Safe Handling of Nanomaterials in Research Laboratories
Nanomaterials are now part of research in medicine, electronics, energy, construction, food technology and environmental science. Their very small size can create useful properties, yet the same characteristics may allow particles to behave differently from larger forms of the same substance. A material that appears familiar on a label can present a different exposure profile when it is engineered at the nanoscale.
Laboratory work often involves small quantities, changing methods and highly specialised equipment. Those conditions can make conventional chemical controls less reliable. Weighing nanopowders, sonication, spraying, centrifuging, heating and cleaning contaminated surfaces may release airborne particles or create splashes that are difficult to see.
Good control begins before a container is opened. Researchers need clear information about the material, the task, the equipment, the people involved and the waste pathway. A sound system combines hazard identification, exposure assessment, engineering controls, safe work procedures, training, health monitoring where appropriate and regular review.
Australian laboratories must also work within a practical regulatory setting. Model work health and safety laws are implemented differently across jurisdictions, so a university in Melbourne, a CSIRO facility in Canberra and a biotechnology company in Sydney may follow related requirements with different regulator guidance. The relevant state or territory authority, local procedures and current safety data should always be checked.
Why Nanomaterials Need Specific Controls
Nanomaterials are commonly discussed as materials with structures or particles in the approximate range of 1 to 100 nanometres, although definitions vary by purpose and regulation. Their high surface area can affect chemical reactivity, solubility, mobility and biological interaction. A metal oxide, carbon-based material or polymer may therefore require a different risk assessment in nanopowder form than in a bulk solid.
The main exposure routes are inhalation, skin contact, eye contact and accidental ingestion. Inhalation is often the priority because airborne nanoparticles can remain suspended and may travel beyond the immediate work area. Risk can increase during powder transfer, dry brushing, grinding, mechanical agitation, aerosol generation and maintenance of contaminated equipment.
Toxicity depends on more than particle size. Shape, surface chemistry, coating, solubility, aggregation, concentration and the properties of the parent material all matter. Information may be incomplete for emerging materials, so uncertainty should lead to a precautionary approach rather than an assumption that low quantities are automatically safe.
Assess Hazards Before Work Begins
A nanomaterial inventory should record the material name, supplier, batch, physical form, concentration, coating, intended use and approximate quantity. Keep the current safety data sheet accessible, while recognising that many sheets provide limited nanospecific information. Ask suppliers for additional data on particle size distribution, dustiness, dispersibility, surface treatment and recommended controls.
Assess each task instead of assessing the material in isolation. Opening a sealed dispersion, weighing a dry powder, injecting a sample into an instrument and cleaning a spill can produce very different exposures. Observe the workflow from receipt through storage, preparation, use, equipment cleaning, waste collection and disposal. Include non-routine activities such as breakdowns, filter changes and urgent repairs.
A written assessment should identify who may be exposed, including cleaners, maintenance contractors, students, visitors and emergency responders. Consider simultaneous work, ventilation failure, incompatible chemicals and the possibility that a normally wet material could dry on a surface. Where exposure data are unavailable, use conservative assumptions and select controls that remain effective under foreseeable error.
The risk assessment should be reviewed when the process, scale, formulation, equipment or supplier changes. A pilot experiment may require controls that remain in place when production or repeated testing begins. Consultation with workers is essential because the person operating a sonicator or glove box often knows where shortcuts, awkward reaches and unexpected releases occur.
Design The Laboratory Around Exposure Control
The hierarchy of controls places elimination and substitution before engineering and administrative measures. Use a less hazardous material, a stable suspension or a pre-dispersed formulation where the research objective permits. Avoid dry powder whenever a liquid, pellet or enclosed delivery system can achieve the same result.
Engineering controls should contain the hazard at its source. Suitable options may include a certified fume cupboard, ventilated enclosure, glove box, local exhaust ventilation, sealed transfer vessel or closed instrument connection. A biological safety cabinet is not automatically suitable for chemical nanomaterials; its purpose, airflow pattern, filtration and chemical compatibility must match the task.
Fume cupboards and local exhaust systems need commissioning, performance checks and routine testing. Do not assume that a cabinet protects the user simply because the fan is running. Keep work well inside the sash, avoid blocking air slots, minimise clutter and use equipment that does not disrupt airflow. High-efficiency particulate air filtration can help with particle capture, but the complete system must be selected and maintained for the material and process.
Personal protective equipment supports higher-level controls; it does not replace them. Laboratory coats or disposable gowns, suitable gloves, eye protection and enclosed footwear are typical starting points. Glove selection should consider the solvent, contact time and breakthrough data. Respiratory protection may be needed for specific non-routine work, but it requires fit testing, medical considerations, training and a properly managed respiratory protection programme.
Manage Storage Waste And Emergencies
Store nanomaterials in sealed, clearly labelled containers that resist breakage and are compatible with the contents. Secondary containment is useful during transport and where a spill could affect drains, ventilation grilles or adjacent work. Labels should identify the substance, nanoscale form, hazards, owner, date and emergency information. Avoid decanting into containers that could be mistaken for ordinary laboratory reagents.
Nanomaterial waste should be segregated at the point of generation. Use closed, durable containers for contaminated solids, liquids, wipes, disposable PPE and filter media. Do not put nanoparticle waste down a sink or into general rubbish unless a competent assessment and local waste rules explicitly allow it. Australian institutions may use licensed hazardous-waste contractors, and procurement teams should confirm that the contractor can accept the specific material.
Spill procedures should be written for the actual material and work area. Restrict access, prevent the material becoming airborne, and notify the responsible supervisor or emergency contact. Avoid dry sweeping, compressed air and ordinary vacuum cleaners, which can redistribute particles. Use compatible wet methods, absorbent materials or a suitable filtered vacuum only where the procedure confirms that the approach is safe.
Emergency planning must cover fire, incompatible reactions, power loss, ventilation failure and personal contamination. A small quantity can still create a serious problem if the material is highly reactive or if it enters a ventilation system. Practise reporting arrangements and make sure the procedure works for after-hours access, shared buildings and contract cleaners.
Support People And Organisational Safety
Training should explain the material’s hazards, routes of exposure, control measures, correct use of equipment, glove removal, waste segregation, spill response and incident reporting. General laboratory induction is rarely enough for workers handling engineered nanoparticles. Keep records of attendance and competence, and provide refresher training after process changes or incidents.
Supervisors should establish who can approve new nanomaterials and who has authority to stop work. A simple approval process can check the safety data, control strategy, equipment capacity and waste route before purchase. Procurement controls are particularly valuable in Australian research organisations, where materials may arrive from overseas suppliers with inconsistent terminology or incomplete nanospecific documentation.
Work organisation also affects safety. High workloads, pressure to meet grant milestones and uncertainty about experimental results can encourage rushed preparation or skipped decontamination. Lone work, remote data analysis and after-hours experiments need clear boundaries. Guidance on remote work risks is relevant when researchers work away from direct supervision or when support is difficult to reach.
An effective safety culture treats near misses as useful information rather than personal failure. A blocked enclosure, damaged glove, unlabeled vial or failed ventilation alarm should trigger corrective action. In Australia, consultation with health and safety representatives and alignment with the relevant state or territory WHS regulator can help turn individual lessons into site-wide improvements.
Practical Controls For Daily Laboratory Work
Daily controls should be specific enough to guide behaviour during a busy experiment. “Use appropriate PPE” is weaker than stating which gloves, eye protection, enclosure, cleaning method and waste container are required for a named task. Place concise instructions at the point of use and keep the complete risk assessment available electronically and in the laboratory.
The following measures provide a practical baseline for research groups, teaching laboratories and small biotechnology facilities:
- Keep an up-to-date inventory of all engineered nanomaterials, including physical form and concentration.
- Perform weighing, sonication, spraying and other aerosol-generating tasks inside verified containment.
- Prefer sealed transfers, pre-wetted materials and closed systems over open handling of dry powders.
- Use task-specific PPE, inspect it before use and remove contaminated items without spreading residue.
- Label secondary containers and place contaminated solids, liquids and disposable items in closed waste streams.
- Prohibit dry sweeping, compressed-air cleaning and unapproved disposal to sinks or general waste.
- Report spills, ventilation failures, damaged containers and near misses promptly, then review the controls.
The table below contrasts common laboratory activities with the main concern and a preferred control approach. It is a starting point for a task assessment, not a substitute for supplier information, occupational hygiene advice or local WHS requirements.
| Laboratory activity | Main exposure concern | Preferred control approach |
|---|---|---|
| Opening or weighing dry powder | Airborne dust and surface contamination | Use a ventilated enclosure or glove box, sealed transfer tools and suitable respiratory protection for approved non-routine work |
| Preparing a liquid dispersion | Splashes, droplets and contaminated gloves | Work in suitable local exhaust, use closed vessels where possible and control sonication |
| Sonication or high-speed mixing | Aerosols, pressure release and equipment contamination | Use sealed containers, secondary containment and a validated enclosure; allow settling before opening |
| Centrifuging samples | Tube failure, leaks and aerosols | Use sealed compatible tubes, safety cups or sealed rotors and decontaminate according to procedure |
| Cleaning benches or instruments | Resuspension and skin contact | Use wet wiping or an approved filtered vacuum; wear task-specific PPE and collect wipes as hazardous waste |
| Transporting between rooms | Container breakage and uncontrolled release | Use sealed primary containers inside labelled, robust secondary containment |
| Disposing of contaminated consumables | Exposure of cleaners and waste contractors | Segregate at source, close containers and provide accurate waste descriptions |
For facilities in Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide or regional areas, access to specialist occupational hygienists and hazardous-waste contractors may vary. Build those contacts into the plan before work starts, rather than searching for help during an incident. A short, well-rehearsed procedure is especially valuable in shared university spaces where several research groups use the same corridors, freezers and waste stores.
Use monitoring when it can answer a clear question, such as whether a new enclosure controls airborne release or whether a maintenance task creates exposure. Air sampling alone may miss short-lived peaks and should be interpreted alongside observations, surface checks and equipment performance data. Records should show what was checked, what changed and who authorised the next stage of work.
Safe nanomaterial handling is a continuing management process. Australian laboratories can strengthen it by combining local WHS duties with recognised occupational hygiene principles, reliable supplier information and the practical knowledge of workers. Review the controls before each significant change, document decisions and make safe work the easiest way to complete the experiment.
Bring your laboratory’s nanomaterial inventory, task assessments and emergency procedures together in one review. Engage workers, supervisors, facilities staff and waste contractors, then close the gaps before the next powder transfer, instrument clean or after-hours experiment. A well-designed control system protects research quality, worker health and the wider laboratory community.