Dr. Gwo-Dong Roam

We interviewed Professor Roam of National Central University and former general director of the Environmental Analysis Labs (EAL) of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Agency to learn more about the background and potential threat of NPs. Dr. Roam informed us that the most common NPs used in Taiwan include: TiO₂, ZnO, Ag, Au, Fe, Carbon Nanotubes, Fullerenes, Clay, and Graphene. He also told us that the toxicity of a nanoparticle is directly related to its size, but there are currently no regulations or guidelines that specify the toxicity of different types and sizes of nanoparticle. With the increased use of NPs in society, Dr. Roam believes that more attention should be placed on waste management, risk assessment and regulations.

After our first visit to the Dihua WWTP, we learned that the sludge removed from wastewater is either 1) sent to landfills, 2) used as fertilizer, or 3) incinerated. We asked Dr. Roam if sludge containing aggregated NPs would still be harmful to the environment if disposed of using current methods. He said that all of these sludge disposal solutions are still harmful to the environment, but they are still better than letting NPs flow into bodies of water. He advised us to target removal of NPs in the wastewater treatment process before it is discharged. (Interviewed by Candice L. and Justin Y.)

Dihua Wastewater Treatment Plant

In order to learn firsthand about the effect of NPs in WWTPs, we visited the Dihua WWTP (迪化污水處理廠). Here, we were given a tour around the plant, and were able to ask questions to the managers and people that work there. They confirmed that the current facilities are unable to remove NPs from wastewater mainly due to their small size. In addition to this information, they kindly provided us with samples of sludge, effluent water, and the polymers they add during wastewater processing. Throughout the year we visited and talked to the Dihua WWTP several times about where and how our project could be implemented in their current system. These conversations and visits played a huge role in shaping our construct design, prototype design, mathematical modeling and overall purpose for our project. (Whole team activity)

Boswell Wastewater Treatment Plant

Not all WWTPs are as large as the one in Taipei. One of our advisors (Jude Clapper) went to visit the Boswell WWTP in rural southwestern Pennsylvania. We learned that the same processes that occur in the Taipei Dihua WWTP also occur in the Boswell WWTP, but with different water flow rates and waste quantities. Because of the similarities in how both WWTPs process their wastewater, It inspired us to create our current prototype design that is a rotating polymeric bioreactor coated in biofilm. This prototype will be placed in the secondary sedimentation tank, where the majority of organic solids have been removed and only smaller particles exist. The Boswell WWTP also confirmed that since our project is bacteria-based, it will be killed by UV light and chlorine in the disinfection tank, similar to the Dihua WWTP, before the water turns into effluent and goes to the rivers and oceans.

THEPS Environmental Protection Engineering Company (中港環保工程股份有限公司)

We contacted the company that removes our nanoparticle waste because we wanted to know what happens when it leaves our lab. They directed us to National Cheng Kung university who actually treats the waste for them. The university uses chemicals and burning to aggregate NPs. Through literature research, we discovered that burning NPs is the most prevalent way for removal, however it is not 100% effective at removing all types of nanomaterials (Marr et. al. 2013). (Interviewed by Katherine H, Audrey T. and Christine C.)

Spring Fair -- Spreading Public Awareness of Nanoparticles

At our school’s annual spring fair, we manned a booth where people could create their own glitter slime by mixing polyvinyl alcohol and sodium borate solutions. The slime was meant to simulate the biofilm we use to trap NPs (in this demo, glitter) in WWTPs. We also showed a few SEM images of bacteria, as well as everyday products that contain NPs such as toothpaste and sunscreen. Everyone who came by our booth was encouraged to take our survey so we could record opinions on bioethics and concerns about NPs. (Whole team activity)

Fundraising & Donation

We held multiple fundraising sales, selling small ice cream dots (resembling NPs!) and Oreo fudge during our lunch periods in school, and making “glitter slime” at our school’s annual spring fair (see Spring Fair in the Outreach section above). (Team activity)

In total, we raised around 500 USD, and donated the money to two organizations:

WaterisLife is an organization that provides clean drinking water, as well as sanitation and hygiene education programs to schools and communities in need. We donated to this organization in hopes that more people will have access to clean water. Visit WaterisLife here.

Taiwan Environmental Protection Union (TEPU) is a local organization founded in 1987 to promote public awareness and participation to prevent pollution and damage to public resources. Visit TEPU here.

Public Outreach -- A Tour of Taipei

Some members of the iGEM team went to various popular sites in Taipei to pass out fliers and conduct surveys. We visited National Taiwan University, Chiang Kai-Shek Memorial Hall, and Taipei 101. This helped us collect feedback from different age groups and backgrounds. This was a great and fun way to spread awareness of nanoparticle pollution! (Team members: Ashley L., Emily C., Florence L., Candice L., Yvonne W., Justin Y., Avery W., Christine C., Jesse K., and Laurent H.)

Survey Results

We created a survey that helped us identify public knowledge and misconceptions about synthetic biology and nanoparticle usage. Our survey results confirmed that the public should be informed more thoroughly on the usage of NPs since many were not aware that there is a potential negative impact associated with NPs. Over 240 people completed the survey. (Survey created by Abby H., Christine C. and Emily C.)

Here are some results from our survey:

General Questions

• The majority of people think that gene modification is acceptable if the goal is to save or improve quality of life; however, it is not acceptable for non-medical related reasons, such as changing hair or eye color. In addition, most people do not have a preference between chemical or biological drug synthesis. These results suggest that people are accepting of genetic engineering when it is related to health and medicine.
• Environmentally, people are generally concerned with the wastewater that enters the ocean and the river. This gives weight to our project, because the quality of water is an important concern for the general public.

Project-Specific Questions

• The majority of people have heard of nanoparticles and know that nanoparticles are used in consumer products; however, they do not know why nanoparticles are used.
• The majority of people want companies to be required to disclose information about potential harms of nanoparticles to the environment and the human body.
• Most people believe that the government and nanoparticle manufacturers should share responsibility for the regulation of nanoparticle usage and disposal.

Click to see all survey results:

Policy Brief -- Nanoparticle Regulation Issues and Case Studies

Our team has conducted extensive research on existing regulatory laws and policies regarding NPs and nanomaterials. We have investigated chemical regulations, including the Restriction, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), A Toxic Substances Control Act (TCSA), CLP, and the Clean Air Act (CAA). There are significant obstacles to successfully regulating NPs, such as conflicting definitions on NPs that lead to an inability to successfully regulate manufacturers. Research has also been conducted on the hazardous effects of NPs on the human body and environment. We decided to compose a policy brief highlighting the existing challenges in nanoparticle regulation and the lessons learned from previous failure to regulate new chemical substances. The brief was sent out to regulatory agencies, government agencies, and news outlets to raise awareness about the issue. We feel responsible to let others know about the damage nanoparticle waste can do to the environment. (Policy Brief created by Ashley L.)

We sent this policy brief to the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) minister in Taiwan, and they responded! They read our policy brief and said that they will take it into consideration when they make policy regulations on the use of NPs in the future. They understand that nanotechnology is still developing and definitely needs more attention and regulation. (Correspondence: Christine C.)

We were interviewed by News Lens International about nanoparticle regulation. Many of the questions focused on why we chose to target NPs and how NPs are dealt with in Taiwan. We emphasized that the lack of regulatory legislation prevents agencies from acquiring regulatory power. We also talked about the lack of nanoparticle filtration in WWTPs. (Interviewed by Ashley L.)