Post on 27-Mar-2020
transcript
CCrriitteerriiaa FFoorr HHeeaalltthh EEffffeeccttss EEvvaalluuaattiioonn
OOff DDiieesseell PPaarrttiiccuullaattee MMaatttteerr DDrr.. NNoorrbbeerrtt MMeettzz
BBMMWW GGrroouupp TTrraaffffiicc aanndd EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt Abstract Mechanisms of diesel particulate matter health effects are still an open issue despite numerous investigations all over the world. Therefore additionally to the mass the pa-rameters size and size distribution, number and number distribution, ultrafine parti-cles, surface, chemical composition, shape and morphology have to be analysed to find the most effective criteria for health effects. Exhaust emissions regarding these criteria from passenger cars and duty vehicles are given and possible mechanism for health effects are discussed. Additionally to the size, the deposited particle mass in the lung, the chemical composition of adsorbed material and the hydrophobic, re-spectively hydrophilic character and also the surface are considered. Due to the complex interaction of all parameters health effects cannot be concentrated on one parameter alone. It is necessary to evaluate all parameters to understand the mechanism of health effects and to be able to derive effective measures to improve the situation. If all these parameters and their relation to each other are known, the gravimetrical determination of PM from diesel engines is the most efficient and suitable way for certification purposes. Introduction The dilemma regarding the evaluation of health effects from diesel particles is that whether animal tests nor epidemiological studies are able to give a reliable background for risk assessments. The defence and lung clearance mechanism is not yet fully clear: Assuming that all particles are 0.2 µm aerodynamic diameter and a particle concentration of 100 000 Particles per cm3 is a typical urban exposure (APEG 1999-Maynard) the daily particle intake of an adult can be calculated 100 000 x 780 000 cm3/h x 24 h x 29 = 5.4 x 1011 /day. 3.35 x 1011 are penetrating to the aveoli . Assumption is that all alvoeoli are ventilated equally. If alveoli number in the adult is 296 x 1010 macrophages (ICPR 66) then number of particles deposited per alveolus is 1130 /day. Crapo (1982) estimate 2.16 x 1010 macrophages in the human alveolar region, implying 73 macrophages per alveolus. If all particles are collected by the macrophages one macrophage ingest 1130/73 = 15 particles. An overload is estimated at 900 000 particles, when the macrophage ingest 60 % of his own volume, which is estimated to 1000 µm3 Oberdörster demonstrated this with particles of an diameter of 50 nm with a volume of 0.000 065 µm3. Therefore an overload situation is far far away. Therefore a lot of parameters have to be investigated. Main conclusions
The evaluation of health effects from Diesel exhaust is complex and can not be explained with one single parameter.
Mass is certainly the most important criteria, which determine dose
response. Prerequisite is that for the number measurements a differentiation between liquid and solid aerosols must be done.
Important criteria for the evaluation of health effects are: - PM mass, size and size distribution, number and number distribution, PM concentration in ambient air, PM surface, shape, morphology, chemical composition inclusive adsorbed material and hygroscopic properties together with bioavailability PM mass emission is declining, despite increasing mileage.
A lower sulphur- content in the diesel fuel strengthen this trend. PM emission both mass and number decreases continuously.
For certification the gravimetric measurement of mass is still the most efficient and suitable procedure.
Criteria For Health Effects EvaluationCriteria For Health Effects Evaluation
Of Diesel Particulate MatterOf Diesel Particulate Matter
Dr. Norbert MetzDr. Norbert Metz
BMW Group Traffic and EnvironmentBMW Group Traffic and Environment
ETH-Conference on Combustion Generated Particles,
Zürich, August 18 – 20. 2003
Criteria for Health Effects EvaluationOf Diesel Particulate Matter
Introduction Dilemma for the Evaluation of Health Effects
PM Mass Particulate Matter Emission ( PM10 , PM2.5 , Diesel Soot)Emission Contribution of Different Sources in GermanyDevelopment of PM-Emissions from Road Transportregarding PM10 , PM2.5 , Soot (EC) and Number
Mass and Number Correlation between Mass and Number, Fuel Influence
PM Size Size Distribution ( Emission / Air Quality )
PM Surface Surface for Euro III and Euro IV Passenger Cars
PM Morphology Diesel PM, Urban Aerosol and Particles in the Lung
PM Chemistry Chemical Composition ( Diesel PM and Ambient)
Health Effects Hypothesis for Effects of PM2.5 and Diesel Soot
Summary and Conclusions
Content
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3802
In Vitro-Test In Vivo-Test Epidemiology
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3803
Tools For Research Upon Health Effects
Ames-Test epicutaneous Case Studiessubcutaneous
Cytogenetic intratracheal Cohort StudiesTest intrapereonal
inhalativeDNA-Repair Test
Cell trans- Animal Species Teratogenic Studiesformation Test Mice (e.g. Scenar)
HamstersRats
(e.g. Fisher 344, Wistar, Sprague Dawley)
Risk Assessment for Humans
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3804Quelle: Mauderly J.Lovelace,Albuquerque, NM9/2000
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3805
Comparison Of Particle ExposedConcentration Ranges
Animal-Tests
Some Diesel-Workplaces
Near Industry
3as
Ann
ual M
ean
Near RoadsAway fromIndustry
Away from RoadsAway from Industry
Diesel Exhaust
OtherEmission Sources
Versuchs -bereich Normale Umwelt
3
LowestDose withoutEffects
µg P
artc
les
l(Soo
t)/m
3
HighestDose
LowestDose
Test-Range Ambient Air
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Alveolarmacrophage
Important cells of the lung on the way to particle-induced tumorgenesis.
Main function:Defence and lung clearance
Activated Alveolar Macrophage (center) Granulocyte (right upper corner)
REM Image from a lung cell
Ref.: Bruch J., Uni Essen 2003 Me-3806
Granulocyte
10 000 nm
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3807Ref: F.Netter
Macrophages bind with „Surfactant“ inhaled Particles in the Lung
1 = Surface ot thealveolar epithel
2 = Particles coming in the alveole
3 = Wrapping of particles
4 = Contact with themacrophage
5 = Entrance in the Cytoplasma
6 = Formation of Phagolysomes
7 = Direct Reaction
8 = Release of lytic encymes1
2
3
4
56
78
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3808
Hamster don´t show even with high dose tumors, with mice the reactions don´t allow clear conclusions.
Rats exposed to low dosis developed no tumors.
With high dose rats showed tumors, which are notdiesel specific. They also appeared with TiO2, elementalcarbon and other fine particles fractions.
The formation of tumors is due to the overload of the rat lung with particles.
Locations of the particle deposition and reactions in the lung,due to inhaled particles are total different in rats and humans.
Metabolismus in rats and in humans is not comparable.
Rat data can not be used therefore for risk assessmentsto estimate a danger for humans.
Questionable Relevance OfRat Test Results To Humans
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3809
Epidemiological Studies And Relative Risk
Howe
Hall
Garshick (88)
Boffetta (90)
Schenker
Garshick (87)
Burns
Siemiatycki
Williams
Boffetta (88)
Menck
Hall
Leupker
Ahlberg
Siemiatycki
Boffetta (88)
Hayes
Boffetta (90)
Steenland
Burns
Williams
0,1 1 10 0,1 1 10
= RR with smoker corr. = RR without smoker corr. = 95%-band
Railway worker Driver (duty veh. +busses)
Relative Risk(95% Conf.)Q:Greenbaum, D.
VDI-Fortschr.ber.
Reihe 12, Bd 348, 5/98
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3810Greenbaum, D.VDI-Fortschr.ber.Reihe 12, Bd 348, 5/98
Relative Risk (derived from Epidemiology)Metaanalysis Summary of Bhatia
1.75
1.50
1.25
1.00
0.75
Rai
lroad
Wor
ker
Con
stru
cti o
nEq
uipm
ent
Dri v
er
Truc
k-D
river
Bus
Driv
er
Tota
l
Job
Expo
sed
Mal
es J
EM
RR = 1.33 (1.24 to 1.44)
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3811
Weak Points in EpidemiologyRegarding Risk Estimations
Exact exposition data are mostly unknown and later not deductible.
Collectives exposed only to diesel exhaust are not available.
Other confounders (e.g. smoking, alcohol use, drugs, etc.) are often not - or insufficient - taken into account.
Smoking as a strong carcinogen has even at low concentrationsstronger effects as particles in urban aerosols, since particles are a weak carcinogen, if at all.
Job induced nutrition and life style habits are hard to be takeninto account adequate.
Also genetic burden and illness can not be taken into account.
Therefore results of existing epidemiological studies cannot be used for risk assessments.
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe- 3812
200 nm
Shape andMorphology
Concentration [g/m3]
Mass [g/km]
Hydrophobic resp.Hydrophilic Character
Size [ µm oder nm]Size Distribution
ChemicalComposition
Number andNumber Distribution
Criteria to Characterize Diesel Particulate Matter for Health Effects Evaluations
Surface [ m2]
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme- 3813
Total Suspended Particulate Matter
Particles with a size below 10 µm ( PM10 )
Particles with a size below 2.5 µm ( PM2.5 )
Particles with a size below 0.1 µm ( PM0.1 )
Ultrafine Particles (below 50 nm)
Soot Particles, Total Carbon
Organic Carbon (OC)
Elemantal Carbon (EC)
Which Particles Are Responsible for Health Effects ?
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3814Q: Prüller, AK-ELWien, Juni 2002
PM10- Emissions225 [kt/a]in 2000
Exhaust Duty Veh. 10%
Passenger Car Wear *) 8%
Industry burning3%
Industry processes27%
Small utilities /Residential 12%
Abrasion Duty Veh. *) 3%
Offroad 13%
Passenger Car Exhaust 4%
Coarse material9%
Power Plants 11%
*) Wear: Tyre, Brake, Road
Contribution of Different Sources to PM10 Emissions in Germany in 2000
PM 2.5 - Emissions 156 [kt/a] in 2000
Coarse Material1%
Small utilities/Residential
8%
Duty veh. Wear *)2%
Offroad16% Exhaust Duty Veh.
13%
Industry Burning2%
Power Plants10%
Passenger Car Exhaust
6%Passenger Car
Wear *)4%
Industry Processes38%
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3815Q: Prüller, AK-ELWien, Juni 2002
*) Wear: Tyre, Brake, Road
Contribution of Sources to PM2.5 Emissions in Germany in 2000
Anthropogenic PM 0.1 Emissionsin Germany in 2000
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3816Ref: Nader, TU Wien, 2002
* Wear: Tyre,Brake,Road
Industry Processes28 %
Industry Processes1 %
Small UtilitiesResidential
2 %
Off Road Machinery33 %
Power Plants3 %
Pass. Car Exhaust8 %
Pass. Car Wear*4 %
Duty Veh. Exhaust19 %
Duty Veh. Wear*2 %
in the Year 2000PM 0.1 Emissions 50 kt/year
(inclusive emissions of Road Transportdue to Wear (Tyres, Brakes and Road))
Passenger CarsDuty VehiclesOffroad MachineryIndustry-IncinerationSmall Utilities /ResidentialPower PlantsIndustry-ProcessesBulk Goods Handling
PM10 Emission TrendSources in Germany
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
PM-E
mis
sion
sin
[kt]
10
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3817Q: Prüller, AK-ELWien, Juni 2002
PM2.5 Emission TrendSources in Germany
0200400600800
100012001400160018002000
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
PM 2.
5 -Em
issi
ons
in [k
t] Passenger CarsDuty VehiclesOffroad MachineryIndustry-IncinerationSmall Utilities /ResidentialPower PlantsIndustry-ProcessesBulk goods Handling
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3818Q: Prüller, AK-ELWien, Juni 2002
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Fleet Stock [1000 Vehicles]
Buses DieselLight Duty DieselHeavy Duty DieselPassenger Cars Diesel
Diesel Vehicles Trend in GermanyBMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3819Q: Prüller S.,TU Wien, AK EL2002
DV-Mileage
Mileage[Billion km/a]
DV-PM-Emissions
Particulate Matter[kt/a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1980 1990 2000 2010 20200
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
PC-PM-Emissions
PC-Mileage
Particulate Matter Exhaust EmissionsPassenger Cars and Duty Vehicles in Germany
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3820Q: Prüller S.,TU Wien, AK EL2002
Quelle: IFEU Heidelberg 03.09.1998
1000 Tons/year
0
10
20
30
40
50
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Passenger CarsLight Duty VehiclesHeavy Duty Vehiclesand Buses
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3821Q: IFEU ausCHC-9008.ppt
Development of PM EmissionsOf Road Transport in Germany
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
spec
ific
Emis
sion
fact
or[g
/km
]
-64
%
-84
%
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3822Q: IFEU ausCHC-9008.ppt
Based on actual car population
Development of Diesel Passenger Car Fleet Emission Factors in Germany
Soot (EC) Air Quality Trend InSome German Cities
Berlin-Karl-Marx-Straße 77
Berlin-Wedding
Berlin-Charlottenburg
Berlin-Schmargendorf
Berlin-NeuköllnNansenstraße
Berlin-Friedrichshein
Düsseldorf-Mörsenbroich
Düsseldorf-Corneliusstraße
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe-3823
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
roadside
Urban background
Soot yearly average values [µg/m³]
aus H.P. Lenz, Ch. Cozzarini , S. Prüller, Bericht Emissionen und Luftqualität 1998, Stuttgart, 25.6.1998
Threshold value accord. 23.VO, §40,Abs.2, BImSchG is 8 µg/m3
Size Distribution Of Exhaust Gas Particles50 km/h And 120 km/h Constant Speed
10 100 10000,0E+00
5,0E+12
1,0E+13
1,5E+13
2,0E+13
2,5E+13
3,0E+13
3,5E+13dN/dln(Dp) [1/km]
0,0E+005,0E+121,0E+131,5E+132,0E+132,5E+133,0E+133,5E+134,0E+134,5E+135,0E+13
10 100 1000
dN/dln(Dp) [1/km]
530d
320d
525tds
Mobility Diameter [nm]
50 km/h 120 km/h
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3824Q: Resch,Steinparzer F.ATZ
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe- 3825Q: Schindler. VDA-KongressFrankfurt,2000
Partikelzahl 10 13 / km Pkw 1 (Euro 1)Pkw 2 (Euro 2)Pkw 3 (Euro 3)
Pkw 4 (Euro 4)
5
4
3
2
1
0
13 / km Particle Number 10 PC 1 (Euro 1)PC 2 (Euro 2)PC 3 (Euro 3)
PC 4 (Euro 4)
10 100 100010 100 1000Particle Diameter in nm
5
4
3
2
1
0
Particle Emission Reduction Of DieselPassenger Cars In Mass And Number
0
1E+13
2E+13
3E+13
4E+13
5E+13
6E+13
7E+13
8E+13
9E+13
1E+14
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07Particle Mass [g/km]
Part
iccl
eN
umbe
r[1
/km
]
ACEA-Study Passenger Cars
ACEA-Programm zur Partikelemission von Pkw gemessen mit SMPS bei 100 km/h Konstantfahrt
ACEA-Study Duty Vehicles
0
2E+14
4E+14
6E+14
8E+14
1E+15
1,2E+15
1,4E+15
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Particle Mass [g/kWh]
Part
icle
Num
ber[
1/kW
h]
convent. Diesel-PCmodern Diesel-PC
ACEA-Programm zur Partikelemission von Nfz gemessen mit SMPS bei Konstantlast
Reduction Of Particle EmissionsMass And Number Of Diesel Vehicles
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3826Q: ACEA, Rep.Fine Part. Brüssel 1999, Stein J. VDA-Techn.Kongr.9/2000,Frankf.
Measurement on different vehicles (Audi, BMW, DC, VW) in Europe-driving cycle
Exhaust Gas Emissions120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
0 to - 54%
-3 to -54%
-14 to -47%
CO HC + NOx Particulate Matter
Range
Basis: Normal Diesel Fuel = 100% compared with Swedish Diesel Fuel Class 1
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe-3827Ref: SchindlerVDA-Workshop 3.6.98
Passenger Car Emission ImprovementsBy Reducing Sulphur Content In Diesel Fuel From 350ppm to 10ppm
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe- 3828Q:Vogt R.,ETH-Nanopart-Conference,Zürich, 2002
Diesel car, 40 ppm S fuel, speed 100 km/h,distance 14 m, T=17-20°C, RH=56-80%
10 100 1000
Dp / nm
30 cm (1)50 cm (1)100 cm (1)0 cm30 cm (2)50 cm (2)100 cm (2)
Diesel car, 320 ppm S fuel, speed 100 km/h,distance 14 m, T=21°C, RH=53-59%
10 100 1000Dp / nm
1E+12
1E+13
1E+14
1E+15
dN/d
logD
p/ #
km
-1 100 cm (1)30 cm50 cm0 cm100 cm (2)
1E+12
1E+13
1E+14
1E+15
dN/d
logD
p/ #
km
-1
Typical Diesel Particle Size DistributionWith 320 ppm Sulfur And With 40 ppm Sulfur
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1800.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
150nm
Dp [nm]
25°C 280°C
20 30 40 50 600.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
50nm
Dp [nm]
20 40 60 800.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
80nm
dN/ d
log
Dp,
norm
[cm
-3]
Dp [nm]
15 20 25 30 350.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
30nm
dN/ d
log
Dp,
norm
[cm
-3]
Dp [nm]
Preliminary Highway Sampling Results For Some Size Fractions In Germany
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe- 3829Ref.: Wehner, B.,Wiedensohler A.2001
Electrical Mobility Equivalent Diameter [nm]
80
60
40
20
0
Particle Mass [ µg/m3] Particle Number [1000 / cm3]
Winter Winter91/92 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 91/92 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01
- 16%
0.01 µm - 2 .5 µm
0.01 µm - 2 .5 µm30
20
10
- 74 %
Mass And Number Of 2.5 ParticlesIn Urban Ambient Air In Erfurt
40
Ref: Kreyling W.G. et al, Atmospheric Environm. 7/2003 in press
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe- 3830
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3831Cartus, IAA 1999
Dieselparticles Measured WithTransmission Electromicroscopy
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3832Nto-109 , BMFT1975
A typical aggregate particleconsisting of several primary particles,which diameter liesbetween 20 and 30 nm.Primary particles are strongconnected with each other.
In the lower left corner theschematic structure of a primary particle is shown.It consists out of manycarbon layers packed together.The distance of the grids isabout 0.36 nm or 3.6 Angström.
Diesel Particle With High ResolutionMagnification 400 000 With Zeiss EM100
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3833Q:Metz N., MTZ, et al. Richards R.J. in PM, Properties andEffects upon Health ed. B.Maynard a. HowellBIOS,1999, Page 111
200 nm
Diesel Engine, CR, 120km/h Urban Aerosol, UK DPM administered to rats, UK
2000 nm
On the way from the exhaust tailpipe into the ambient air and to the deposition in therespiratory system diesel particles tend to increase their diameter from 100-200 nm over 300-500 nm (ambient air) to 600-1000 m (alveols and interstitium)
Particle From A Diesel Engine, Particles In Ambient Air And Deposited In The Lung
Surface Of Diesel Aggregate ParticlesBMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3834Ref. Metz N.5.ETH-Conf.,2001
The weight of particles of a Euro 3 passenger car is0,04 g/km = 40 mg/km = 40 000 µg/km = 40 000 000 ng/km.
The weight of one aggregate particle is approximately580 * 10-9 ng.This means that in the Exhaust there are
40 000 000 ng * 1000 000 000580 ng *km
= 69 *1012 Particles /km with a Surface of 81 500 nm2 /Particle
Surface Euro 3 = 69 * 81,4 * 1015 = 5.6 m2/km.
The Surface of Particles from Euro 4 Passenger Cars is 2.8 m2/km.
Aggregate Particle Composition Of A Modern PC Diesel Engine
Aggregate Particle Diameter (AD) = 120 nm
Primary Particle Diameter (PD) = 25 nm
120 nm
25 nm
Gaseous HC
Soluble organic HC-Fraction OC
Sulfate SO4
Adsorbed HC
EC = Elemental Carbon
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3835Ref: Greenbaum D.,2/2003
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltme-3836Q: Niessner R.München 1995
Composition Of Particulate Matter Near Kerbside In Munich, Germany
Total-Carbon
36.5%
Sulphur, Nitrate,Chloride, etc.56.2%
Silicate6.6%
PAHs0.3%
SolubleCarbon-Material10%
ElementaryCarbon26.2%
Metals0.7%
Luise Kiesselbach-Platz Winter 1992/93
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.1
-0.2
0.2
-0.3
0.3
-0.4
0.4
-0.5
0.5
-0.6
0.6
-0.7
0.7
-0.8
0.8
-0.9
0.9
-1.0
1.0
-2.0
2.0
-3.0
3.0
-4.0
4.0
-5.0
5.0
-6.0
6.0
-7.0
7.0
-8.0
particle diameter [µm]
Other
Metal oxide
Quartz
Silicate
Organic
Soot
Biological
Relative Abundance Of Particle Groups At Black Forest „Kleiner Feldberg“ (13.08.1997)
Umweltmineralogiecontact:Martin Ebert (mebert@geo.tu-darmstadt.de )
Stephan Weinbruch (dh6d@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de)
num
ber [
%]
number of analyzed particles = 3653
BMW GroupVerkehr und UmweltMe-3837
Linear Dose Response For Inflammation And J-Shaped Response For GenotoxicSubstances
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme-3838Quelle: BruchEssen,4/ 2003
Range for Risk Assessment
Range fortoxicological tests
.1 1 1 0 1 0 0
Dose response (DR) for inflammation and DNA damage for hygienic risk assessment for Quartz
J-shaped DR and threshold for a gentoxic effect from Quartz (white circles, green curve)
Linear DR for an inflammatoric effect (orange points, gray line)
Wirkung
INFLAMMATION
MutagenicDNA Damage
Response
Dose
Questionable Linearity Of Dosis-Response Relation
BMW GroupVerkehr und Umweltme-3839Quelle: Bruch,2003
Semi quantitative schema for different threshold curvesfor different samples
Measured:red and green linefor different aerosols
Hypothesis:Extrapolation fromhigh dose tolow dose (gray line)
Range forRisk Assessment
Range oftoxicological tests
.1 1 1 0 1 0 0
Dose
Response
Hypothetical Modes of Action for Fine PM
PlaqueFormation
PlaqueRupture
PM 0.1
ACUTE PHASE RESPONSE
Trans-Endothelium
SYSTEMIC INFLAMMATION
ACUTE PULMONARYINFLAMMATION
CardiacDeposition
LiverDeposition
PERSISTENTPULMONARY INJURY
Ischemia
AutonomicControl
Fibrinogen / C-Reactive
Protein
HOURSDAYS - WEEKS
YEARS
+
+
Metals EC / OC
PM 2.5
This is an abstract of a proposed presentation and does not necessarily reflect EPA policy.
BMW GroupVerkehr undme-3540Ref: Neas, EPA-ORD, RTP 2001
BMW GroupVerkehr undUmweltMe-3841
Summary and Conclusions
The evaluation of health effects from Diesel exhaust is complex and cannot be explained with one single parameter.Mass is certainly the most important criteria, which determine dose response. Prerequisite is that for the number measurements a differentiation between liquid and solid aerosols must be done.Important criteria for the evaluation of health effects are: - PM mass, size and size distribution, number and number distribution,
PM concentration in ambient air, PM surface, shape, morphology, chemical composition inclusive adsorbed material and hygroscopicproperties together with bioavailability
PM mass emission is declining, despite increasing mileage.A lower sulphur- content in the diesel fuel strengthen this trend. PM emission both mass and number decreases continuously.For certification the gravimetric measurement of mass is still the
most efficient and suitable procedure.