Jones, W; Gibb, A; Goodier, C and Bust, P (2015) Managing the unknown: The health risks of nanomaterials in the built environment. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2015, Lincoln, UK.
Abstract
The application of nanomaterials, containing particles 1000 times smaller than the thickness of a human hair, is increasing but uncertainties persist regarding their potential health effects. An ongoing study to identify where nanomaterials are used in construction and to assess the impact of demolition processes on particle release has identified difficulties which arise when dealing with the unknown: assessing, and managing the risks of these, and other, new materials. The widespread use of materials whose risks are inadequately understood is clearly unsatisfactory. However, the timing of a detailed health evaluation for a new product or process is not straightforward - a focus on these aspects too early in a developmental lifecycle may derail potentially promising innovations. It is also necessary to carefully balance benefit and risk. A product with moderate risk potential may be tolerated provided there are significant benefits, and adequate control measures are available. Questions also arise regarding who should carry out and fund health risk assessments for new materials. Manufacturers clearly have responsibilities, but there are also advantages in centrally funded, objective assessment. Particular complications arise when assessing the health risks for nanomaterials in view of their wide variability and the lack of adequate exposure data. There is no requirement to label nano-enabled building materials. This makes it difficult to assess the extent of their usage, and hence also to determine the health risks to those working with them, or exposed to them due to demolition or recycling at the end of the product or building life. Manufacturers, researchers, governments and wider society share responsibility for addressing these challenges. However, there are steps which constructors can take in the interim to minimise the impact on those working with these uncertainties.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | nanotechnology; nanomaterials; demolition; health risk |
| Index terms: | variability, health risk assessment, exposure, built environment, building material, lifecycle, recycling, society, health risk, thickness, manufacturer |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, environmental hazards, environmental health, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, public and environmental health, building materials, project delivery, practitioner, materials science, waste management |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here