logo
Call us: +44 (0)1865 244727

  • Home
  • Scope
  • News
  • Products
    • RADAR
    • CALL-OFF PROJECTS
  • Clients
  • Contact
  • How we work
    • Independent
      • Common law orthodoxies
      • Sensationalism
      • Expert witness
      • Regulation and Politics
      • Tied services
    • Up-to-date
      • Timely
      • Insurance Scenarios
      • Probabilistic Methods
    • Expert
      • Personal Injury
      • Trends
    • Innovative
  • Database
    • Member’s login
    • Member’s Settings
    • Register
    • RADAR Database
  • Recent projects
    • EMFs
    • STRESS AT WORK
    • WHIPLASH
    • WELDING RODS: MANGANESE EXPOSURE
    • ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
    • Other Projects



Nanomaterials Insurance Risk Calculator

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Human and environmental harm arising from exposure to nanomaterials is insured under several types of liability policy. This page provides a very simple insurance risk assessment based on the generalisable findings of toxicological research, and on common sense. By answering the following questions you can find out whether or not a particular nanomaterial is likely to be of insurance concern.

Please enter:

  • Common name of the material:

  • CAS number if known:

You must answer all of the following questions. Use your judgment and the guide notes provided.

1. How is the material deployed in the insured scenario? For example; if used as a powder it is free, if incorporated into an exposed solid matrix it is accessible, if completely and permanently enclosed it is inaccessible.



2. Persistence in the target organism. This is measured by the time taken to dissolve or to break into smaller particles. Most likely you will only know its solubility in the lab; this is good enough for most purposes. You will know whether or not the material must be kept dry at all times!



3. Aggregation/agglomeration in the relevant situation. Most nanomaterials have a tendency to form clumps but this can be prevented. Insurance risk depends very little on whether the precise term is either aggregate or agglomerate.



4. Multiple oxidation states. Elemental and molecular nanomaterials can adopt several kinetically stable oxidation states in the same biological environment e.g. cell. A good example is chromium, which typically exists CrVI or CrIII in vivo.


5. Size distribution. Unusual toxicological properties are not usually observed in the larger nano materials. Fibres are the exception and are dealt with in question 6. Size distribution is almost always measured for QA purposes.Is 20% or more of the non-aggregated particle below 50 nm in cross-section?


6. Fibre size (if fibrous). The main concern is for fibres longer than 3 times the diameter. Risk is measured according to size distribution (again this will be known for QA purposes).





Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Human and environmental harm arising from exposure to nanomaterials is insured under several types of liability policy. This page provides a very simple insurance risk assessment based on the generalisable findings of toxicological research, and on common sense. By answering the following questions you can find out whether or not a particular nanomaterial is likely to be of insurance concern.

Please enter:

  • Common name of the material:

  • CAS number if known:

You must answer all of the following questions. Use your judgment and the guide notes provided.

1. How is the material deployed in the insured scenario? For example; if used as a powder it is free, if incorporated into an exposed solid matrix it is accessible, if completely and permanently enclosed it is inaccessible.



2. Persistence in the target organism. This is measured by the time taken to dissolve or to break into smaller particles. Most likely you will only know its solubility in the lab; this is good enough for most purposes. You will know whether or not the material must be kept dry at all times!



3. Aggregation/agglomeration in the relevant situation. Most nanomaterials have a tendency to form clumps but this can be prevented. Insurance risk depends very little on whether the precise term is either aggregate or agglomerate.



4. Multiple oxidation states. Elemental and molecular nanomaterials can adopt several kinetically stable oxidation states in the same biological environment e.g. cell. A good example is chromium, which typically exists CrVI or CrIII in vivo.


5. Size distribution. Unusual toxicological properties are not usually observed in the larger nano materials. Fibres are the exception and are dealt with in question 6. Size distribution is almost always measured for QA purposes.Is 20% or more of the non-aggregated particle below 50 nm in cross-section?


6. Fibre size (if fibrous). The main concern is for fibres longer than 3 times the diameter. Risk is measured according to size distribution (again this will be known for QA purposes).





Search Documents


Categories

  • Causation
    • de minimis
    • material contribution
  • Date of knowledge
  • Diagnosis
  • Duty of Care
  • Exposure estimation data
  • Mitigation
  • Motor related injury
  • News
  • Uncategorized

Archives

  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • November 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • November 2017
  • July 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • November 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • July 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012

© Re: Liability (Oxford) Ltd. 2012. All rights reserved.
Website Design by The Big Picture