Ethylene glycol final content: appendix A


Appendix A: List of Tables (1 to 13)

Table 1: Chemical and Physical Properties of Ethylene Glycol
Property Parameter Reference Fugacity Model
Input Parameters
(Mackay et al. 1995)
Molecular formula C2H6O2    
Molecular weight (g/mol) 62.07   62.07
CAS registry number 107-21-1    
Common synonyms glycol, glycol alcohol, ethylene alcohol, ethylene dihydrate, monoethylene glycol, 1,2-dihydroxyethane, 1,2-ethanediol    
Physical state (25°C) colourless liquid    
Melting point (°C) -13
-11.5
Budavari et al. 1989
Howard 1990
Weast 1982-1983
IPCS 1993
HSDB 1999
-13
Boiling point (°C) 197.6 Budavari et al. 1989
Howard 1990
IPCS 1993
HSDB 1999
 
Density (g/mL) at 20°C 1.1135
1.1
1.1088
1.1130
Budavari et al. 1989
IPCS 1993
HSDB 1999
Verschueren 1983
 
Vapour pressure (Pa) 6.7 (20°C)
7 (20°C)
12.27 (5°C)
11.7 (25°C)
Verschueren 1983
IPCS 1993
Howard 1990
HSDB 1999
12
Henry's law constant (Pa·m3/mol) 6.08 × 10-3 5.81 × 10-6 (calculated)
2.37 × 10-5 (calculated)
6.0 × 10-3 (experimental)
Howard 1990
Hine and Mookerjee 1975
Hine and Mookerjee 1975
Hine and Mookerjee 1975
7.5 × 10-3 (calculated based on fictitious water solubility of 1.0 × 105)
Log Kow -1.36
-1.93
-2.02
Howard 1990
Verschueren 1983
Iwase et al. 1985
-1.36
Solubility in water miscible Budavari et al. 1989
IPCS 1993
1.0 × 1011 mg/L
Conversion factor multiply by 1.11 g/mL to convert µL/L to mg/L    
Half-life -- air 0.35-3.5 days
0.24-2.4 hours
Howard et al. 1991
Darnall et al. 1976
55 hours
Half-life -- water 2-12 days (aerobic)
8-48 days (anaerobic)
Howard et al. 1991
Howard et al. 1991
55 hours
Half-life -- groundwater 4-24 days Howard et al. 1991  
Half-life -- soil 2-12 days Howard et al. 1991 55 hours
Half-life -- sediment - - 170 hours

 

Table 2: Ethylene Glycol Releases from all Reporting Sources (NPRI 1994 - 2005)
Report
Year
Number of
Reporting
Facilities
Total
Disposal
Total
Recycled
Untreated
Releases
Total
Glycol
Releases
1994 237 2 073 821 2 931 5 825
1995 237 3 523 359 3 857 7 739
1996 275 3 775 353 3 765 7 893
1997 289 3 997 913 4 569 9 479
1998 294 2 874 2 748 2 986 8 608
1999 327 3 198 1 632 2 207 7 037
2000 333 4 390 7 230 2 570 14 190
2001 337 5 597 3 358 2 346 11 301
2002 358 5 985 2 202 1 571 9 759
2003 345 5 215 2 953 2 331 10 500
2004 345 4 573 2 702 2 358 9 633
2005 353 5 270 2 675 2 175 10 119

Notes: All releases in tonnes. "Untreated Releases" does not include underground injection.

 

Table 3: Untreated Ethylene Glycol Releases by Compartment, All Sources (NPRI, 1994-2005)
Year Reporting
Facilities
Compartment Total
Releases
Air Water Land Underground
Injection
1994 178 377 91 2453 77 2998
1995 165 533 72 3247 220 4072
1996 188 504 69 3188 233 3994
1997 192 378 26 4161 133 4698
1998 175 256 33 2691 139 3119
1999 203 284 28 1890 245 2447
2000 190 317 68 2179 422 2986
2001 223 247 58 2037 123 2465
2002 188 312 51 1206 173 1742
2003 185 352 444 1532 173 2501
2004 184 343 545 1465 126 2479

All releases in tonnes

 

Table 4: Ethylene Glycol Releases from Airports
Reporting
Year
Untreated
Releases
Disposal Recycling Total
1998 2450 1418 709 4577
1999 1797 1874 466 4137
2000 2163 3090 346 5599
2001 2019 4322 347 6688
2002 1165 4364 654 6183
2003 1445 4030 844 6319
2004 1405 3536 988 5929
2005 1232 4236 1277 6745

Source: NPRI 2005. All releases in tonnes.

 

Table 5: Summary Statistics of Concentrations of Ethylene Glycol in Stormwater Released from Canadian Airports in Selected Years
Deicing
season
Number of
Samples
Summary statistics and percentiles of distribution of measured concentrations (mg/L)
Mean Median 75th 90th 95th 99th Maximum
1997-98 1606 22 4 10 38 80 256 3700
1998-99 1676 23 5 12 45 65 180 4700
1997-99 combined 3282 23 5 10 42 72 200 4700
2003-04 1508 27 5 12 46 82 478 1860
2004-05 1728 19 4 11 51 76 136 2560
2003-05 combined 3236 23 5 12 49 78 224 2560

 

Table 6: Direct Toxicity Risk Quotients for Exposure of Algae to Ethylene Glycol
Effluent
concentration (mg/L)
Descriptor EEV in
receiving
water
(mg/L)
QuotientFootnote a
4700 Highest maximum, 1997-1999 seasons 470 0.719
200 99th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 20 0.031
72 95th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 7 0.012
2560 Highest maximum, 2003-2005 seasons 256 0.391
224 99th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 22 0.034
78 95th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 8 0.012

 

Table 7: Direct Toxicity Risk Quotients for Exposure of Amphibians to Ethylene Glycol
Effluent
Concentration
(mg/L)
Descriptor EEV in
Receiving
Water
(mg/L)
QuotientFootnote a.1
4700 Highest maximum, 1997-1999 seasons 470 0.993
200 99th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 20 0.042
72 95th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 7 0.015
2560 Highest maximum, 2003-2005 seasons 256 0.541
224 99th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 22 0.047
78 95th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 8 0.017

 

Table 8: Indirect Toxicity Risk Quotients for Exposure of Aquatic Biota to Ethylene Glycol
Effluent
Concentration (mg/L)
Descriptor EEV in
Receiving
Water (mg/L)
Oxygen
DeficitFootnote a.2 (mg/L)
QuotientFootnote b
4700 Highest maximum, 1997-1999 seasons 470 57.9 16.1
200 99th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 20 3.1 0.86
72 95th Percentile, 1997-1999 seasons 7 1,3 0.37
2560 Highest maximum, 2003-2005 seasons 256 32.9 9.13
224 99th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 22 3.4 0.95
78 95th Percentile, 2003-2005 seasons 8 1.6 0.44

 

Table 9: Upper-bounding Estimates of Daily Intake of Ethylene Glycol by the General Population of Canada. (μg/kg-bw per day)
Route of Exposure 0-6 monthsFootnote a.3 0.5-4
yrFootnote b.1
5-11
yrFootnote c
12-19
yrFootnote d
20-59
yrFootnote e
60 +
yrFootnote f
Formula
Fed
Not
Formula
Fed
Ambient AirFootnote g 2.6 2.6 5.6 4.4 2.5 2.1 1.9
Indoor AirFootnote h 54.6 54.6 117.1 91.3 51.9 44.6 38.8
Food and BeveragesFootnote i 2.4 2.4 34.4 41.1 31.9 16.8 12.2
Drinking WaterFootnote j - - - - - - -
SoilFootnote k - - - - - - -
Total Intake 60 60 157 137 86 64 53

 

Table 10: Upper-bounding Estimates of Daily Intake of Ethylene Glycol by a Highly Exposed Population in the Immediate Vicinity of an Industrial Point Source (μg/kg-bw per day)
Route of Exposure 0-6 monthsFootnote a.4 0.5-4
yrFootnote b.2
5-11
yrFootnote c.1
12-19
yrFootnote d.1
20-59
yrFootnote e.1
60 +
yrFootnote f.1
Formula
Fed
Not
Formula
Fed
Ambient AirFootnote g.1 5.39 5.39 11.55 9.01 5.12 4.40 3.82
Indoor AirFootnote h.1 54.6 54.6 117.1 91.3 51.9 44.6 38.8
Food and BeveragesFootnote i.1 2.4 2.4 34.4 41.1 31.9 16.8 12.2
SoilFootnote j.1 17 17 28 9 2 2 2
Total Intake 79 79 191 150 91 68 57

 

Table 11: Upper-bounding Estimates of Exposure to Ethylene Glycol from use of Consumer Products
Consumer Product Type Assumptions Estimated Concentrations
and Intakes
Latex Wall Paint

Inhalation (do-it-yourself painter)

  • Use Wall Paint Exposure Assessment Model (WPEM), version 3.2 2001 (US EPA 2001) and its default values (unless otherwise stated) for a do-it-yourself adult painter (RESDIY) in a painted area.
  • Assume adult paints one bedroom with 2 coats of paint in one day.
  • Select ethylene glycol as the chemical of interest.
  • Assume the percent ethylene glycol in the paint to range from 1.9% (average) to 5.0% (CPCA 2008).
  • Adjust paint chemical mass by using a recovery rate of 9% (Chang et al. 1997) and the emission decay rate constant k1 to 3.0 (US EPA 2001)

A worst-case scenario would be if an adult paints one bedroom with one coat of primer and one coat of paint at a maximum ethylene glycol concentration of 5% in both primer and the paint (NLM 2007; ICI 2007) in one day - 7.74 mg/m3

Concentrations would be higher for paints that contain more than 5% ethylene glycol (0.4% of paints sold in Canada)

Highest 8-hr concentration =
2.5 mg/m3 (1.9% EG)
4.0 mg/m3 (3% EG)
6.7 mg/m3 (5% EG)

Highest instantaneous concentration =
3.6 mg/m3 (1.9% EG)
5.7 mg/m3 (3% EG)
9.6 mg/m3 (5% EG)

Latex Wall Paint

Inhalation (adult/child occupant)

  • Use Wall Paint Exposure Assessment Model (WPEM), version 3.2 2001 (US EPA 2001) and its default values (unless otherwise stated) for a child residing in house being painted (RESCHILD) located in the building but not in the painted area.
  • Assume one bedroom is painted with 2 coats of paint.
  • Select ethylene glycol as the chemical of interest.
  • Adjust paint chemical mass by using a recovery rate of 9% (Chang et al. 1997) and the emission decay rate constant k1 to 3.0 (US EPA 2001).
  • Assume the average percent ethylene glycol in the paint to range from 1.9% (average) to 5.0% (CPCA 2008).

A worst-case scenario would be if a child occupant is present when one bedroom is being painted using one coat of primer and one coat of paint at a maximum ethylene glycol concentration of 5% in both primer and the paint (NLM 2007; ICI 2007) in one day - 3.20 mg/m3

Concentrations would be higher for paints that contain more than 5% ethylene glycol (0.4% of paints sold in Canada)

Highest 8-hr concentration =
0.7 mg/m3 (1.9% EG)
1.1 mg/m3 (3% EG)
1.8 mg/m3 (5% EG)

Highest instantaneous concentration =
1.7mg/m3 (1.9%EG)
2.7 mg/m3 (3% EG)
4.6 mg/m3 (5% EG)

Latex Wall Paint

Dermal (do-it-yourself painter)

  • Assume a paint density of 1.24 g/cm3, surface area exposed to be 220 cm2 (10% of the surface area of the face, hands and forearms), a film thickness of 0.0098 cm (US EPA 1986)
  • Assume the maximum percent ethylene glycol in both the primer and the paint to be 5.0% (NLM 2007; ICI, 2007)
  • Assume 100% absorption through skin.
  • Assume adult body weight of 70.9 kg (EHD 1998).

Intake = [(% in product)(surface area)(density of product)(film thickness)] / (body weight)

Intake = [(0.05)(220 cm2)(1.24 g/cm3)(0.0098 cm)] / 70.9 kg

= 0.001885 g/kg-bw per day Or 1.89 mg/kg-bw per day

Intake = 1.9 mg/kg-bw per day
Floor Polish/Wax

Inhalation (adult/child occupant)

  • Use ConsExpo, version 4.1 (RIVM, 2006) and its default values (unless otherwise stated) for adult applying floor polish to living room floor (22m2) using a cloth and manually rubbing floor, twice/ yr, undiluted product, leave the room after polishing.
  • Assume the maximum percent ethylene glycol in floor polish to be 3.5 based on value referenced in SoS Report (2000). Note: CCSPA (2007) indicated a typical range of 1-3%.
Mean event concentration = 2.1 mg/m3
Auto wax/pasteFootnote a.5

Dermal contact by applicator

  • Assume a maximum concentration of 3.0%, an exposed surface area equal to 400 cm2 (palm and fingers of average adult), product density of 1.022 g/cm3, a film thickness of 0.00325 cm (US EPA 1986).
  • Assume adult body weight of 70.9 kg (EHD 1998).

Intake = [(% in product)(surface area)(density of product)(film thickness)] / (body weight)

Intake = [(0.030)(400 cm2)(1.022 g/cm3)(0.00325 cm)] / 70.9 kg

= 0.000562 g/kg-bw per day Or 0.56 mg/kg-bw per day

Intake = 0.56 mg/kg-bw per day

 

Table 12: Benchmark Dose (BMD) Values for Key Toxicity Studies: Gaunt et al. (1974)Footnote a.6
End Point BMD05
(mg/kg/day)
BMDL05
(mg/kg/day)
Lack of Fit
(P-valueP
Kidney tubule damage 39.3 18.6 0.87
Individual nephrons with dethylene glycoleneration 83.8 45.1 0.86
Individual nephrons with dethylene glycoleneration & occasional oxalate 217.6 75.4 0.75
Several nephrons with dethylene glycoleneration & frequent crystals 553.9 180.1 1.00
Nephrons with dethylene glycoleneration & oxalate crystals 173.4 67.3 0.90
Generalized tubular damage with heavy crystals 456.5 158.1 1.00

 

Table 12 (Continued): Benchmark Dose (BMD) Values for Key Toxicity Studies: Depass et al. (1986)
End Point BMD05
(mg/kg/day)
BMDL05
(mg/kg/day)
Lack of Fit
(P-value)
Tubular dilation 726.5 476.1 0.70
Tubular dilation 726.5 476.1 0.70
Hydronephrosis 367.0 230.0 0.11
Oxalate nephrosis 313.2 272.5 0.41
Calcium oxalate crystalluria 704.0 521.6 0.93

 

Table 12 (Continued): Benchmark Dose (BMD) Values for Key Toxicity Studies: Neeper-Bradley et al. (1995)
End Point BMD05
(mg/kg/day)
BMDL05
(mg/kg/day)
Lack of Fit
(P-value)
Extra 14th rib per litter 141.3 23.1 0.91
Extra 14th rib per fetus 103.6 87.9 0.01

 

Table 12 (Continued): Benchmark Dose (BMD) Values for Key Toxicity Studies: Cruzan et al. (2004)
End Point BMD05
(mg/kg/day)
BMDL05
(mg/kg/day)
Lack of Fit
(P-value)
Wistar rats, crystal nephropathy severity ≥1 vs. severity 0 160.7 71.5 0.92
Wistar rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥2 vs. severity ≤1 194.7 73.0 0.98
Wistar rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥3 vs. severity ≤2 158.2 52.9 0.68
Wistar rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥4 vs. severity ≤3 326.4 95.1 0.98
Wistar rats, crystal nephropathy, severity 5 vs. severity ≤4 398.5 106.6 0.96
F-344 rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥1 vs. severity 0 348.0 164.3 0.82
F-344 rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥2 vs. severity ≤1 367.1 214.8 0.46
F-344 rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥3 vs. severity ≤2 437.8 226.7 0.79
F-344 rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥4 vs. severity ≤3 704.3 241.6 0.99
F-344 rats, crystal nephropathy, severity ≥5 vs. severity ≤4 704.3 241.6 0.99

 

Table 12 (Continued): Benchmark Dose (BMD) Values for Key Toxicity Studies: ACC (2005)
End Point BMD05
(mg/kg/day)
BMDL05
(mg/kg/day)
Lack of Fit
(P-value)
Compound-induced nephropathy incidence 120.1 82.0 0.49
Compound-induced nephropathy severity 165.4 151.1 0.38
Birefringement crystals incidence 142.5 93.6 0.70
Birefringement crystals severity 172.7 156.2 0.25

 

Table 13: Maternal and Developmental Effects in CD-1 Mice from Nose-only Exposure to Ethylene Glycol During Gestation Day 6-15 (Tyl, et al., 1995)
Target Concentration
(mg/m3)
Average Measured Concentration
(mg/m3)
Maternal Effects Observed Developmental Effects Observed
0 0 No effects No effects
500 360 No significant effects observed No significant effects observed
1000 779 Increased absolute kidney weight No significant effects observed
2500 2505 Increased absolute and relative (~7%; p<0.05) kidney weights Reduced fetal body weights per litter, increase incidence of skeletal variations and fused ribs
Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: