4.8 Article

Identifying Transfer Mechanisms and Sources of Decabromodiphenyl Ether (BDE 209) in Indoor Environments Using Environmental Forensic Microscopy

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 43, 期 9, 页码 3067-3072

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es803139w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Boston University Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Environmental Exposures (CIREEH)
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [R01ES015829]
  3. Research Scientific Foundation-Flanders (FWO), Belgium
  4. National Council of Science and Technology-Mexico (CONACYT)
  5. Egyptian government
  6. Egyptian ministry Of higher education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the presence of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in house dust has been linked to consumer products, the mechanism of transfer remains poorly understood. We conjecture that volatilized PBDEs will be associated with dust particles containing organic matter and will be homogeneously distributed in house dust. In contrast, PBDEs arising from weathering or abrasion of polymers should remain bound to particles of the original polymer matrix and will be heterogeneously distributed within the dust. We used scanning electron microscopy and other tools of environmental forensic microscopy to investigate PBDEs in dust, examining U.S. and U.K. dust samples with extremely high levels of BDE 209 (260-2600 mu g/g), a nonvolatile compound at room temperature. We found that the bromine in these samples was concentrated in widely scattered, highly contaminated particles. In the house dust samples from Boston (U.S.), bromine was associated with a polymer/organic matrix. These results suggest that the BDE 209 was transferred to dust via physical processes such as abrasion or weathering. In conjunction with more traditional tools of environmental chemistry, such as gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), environmental forensic microscopy provides novel insights into the origins of BDE 209 in dust and their mechanisms of transfer from products.

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

4.8
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