tSome brominated flame retardants (BFRs), as PBDEs, are persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic (PBT) andare restricted/prohibited under various legislations. They are replaced by “safer” flame retardants (FRs),such as new BFRs or organophosphorous compounds. However, informations on the PBT behaviour ofthese substitutes are often lacking. The PBT assessment is required by the REACH regulation and the PBTchemicals should be subjected to authorization. Several new FRs, proposed and already used as saferalternatives to PBDEs, are here screened by the cumulative PBT Index model, implemented in QSARINS(QSAR-Insubria), new software for the development/validation of QSAR models. The results, obtaineddirectly from the chemical structure for the three studied characteristics altogether, were compared withthose from the US-EPA PBT Profiler: the two different approaches are in good agreement, supporting theutility of a consensus approach in these screenings. A priority list of the most harmful FRs, predictedin agreement by the two modelling tools, has been proposed, highlighting that some supposed “saferalternatives” are detected as intrinsically hazardous for their PBT properties. This study also shows thatthe PBT Index could be a valid tool to evaluate appropriate and safer substitutes, a priori from the chemicaldesign, in a benign by design approach, avoiding unnecessary synthesis and tests.
|Titolo:||Are some “safer alternatives” hazardous as PBTs? The case study of new flame retardants|
|Data di pubblicazione:||2016|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||Articolo su Rivista|