Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Desktop 3D Printers Shown To Emit Hazardous Gases and Particles (acs.org)

Posted by timothy on from the print-yourself-a-new-set-of-lungs dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A new study in the journal Environmental Science & Technology by researchers at Illinois Institute of Technology and The University of Texas at Austin sheds more light on potentially harmful emissions from desktop FDM 3D printers. The researchers measured emissions of both ultrafine particles (UFPs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from 5 commercially available polymer-extrusion 3D printers using up to 9 different filaments. [The researchers] found that the individual VOCs emitted in the largest quantities included caprolactam from nylon-based and imitation wood and brick filaments (ranging from ~2 to ~180 g/min), styrene from acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and high-impact polystyrene (HIPS) filaments (ranging from ~10 to ~110 g/min), and lactide from polylactic acid (PLA) filaments (ranging from ~4 to ~5 g/min). Styrene is classified as a "possible human carcinogen" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC classification group 2B). While caprolactam is classified as "probably not carcinogenic to humans," the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) maintains low acute, 8-hour, and chronic reference exposure levels (RELs) of only 50, 7, and 2.2 g per cubic meters, respectively, all of which would likely be exceeded with just one of the higher emitting printers operating in a small office.

7 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Duh? by BoberFett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ummmm, duh? You're melting plastics in order to reform them into another shape. It doesn't take a study to realize you shouldn't stick your face in and breathe deeply.

    1. Re:Duh? by vlad30 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Additionally which models did they test one with or without a case the diagrams suggest a case however most models with cases have fans and filters did they open the case and measure was the filter defective or removed to allow the particles to be measured they talk about the sealed room not a sealed printer in the setup

      --
      Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
  2. Plastic is nothing but toxic garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And now we are suddenly surprised that manufacturing plastics from toxic chemicals actually released toxic chemicals into the air. Even when you do it in your own home. Who would've known.

  3. Lots of toxic chemicals are usd every day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would seem that the best approach is simply to 3D print things in a well-ventilated area. Lots of things are toxic if exposed to sufficient concentrations. In the absence (for now) of alternatives to the toxic chemicals, the best advice is ventilation and avoid the areas as much as possible where printing is being done.

  4. Um, ventilate? by Sowelu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't every single printer and every single guide say to use in a well ventilated area for obvious reasons? You don't want to solder in a small office with no ventilation either.

  5. Yep, they're almost useful by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ....must be time to ban them.

  6. That's MICROgrams, not grams... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is getting ridiculous. A moment's thought would make it obvious that the emission rates quoted in the summary are wrong by orders of magnitude. Are there even home printers today that can extrude as much as 180 g/min of material, never mind vaporize or aerosolize that much?