Health and Safety Practices in the

Nanomaterials Workplace: Results from

an International Survey

Joseph Conti

Nanotechnology and Occupational Health and Safety Conference

November 15 - 17, 2007
University of California, Santa Barbara

1
Research project team

Donald Bren School of NSF NSEC: Center for Nanotechnology

Environmental Science and Management in Society at University of California,
University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara

Graduate Researchers:
Gina Gerritzen Research Mentor:
Li-Chin Huang Joseph Conti, PhD Candidate,
Keith Killpack Sociology
Maria Mircheva

Principal Investigators: Principal Investigators :

Dr. Patricia Holden, PI Dr. Barbara Herr Harthorn, Co-PI
Dr. Magali Delmas, Co-PI Dr. Rich Appelbaum, Co-PI

2
What’s distinctive about the study?
 Benchmark understanding of safety
practices in an international context
 Both Environmental, Health and Safety
(EHS) and product stewardship of
nanomaterials
 Global in scope
 Publicly available
 http://icon.rice.edu/
 http://www.cns.ucsb.edu
 Includes industry, university and research
labs

3
Survey
 Conducted between June and September 2006
 Confidentiality and anonymity ensured
 Pretesting
 Telephone Interviews (n=39)
 3rd party written administration (n=37)
○ Japan and China (PRC)

 Web Survey (n=6)

4
Sample Characteristics
 357 organizations contacted; 82 participated
 14 countries
 NANOVIP.com estimates 1,700 nanotech companies worldwide (labs
excluded) (November 2006)
 Estimated 16% contact rate for companies

Response
# Contacted # Respondents Rate (%) Region

178 25 14% North America

102 43 41% Asia
69 11 16% EU
8 3 38% Australia
357 82 23% Overall

5
Sample characteristics, continued.

Private, young, and small

 Private (71%, n=58)
 Less than 10 years old(57%, n=47)
 < 50 workers handling nanomaterials
(84%, n=65)
 Small or pilot scales (63%, n=52)
 Most respondents were management,
scientists or a combination

6
Sample characteristics, continued.

Business activities
60
49
50
44
40 38
40 35 35 33
# Organizations

29
30 25
22 22
18 17 19
20
10
10 6
3
0

7
Sample characteristics, continued.

Nanomaterials
 Nomenclature an issue; but four most commonly
handled nanomaterials
60
50 48
# Organizations

40 36
30
23
20 15 15 14 14 12 10
10 5 5 5 7
2 2
0

8
Key Findings

 Nanotechnology organizations worldwide are about

split on whether or not special risks exist, though
more reported that there are not special risks.
 Overall, organizations reported behaviors that
demonstrate a precautionary approach based on
limited knowledge
 Most measures were derived from conventional
chemical hygiene
 Both novel and potentially suspect practices reported
 Product stewardship practices remain in
development

9
Waste Management
 Most respondents (34/63) reported not
discarding nanomaterials as hazardous
waste
 Most North American, European and
Australian firms disposed of their nano-
waste as hazardous, while two organizations
in Asia reported doing so
 36 of 61 respondents do not label their waste
as nanomaterial (label by bulk material)

10
Safe Use
 71% (n=58) report having guidance for safe use
of nano-products
45 41
40
# Organizations

35
30
24
25
20 17
15 11
10 8 8 8 6 4 2
5 1 1
0

11
Reported Nanomaterial Risk Beliefs
No
Response,
 Leading concerns include 10, 12%
inhalation exposure and
potential for flammability No risk, 35,
43%

 One report of concern for

dermal exposure
risks
 Most (75%) do not perform described,
25, 30%
or fund toxicological
Not sure, 12,
testing of their 15%
nanomaterials

12
EHS Programs
 73 (89%) respondents report implementing
a general EHS program
 57 (70%) describe a nano-specific EHS
program
 Nano-specific EHS programs are more
prevalent in organizations that:
 Have worked with nanomaterials for a longer time
 Have more employees handling nanomaterials
 Believed there are special risks associated with
their nanomaterials

13
Years handling nanomaterials and
EHS programs
Nano-specific EHS
45 and/or Formal
40 nano saftey
training
35

30 General EHS Only

25

20

15 None
10

0
0 to 5 years 6 to 10 > 11 years no
years response

14
Number of Employees handling
nanomaterials and EHS programs
60
Nano-specific EHS
and/or Formal
50
nano saftey
training
40
General EHS Only
30

20
None
10

0
1 to 9 10 to 50 50 to 250 more no
than 250 response

15
Reported Risk Beliefs and EHS
Programs
35

30 Nano-specific
EHS and/or
25 Formal nano
saftey training
20 General EHS
Only
15

10 None

0
No risk Risks Not sure No
response
16
Reported Impediments to Nano-
Specific Practices

 44/82 described External impediment 37

impediments Lack of information and
guidelines 31
Legal liability 2
 Primary impediment is lack Internal impediment 12
of information Cost concerns 9
Lack of EHS prioritization 4
 Top ranked sources used for Dissemination of information
determining risks of within organization 2
nanomaterials no impediments 18
no response 20
 scientific literature
 government regulations and
guidelines
 expert consultation

17
Overall Implications
 Lack of information and guidance are the primary
reported impediment
 Most pressing demand is for research on
nanotoxicology, hazard assessment and safe
handling methods for nanomaterials
 Novel practices identified in this study could be
the basis of future systematic study
 Smaller organizations should be targeted for
safety messages
 Geographical variation in safety practices
 Safety and product stewardship require a global
approach
18
Health and Safety Practices in the
Nanomaterials Workplace: Results from
an International Survey

Joseph Conti

Nanotechnology and Occupational Health and Safety Conference

November 15 - 17, 2007
University of California, Santa Barbara

19