Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Joseph Conti
1
Research project team
Graduate Researchers:
Gina Gerritzen Research Mentor:
Li-Chin Huang Joseph Conti, PhD Candidate,
Keith Killpack Sociology
Maria Mircheva
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)
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
5
Sample characteristics, continued.
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
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%
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
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
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
19