4.7 Article

Occurrence and fate of organophosphate ester flame retardants and plasticizers in indoor air and dust of Nepal: Implication for human exposure

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 229, 期 -, 页码 668-678

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.06.089

关键词

Chlorinated alkyl phosphate; Passive air sampling; Kathmandu; Pokhara; Birgunj; Biratnagar

资金

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences [2014FFZB0017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study was carried out in Nepal, a landlocked country located between world's two most populous countries i.e. India and China. In this study, the occurrence, profiles, spatial distributions and fate of eight organophosphate ester flame retardants (OPFRs) were investigated in indoor air and house dust. Overall, the concentrations of EOPFR were in the range of 153-12100 ng/g (median732 ng/g) and 0.32-64 ng/m(3) (median 5.2 ng/m(3)) in house dust and indoor air, respectively. The sources of high OPFR in the indoor environment could be from locally used wide variety of consumer products and building materials in Nepalese houses. Significantly, high concentration of tri-cresyl phosphate (TMPP) was found both in air and dust, while tri (2-ethylhexyl) phosphate (TEHP) had the highest concentration in air samples. It might be due to fact that the high concentrations of TMPP are related to intense traffic and/or nearby airports. On the other hand, significantly high concentration of TEHP could be due to anthropogenic activities. Only TEHP showed positive correlation between indoor air and house dust (Rho = 0.517, p < 0.01), while rest of compounds were either less correlated or not correlated at all. The estimated human exposure to EOPFR via different pathway of intake suggested dermal absorption via indoor dust as major pathway of human exposure to both children and adult population. However, other pathways of OPFR intake such as dietary or dermal absorption via soil may still be significant in case of Nepal. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据