| Autor: |
Wickersham LC; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Mattila JM; Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, TN, USA., Krug JD; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Jackson SR; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Wallace MAG; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Shields EP; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Halliday H; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Li EY; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Liberatore HK; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Farrior SM; CSS Inc., Durham, NC, USA., Preston W; CSS Inc., Durham, NC, USA., Ryan JV; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Lee CW; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Linak WP; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Measurements and Modeling, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. |
| Abstrakt: |
During thermal processes utilized in affixing fluoropolymer coatings dispersion to fibers and fabrics, coating components are vaporized. It is suspected that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from the dispersions may undergo chemical transformations at the temperatures used, leading to additional emitted PFAS thermal byproducts. It is important to characterize these emissions to support evaluation of the resulting environmental and health impacts. In this study, a bench-scale system was built to simulate this industrial process via thermal application of dispersions to fiberglass utilizing relevant temperatures and residence times in sequential drying, baking, and sintering steps. Experiments were performed with two commercially available dispersions and a simple model mixture containing a single PFAS (6:2 fluorotelomer alcohol [6:2 FTOH]). Vapor-phase emissions were sampled and characterized by several off-line and real-time mass spectrometry techniques for targeted and nontargeted PFAS. Results indicate that multiple PFAS thermal transformation products and multiple nonhalogenated organic species were emitted from the exit of the high temperature third (sintering) furnace when 6:2 FTOH was the only PFAS present in the aqueous mixture. This finding supports the hypothesis that temperatures typical of these industrial furnaces may also induce chemical transformations within the fluorinated air emissions. Experiments using the two commercial fluoropolymer dispersions indicate air emissions of part-per-million by volume (ppmv) concentrations of heptafluoropropyl-1,2,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl ether (Fluoroether E1), as well as other PFAS at operationally relevant temperatures. We suspect that E1 is a direct thermal decomposition product (via decarboxylation) of 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-2-(heptafluoropropoxy)propanoic acid (commonly referred to as HFPO-DA) present in the dispersions. Other thermal decomposition products, including the monomer, tetrafluoroethene, may originate from the PFAS used to stabilize the dispersion or from the polymer particles in suspension. This study represents the first researcher-built coating application simulator to report nontargeted PFAS emission characterization, real-time analyses, and the quantification of 30 volatile target PFAS. Implications : Thermal processes used to affix fluoropolymers to fabrics are believed to be a source of PFAS air emissions. These coating operations are used by many large and small manufacturers and typically do not currently require any air emissions control. This research designed and constructed a bench-scale system that simulates these processes and used several off-line and advanced real-time mass spectroscopy techniques to characterize PFAS air emissions from two commercial fluoropolymer dispersions. Further, as the compositions of commercial dispersions are largely unknown, a model three-component solution containing a single PFAS was used to characterize emissions of multiple PFAS thermal transformation products at operationally relevant conditions. This research shows that fluoropolymer fabric coating facilities can be sources of complex mixtures of PFAS air emissions that include volatile and semivolatile PFAS present in the dispersions, as well as PFAS byproducts formed by the thermal transformation of fluorocarbon and hydrocarbon species present in these dispersions. |
