Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 47, No. 8, pp. 653-669, 2003
© 2003 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
Cellulosic Building Insulation versus Mineral Wool, Fiberglass or Perlite: Installer’s Exposure by Inhalation of Fibers, Dust, Endotoxin and Fire-retardant Additives
1 National Institute of Occupational Health, Lersoe Parkalle 105, DK-2100 Copenhagen; 2 Danish Building and Urban Research, Dr. Neergaardsvej 15, DK-2970 Hoersholm, Denmark
Received 3 February 2003; in final form 5 June 2003
A task-specific exposure matrix was designed for workers installing building insulation materials. A priori, a matrix element was defined by type of task (installer or helper), type of work area (attic spaces or wall cavities) and type of insulation material (slabs from mineral wool, fiberglass or flax; loose-fill cellulosic material or perlite). In the laboratory a mock-up (full scale) of a one-family house was used for simulated installation of insulation materials (four replicates per matrix element). Personal exposure to dust and fibers was measured. The dust was analyzed for content of endotoxin and some trace elements (boron and aluminum) from fire-retardant or mold-resistant additives. Fibers were characterized as WHO fibers or non-WHO fibers. In support of the exposure matrix, the dustiness of all the materials was measured in a rotating drum tester. For installers in attic spaces, risk of exposure was low for inhalation of dust and WHO fibers from slab materials of mineral wool or fiberglass. Slab materials from flax may cause high risk of exposure to endotoxin. The risk of exposure by inhalation of dust from loose-fill materials was high for installers in attic spaces and for some of the materials risk of exposure was high for boron and aluminum. Exposure by inhalation of cellulosic WHO fibers was high but little is known about the health effects and a risk assessment is not possible. For the insulation of walls, the risk of installers’ exposure by inhalation of dust and fibers was low for the slab materials, while a high risk was observed for loose-fill materials. The exposure to WHO fibers was positively correlated to the dust exposure. A dust level of 6.1 mg/m3 was shown to be useful as a proxy for screening exposure to WHO fibers in excess of 106 fibers/m3. In the rotating drum, slabs of insulation material from mineral wool or fiberglass were tested as not dusty. Cellulosic loose-fill materials were tested as very dusty, and perlite proved to be extremely dusty.
Keywords: cellulose; dustiness; fiber; insulation; mineral
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Schneider and K. A. Jensen Combined Single-Drop and Rotating Drum Dustiness Test of Fine to Nanosize Powders Using a Small Drum Ann. Hyg., January 1, 2008; 52(1): 23 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. LIDEN Dustiness testing of materials handled at workplaces. Ann. Hyg., July 1, 2006; 50(5): 437 - 439. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. MADSEN, P. KRUSE, and T. SCHNEIDER Characterization of Microbial Particle Release from Biomass and Building Material Surfaces for Inhalation Exposure Risk Assessment Ann. Hyg., March 1, 2006; 50(2): 175 - 187. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|