Establishing the safety of novel bio-based cellulose nanomaterials for commercialization

NanoImpact

Volumn 6, Issue , 2017, Pages 19-29

  Ong, K J ^a   Shatkin, J A ^a   Nelson, K ^b   Ede, J D ^a   Retsina, T ^b  

^a Vireo Advisors   (United States)

^b American Process Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Cellulose nanocrystals; Cellulose nanofibrils; Cellulose nanomaterials; Environmental health and safety; Nanocellulose; Nanomaterials commercialization; Safety

Indexed keywords

EID: 85016144833     PISSN: None     EISSN: 24520748     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.impact.2017.03.002     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Agenda 2020, Technology Alliance, 2016. Cellulose Nanomaterials Research Roadmap. Available at: http://www.agenda2020.org/technology-roadmaps.html, 2016.
2. Blaser, S.A., et al. Estimation of cumulative aquatic exposure and risk due to silver: contribution of nano-functionalized plastics and textiles. Sci. Total Environ. 390 (2008), 396–409.
3. Dufaud, O., et al. Ignition and explosion of nanopowders: something new under the dust. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 304, 2011, 012076 11.
4. ECHA, REACH: Information Requirements. Available at: https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/registration/information-requirements, 2016.
5. Eckhoff, R.K., Dust Explosions in the Process Industries: Identification, Assessment, and Control of Dust Hazards. 2003, Gulf Professional Publishing.
6. EPA, Sustainable futures/P2 framework manual. EPA-748-B12–001, 2012, EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
7. Exec Order No. 13693, 80 FR 15869, Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade. 2015.
8. FDA, Guidance for Industry: Summary Table of Recommended Toxicological Testing for Additives Used in Food. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/IngredientsAdditivesGRASPackaging/ucm054658.htm, 2006.
9. FDA, Guidance for Industry Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the Application of Nanotechnology. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM401695.pdf, 2014.
10. Fernandes, T.F., et al. Preparation and characterization of novel biodegradable composites based on acylated cellulose fibers and poly(ethylene sebacate). Compos. Sci. Technol. 71:16 (2011), 1908–1913.
11. Fox, D.M., et al. Char-forming behavior of nanofibrillated cellulose treated with glycidyl phenyl POSS. Carbohydr. Polym. 88:3 (2012), 847–858.
12. Fox, D.M., et al. Flame retarded poly(lactic acid) using POSS-modified cellulose. 1. Thermal and combustion properties of intumescing composites. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 98:2 (2013), 590–596.
13. Gupta, A., et al. Rheological and thermo-mechanical properties of poly(lactic acid)/lignin-coated cellulose nanocrystal composites. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 5 (2017), 1711–1720.
14. Harper, B.J., et al. Impacts of chemical modification on the toxicity of diverse nanocellulose materials to developing zebrafish. Cellulose 23:3 (2016), 1763–1775.
15. Kotkoskie, L.A., et al. Qualitative investigation of uptake of fine particle size microcrystallinecellulosefollowingoraladministrationin. J. Anat. 189 (1996), 531–535.
16. Kovacs, T., et al. An ecotoxicological characterization of nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC). Nanotoxicology 4:3 (2010), 255–270.
17. Kümmerer, K., et al. Biodegradability of organic nanoparticles in the aqueous environment. Chemosphere 82:10 (2011), 1387–1392.
18. Leshine, S.B., Cellulose degradation in anaerobic environments. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 49 (1995), 399–426.
19. Moon, R.J., Schueneman, G.T., Simonsen, J., Overview of cellulose nanomaterials, their capabilities and applications. JOM 68:9 (2016), 2383–2394.
20. Motte, J.C., et al. Dynamic observation of the biodegradation of lignocellulosic tissue under solid-state anaerobic conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 191 (2015), 322–336.
21. Mueller, N.C., Nowack, B., Exposure modeling of engineered nanoparticles in the environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008), 4447–4453.
22. Nelson, K., Retsina, T., Innovative nanocellulose process breaks the cost barrier. TAPPI J. 13:5 (2014), 19–23.
23. Nelson, K. et al, 2015. U.S. Patent No. 9,187,865.
24. NFPA, NFPA 68: Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting. 2013.
25. NIOSH, Occupational Safety and Health Guideline for Cellulose. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/81-123/pdfs/0110.pdf, 1995.
26. O'Connor, B., Berry, R., Goguen, R., Commercialization of cellulose Nanocrystal (NCC) production: a business case focusing on the importance of proactive EHS Management. Hull, M., Bowman, D., (eds.) Nanotechnology Environmental Health and Safety, 2014, Elsevier, 225–246.
27. Oltjen, R.R., Sirny, R.J., Tillman, A.D., Effect of three levels of minerals and three levels of cellulose on the performance of sheep fed purified rations. J. Anim. Sci. 21:2 (1962), 302–305.
28. Ong, K.J., et al. Widespread nanoparticle-assay interference: implications for nanotoxicity testing. PLoS ONE, 2014, 10.1371/journal.pone.0090650.
29. OSHA, Hazard Communication Guidance for Combustible Dusts. OSHA, 3371-08, 2009.
30. Paturi, G., et al. Cecal and colonic responses in rats fed 5 or 30% corn oil diets containing either 7.5% broccoli dietary fiber or microcrystalline cellulose. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58 (2010), 6510–6515.
31. Peng, Y., et al. Drying cellulose nanofibrils: in search of a suitable method. Cellulose 19:1 (2012), 91–102.
32. Raemy, A., Loeliger, J., Self ignition of powders studied by high pressure differential thermal analysis. Thermochim. Acta 85 (1985), 343–346.
33. Ronzon, T., Santini, F., MBarek, R., The Bioeconomy in the European Union in Numbers. Facts and Figures on Biomass, Turnover and Employment. 2016, European Comission, Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Spain.
34. Shatkin, J.A., Nanotechnology Health and Environmental Risks. second ed., 2012, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
35. Shatkin, J.A., Kim, B., Cellulose nanomaterials: life cycle risk assessment, and environmental health and safety roadmap. Environ. Sci.: Nano 2 (2015), 477–499.
36. Shatkin, J.A., et al. Market projections of cellulose nanomaterial-enabled products − part 1: applications. TAPPI J. 13:5 (2014), 9–16.
37. Shatkin, J.A., et al. Toward cellulose nanomaterial commercialization: knowledge gap analysis for safety data sheets according to the globally harmonized system. TAPPI J. 15:6 (2016), 425–437.
38. Sundaravalli, O.E., Shurpalekar, K.S., Rao, M.N., Effects of dietary cellulose supplements on the body composition and cholesterol metabolism of albino rats. J. Agric. Food Chem. 19:1 (1971), 116–118.
39. Truong, L., Harper, S.L., Tanguay, R.L., Evaluation of embryotoxicity using the zebrafish model. Methods Mol. Biol. 691 (2011), 271–279.
40. United Nations, Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Fifth revised edition, 5 ed., 2013 New York and Geneva.
41. Vartiainen, J., et al. Health and environmental safety aspects of friction grinding and spray drying of microfibrillated cellulose. Cellulose 18:3 (2011), 775–786.
42. WHO, Safety evaluation of certain food additives and contaminants: microcyrstalline cellulose. WHO Food Additive Series 40, 1998 Geneva.
43. Wu, H.-C., Explosion characteristics of aluminum Nanopowders. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 10 (2010), 33–42.
44. Wu, H.-C., Chang, R.-C., H-C, H., Research of minimum ignition energy for nano titanium powder and nano iron powder. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 22 (2009), 21–24.