Johannes Gerding1, Claudia Peters2, Wolfgang Wegscheider3, Johanna Stranzinger3, Frederik Lessmann4, Katrin Pitzke5, Volker Harth4, Udo Eickmann3, Albert Nienhaus3,2. 1. German Social Accident Insurance, Institution for the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Public Health, Hamburg, Germany. johannes.gerding@bgw-online.de. 2. University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Competence Centre for Epidemiology and Health Services Research for Healthcare Professionals (CVcare), Hamburg, Germany. 3. German Social Accident Insurance, Institution for the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), Department for Occupational Medicine, Hazardous Substances and Public Health, Hamburg, Germany. 4. University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Institute for Occupational and Maritime Medicine (ZfAM), Hamburg, Germany. 5. Institute for Occupational Health and Safety (IFA) of the German Social Accident Insurance (DGUV), Sankt Augustin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In Germany, the initial step of electronic waste (e-waste) recycling frequently takes place in sheltered workshops for physically and mentally handicapped workers (Werkstätten für behinderte Menschen (WfbM), in german language). E-waste recycling involves a potential risk of exposure to toxic metals. Therefore, we assessed the occupational exposure of recycling workers to toxic metals to identify potential health risks and insufficient protective measures. METHODS: We used a combined air- and bio-monitoring approach to determine exposure of recycling workers to toxic metals. Air and urine samples were collected in five sheltered workshops in Germany and were analysed for their content of aluminium, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury and nickel. Results were compared to German and international occupational limit values and to metal exposures of workers in conventional e-waste recycling firms. RESULTS: Exposure of recycling workers in five German sheltered workshops to the studied metals and their compounds was below German and international occupational limit values across all facilities studied considering both air and urine samples. Workers in the present study were not exposed to higher amounts of toxic metals than workers in conventional e-waste recycling firms. CONCLUSION: This is the first study on toxic metal exposure of recycling workers in sheltered workshops. The results of this study revealed a low occupational exposure of e-waste recycling workers to toxic metals in this type of enterprises. Current work methods and safety measures provide the workers with adequate protection.
OBJECTIVES: In Germany, the initial step of electronic waste (e-waste) recycling frequently takes place in sheltered workshops for physically and mentally handicapped workers (Werkstätten für behinderte Menschen (WfbM), in german language). E-waste recycling involves a potential risk of exposure to toxic metals. Therefore, we assessed the occupational exposure of recycling workers to toxic metals to identify potential health risks and insufficient protective measures. METHODS: We used a combined air- and bio-monitoring approach to determine exposure of recycling workers to toxic metals. Air and urine samples were collected in five sheltered workshops in Germany and were analysed for their content of aluminium, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury and nickel. Results were compared to German and international occupational limit values and to metal exposures of workers in conventional e-waste recycling firms. RESULTS: Exposure of recycling workers in five German sheltered workshops to the studied metals and their compounds was below German and international occupational limit values across all facilities studied considering both air and urine samples. Workers in the present study were not exposed to higher amounts of toxic metals than workers in conventional e-waste recycling firms. CONCLUSION: This is the first study on toxic metal exposure of recycling workers in sheltered workshops. The results of this study revealed a low occupational exposure of e-waste recycling workers to toxic metals in this type of enterprises. Current work methods and safety measures provide the workers with adequate protection.
Entities:
Keywords:
Air monitoring; Biomonitoring; Electronic waste; Metal exposure; Sheltered workshop; Urine
Authors: Stine Eriksen Hammer; Stephen L Dorn; Emmanuel Dartey; Balázs Berlinger; Yngvar Thomassen; Dag G Ellingsen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Ann Colles; Dries Coertjens; Bert Morrens; Elly Den Hond; Melissa Paulussen; Liesbeth Bruckers; Eva Govarts; Adrian Covaci; Gudrun Koppen; Kim Croes; Vera Nelen; Nicolas Van Larebeke; Stefaan De Henauw; Tine Fierens; Griet Van Gestel; Hana Chovanova; Maja Mampaey; Karen Van Campenhout; Ilse Loots; Willy Baeyens; Greet Schoeters Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-22 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Paul T J Scheepers; Radu Corneliu Duca; Karen S Galea; Lode Godderis; Emilie Hardy; Lisbeth E Knudsen; Elizabeth Leese; Henriqueta Louro; Selma Mahiout; Sophie Ndaw; Katrien Poels; Simo P Porras; Maria J Silva; Ana Maria Tavares; Jelle Verdonck; Susana Viegas; Tiina Santonen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 3.390