4.7 Review

Carbon black vs. black carbon and other airborne materials containing elemental carbon: Physical and chemical distinctions

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 181, 期 -, 页码 271-286

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.06.009

关键词

Carbon black; Black carbon; Soot; Elemental carbon; Nanomaterial

资金

  1. International Carbon Black Association (ICBA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Airborne particles containing elemental carbon (EC) are currently at the forefront of scientific and regulatory scrutiny, including black carbon, carbon black, and engineered carbon-based nanomaterials, e.g., carbon nanotubes, fullerenes, and graphene. Scientists and regulators sometimes group these EC-containing particles together, for example, interchangeably using the terms carbon black and black carbon despite one being a manufactured product with well-controlled properties and the other being an undesired, incomplete-combustion byproduct with diverse properties. In this critical review, we synthesize information on the contrasting properties of EC-containing particles in order to highlight significant differences that can affect hazard potential. We demonstrate why carbon black should not be considered a model particle representative of either combustion soots or engineered carbon-based nanomaterials. Overall, scientific studies need to distinguish these highly different EC-containing particles with care and precision so as to forestall unwarranted extrapolation of properties, hazard potential, and study conclusions from one material to another. (C) 2013 The Authors. Published by 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