \n \n Key words: Asbestos, abatement, occupational exposure , environmental monitoring.","PeriodicalId":17507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences","volume":"30 1","pages":"46-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asbestos exposure risk from ceiling and other building materials\",\"authors\":\"K. Guth, U. Desai, J. McCluskey, R. Harbison\",\"doi\":\"10.5897/JTEHS2020.0467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although much research has been conducted regarding asbestos removal and worker exposure, there are gaps in our understanding of the extent of asbestos-containing materials still present in building materials and the effectiveness of exposure controls used during the removal of these materials. We conducted a review of third party surveys and exposure assessment reports to: (1)  Evaluate the exposure levels measured by personal and area asbestos air sampling during abatement of ceiling and other building materials to measure the effectiveness of site controls, (2) summarize the type and concentration of asbestos identified in residential and commercial buildings’ building materials. A literature research was performed using Bing, Google, and Yahoo search engines to identify (commercially) unpublished asbestos survey reports and air sampling reports during asbestos removal to assess exposure potentials. The data extracted resulted in 3012 bulk samples assessed for concentration and type; 617 contained asbestos. Forty-one types of Asbestos-containing material (ACM) were identified. All ACMs identified were chrysotile. The chrysotile concentration in the bulk samples ranged from non-detectable to 100%. Air sampling exposure data from two asbestos abatement projects were assessed. The maximum unweighted (time) personal exposure measured was 0.0201 f/cc. Based on our evaluation of the exposure records from the removal of ACM in both commercial and residential settings where type and concentration of asbestos was known, the risk for overexposure is low based on the effectiveness of implemented risk management strategies.    \\n \\n Key words: Asbestos, abatement, occupational exposure , environmental monitoring.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"46-59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5897/JTEHS2020.0467\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5897/JTEHS2020.0467","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管对石棉清除和工人接触石棉进行了大量研究,但我们对建筑材料中含石棉材料的程度以及在清除这些材料期间使用的接触控制的有效性的了解仍存在差距。我们对第三方调查和暴露评估报告进行了回顾,以:(1)评估在减少天花板和其他建筑材料期间通过个人和区域石棉空气采样测量的暴露水平,以衡量现场控制的有效性;(2)总结在住宅和商业建筑材料中发现的石棉类型和浓度。使用Bing、b谷歌和Yahoo搜索引擎进行文献研究,以识别(商业)未发表的石棉调查报告和石棉清除过程中的空气采样报告,以评估暴露潜力。提取的数据产生3012个散装样品,评估其浓度和类型;617号含有石棉。确定了41种含石棉材料(ACM)。所有鉴定的ACMs均为温石棉。大量样品中的温石棉浓度从无法检测到100%不等。评估了两个石棉消减项目的空气采样暴露数据。测量的最大未加权(时间)个人暴露量为0.0201 f/cc。根据我们对在已知石棉类型和浓度的商业和住宅环境中清除ACM的暴露记录的评估,基于实施风险管理策略的有效性,过度暴露的风险很低。关键词:石棉,治理,职业暴露,环境监测
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Asbestos exposure risk from ceiling and other building materials
Although much research has been conducted regarding asbestos removal and worker exposure, there are gaps in our understanding of the extent of asbestos-containing materials still present in building materials and the effectiveness of exposure controls used during the removal of these materials. We conducted a review of third party surveys and exposure assessment reports to: (1)  Evaluate the exposure levels measured by personal and area asbestos air sampling during abatement of ceiling and other building materials to measure the effectiveness of site controls, (2) summarize the type and concentration of asbestos identified in residential and commercial buildings’ building materials. A literature research was performed using Bing, Google, and Yahoo search engines to identify (commercially) unpublished asbestos survey reports and air sampling reports during asbestos removal to assess exposure potentials. The data extracted resulted in 3012 bulk samples assessed for concentration and type; 617 contained asbestos. Forty-one types of Asbestos-containing material (ACM) were identified. All ACMs identified were chrysotile. The chrysotile concentration in the bulk samples ranged from non-detectable to 100%. Air sampling exposure data from two asbestos abatement projects were assessed. The maximum unweighted (time) personal exposure measured was 0.0201 f/cc. Based on our evaluation of the exposure records from the removal of ACM in both commercial and residential settings where type and concentration of asbestos was known, the risk for overexposure is low based on the effectiveness of implemented risk management strategies.    Key words: Asbestos, abatement, occupational exposure , environmental monitoring.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信