Fluorinated aromatic PBCTF and 6:2 diPAP in bridge and traffic paints.

Publisher: Royal Society of Chemistry Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101601576 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2050-7895 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20507887 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Environ Sci Process Impacts Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: Cambridge : Royal Society of Chemistry

Paint*/analysis ; Environmental Monitoring*/methods ; Fluorocarbons*/analysis; Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are reported in residential and commercial paints, but there are no data for paints used in the transportation sector. From 2023 to 2024, 16 traffic paints and 10 bridge paints were collected from Pacific Northwest regional transportation facilities or purchased and analyzed for total fluorine by ¹⁹ F-nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, volatile PFAS by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and ionic target and suspect PFAS by liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. The only target PFAS identified was 6:2 fluorotelomer phosphate diester (diPAP) which ranged in concentrations from 0.065 to 13 μg g ^-1 . While 6:2 diPAP is not regulated in paints, it can undergo environmental transformation to act as a source of perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids. A combination of ¹⁹ F-NMR and GC-MS was used to quantify and identify the fluorinated aromatic PFAS, parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF), at concentrations from 440 to 16 000 μg g ^-1 in bridge paints, thus PCBTF may contribute to work exposure and levels in urban air. Additionally, evolved gas analysis with mass spectrometry and pyrolysis-GC-MS established that the insoluble fraction of paints is not comprised of fluoropolymers. Based on the amount of paint required per kilometer, we estimate up to 0.20-2.30 g 6:2 diPAP per kilometer depending on marking type. Therefore, traffic paint may be a potential source of the PFAS detected in urban runoff.

Erratum in: Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2024 Dec 9. doi: 10.1039/d4em90053g. (PMID: 39651550)

Sci Total Environ. 2023 Sep 20;892:164538. (PMID: 37271381)
Environ Sci Technol. 2022 May 17;56(10):6069-6077. (PMID: 34596397)
Environ Sci Technol. 2022 Dec 6;56(23):17070-17079. (PMID: 36367233)
Environ Sci Technol. 2022 Jan 18;56(2):974-983. (PMID: 34961317)
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2011 Oct;7(4):513-41. (PMID: 21793199)
Environ Sci Technol. 2021 Dec 7;55(23):15575-15578. (PMID: 34751569)
Chemosphere. 2012 Aug;88(8):980-7. (PMID: 22483730)
Environ Sci Technol. 2012 Sep 4;46(17):9342-9. (PMID: 22900587)
Chemosphere. 2015 Jun;129:4-19. (PMID: 25245564)
Environ Sci Technol. 2010 May 1;44(9):3305-10. (PMID: 20355697)
Chemosphere. 2021 Oct;281:130713. (PMID: 34023761)
J Agric Food Chem. 2022 Nov 16;70(45):14329-14338. (PMID: 36323308)
J Hazard Mater. 2024 Feb 15;464:133018. (PMID: 37984148)
Environ Pollut. 2016 May;212:230-237. (PMID: 26849529)
Water Res. 2012 Dec 15;46(20):6601-8. (PMID: 22154107)
Environ Sci Technol. 2018 Sep 18;52(18):10609-10616. (PMID: 30148348)
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015;12(7):D123-30. (PMID: 25625325)
Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2024 Oct 16;26(10):1760-1779. (PMID: 39291694)
Environ Sci Technol Lett. 2022 Jun 14;9(6):473-481. (PMID: 35719859)
Environ Toxicol Chem. 2008 Nov;27(11):2233-8. (PMID: 18444698)
Environ Sci Technol. 2012 Nov 6;46(21):11532-40. (PMID: 23030600)
Molecules. 2023 Jan 16;28(2):. (PMID: 36677962)
J Phys Chem A. 2022 Aug 18;126(32):5407-5419. (PMID: 35943137)
J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2023 May 3;34(5):939-947. (PMID: 37018384)
Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2019 Nov 1;21(11):1936-1945. (PMID: 31219125)

S10 OD018518 United States OD NIH HHS

0 (Fluorocarbons)

Date Created: 20241118 Date Completed: 20241211 Latest Revision: 20241213

20241213

PMC11634627

10.1039/d4em00546e

39555575