Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Background & Expected Outcomes 1 Myriam Hill Wendel Wohlleben.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Background & Expected Outcomes 1 Myriam Hill Wendel Wohlleben."— Presentation transcript:

1 Background & Expected Outcomes 1 Myriam Hill Wendel Wohlleben

2 NanoRelease is working to advance understanding of measurement methods for the release of nanomaterials from solid matrices used in commercial products. 2

3 Decided on MWCNT-polymer Glossary of terms Three white papers Phase 2.5 report PHASE1PHASE Criticality We have the best ever compilation of knowledge: Comprehensive: white papers on scenarios, materials, methods Specific advice: phase 2.5 report about nano-release labs

4 Decided on MWCNT-polymer Glossary of terms Three white papers Phase 2.5 report ITG pilots ITG full modules PHASE1PHASE PHASE3 Criticality This is a decision-making workshop Chose options for ITG

5 Decided on MWCNT-polymer Glossary of terms Three white papers Phase 2.5 report ITG pilots ITG full modules PHASE1PHASE PHASE3 Adoption of methods NSF –EPA Lifecycle centers FP7 SUN etc, Criticality This is a decision-making workshop Chose options for ITG Aim at low barriers towards wide adoption

6 Decided on MWCNT-polymer Glossary of terms Three white papers Phase 2.5 report ITG pilots ITG full modules PHASE1PHASE PHASE3 Adoption of methods NSF –EPA Lifecycle centers FP7 SUN etc, Criticality Nanomaterial in solid matrix: pigments, CNTs, fillers, … in coatings, plastics, metals… MWCNT-polymer Adoption to pigments, fibers, fillers, … in coatings, plastics, metals…

7 Convening the SC to a Decision Session (Day 2 Plenary Session, after lunch) The SC shall take the following decisions: 1) How appropriate is the approach to developing a pilot phase workplan? What portions need to be changed in order to move on to methods development? 2) Prioritize modules by the SC view on:  The relevance of the scenario  The probability of success of the work plan elements as developed by the breakout groups 3) Take a GO / REVISE / STOP decision on each module (sanding, abrasion, weathering) where : 7

8 GO: ITG is charged to realize the pilot lab work,  With SC acknowledgement that independent decisions will be made on finalizing the workplan(s). Manufacturers Liason Group (MLG) will be approached for industrially relevant samples as proposed by work plan SC responsible for (mainly intramural) resources  If funding is identified through the project, it will be issued in an open solicitation  Otherwise, with the exception of funding to coordinate the ITG, all resources are assumed to reside in participating labs Further decision item: timeframe 8

9 STOP: SC NanoRelease sees no value in an inter- laboratory study to develop methods. (Are there scenarios in studies in the literature, or being proposed for evaluation that, at this time, would not be useful to use to develop broadly accepted methods?) 9

10 REVISE: ITG (or other SC group) charged to Describe unacceptable uncertainties with regard to workplan elements, and where possible  Propose solutions that allow a “GO” decision  Frame proposals for study to advance the field and for consideration by the SC (Note: probably by experiments, since literature is exhaustively covered by now). Timeline to achieving a “GO” decision (or a STOP) 10


Download ppt "Background & Expected Outcomes 1 Myriam Hill Wendel Wohlleben."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google