Gradient, 20 University Road, Suite 5, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Environ Pollut. 2013 Oct;181:271-86. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.06.009. Epub 2013 Jul 10.
Airborne particles containing elemental carbon (EC) are currently at the forefront of scientific and regulatory scrutiny, including black carbon, carbon black, and engineered carbon-based nanomaterials, e.g., carbon nanotubes, fullerenes, and graphene. Scientists and regulators sometimes group these EC-containing particles together, for example, interchangeably using the terms carbon black and black carbon despite one being a manufactured product with well-controlled properties and the other being an undesired, incomplete-combustion byproduct with diverse properties. In this critical review, we synthesize information on the contrasting properties of EC-containing particles in order to highlight significant differences that can affect hazard potential. We demonstrate why carbon black should not be considered a model particle representative of either combustion soots or engineered carbon-based nanomaterials. Overall, scientific studies need to distinguish these highly different EC-containing particles with care and precision so as to forestall unwarranted extrapolation of properties, hazard potential, and study conclusions from one material to another.
空气中含有元素碳（EC）的颗粒目前是科学和监管审查的前沿领域，包括黑碳、炭黑和工程碳基纳米材料，例如碳纳米管、富勒烯和石墨烯。科学家和监管机构有时会将这些含 EC 的颗粒归为一组，例如，尽管炭黑是一种具有良好控制特性的制造产品，而黑碳是一种具有不同特性的不期望的不完全燃烧副产物，但它们可互换使用。在这篇重要的综述中，我们综合了有关含 EC 颗粒的对比特性的信息，以突出可能影响危害潜力的显著差异。我们展示了为什么不应将炭黑视为代表燃烧烟尘或工程碳基纳米材料的模型颗粒。总的来说，科学研究需要谨慎和精确地区分这些高度不同的含 EC 颗粒，以防止将一种材料的性质、危害潜力和研究结论不恰当地推断到另一种材料上。
