Qualitative Analysis of E-Liquid Emissions as a Function of Flavor Additives Using Two Aerosol Capture Methods

Nathan Eddingsaas, Todd Pagano, Cody Cummings, Irfan Rahman, Risa Robinson and Edward Hensel
Additional contact information
Nathan Eddingsaas: College of Science, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Todd Pagano: National Technical Institute for the Deaf, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Cody Cummings: National Technical Institute for the Deaf, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Irfan Rahman: UR Medical Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA
Risa Robinson: Kate Gleason College of Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Edward Hensel: Kate Gleason College of Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA

IJERPH, 2018, vol. 15, issue 2, 1-14

Abstract: This work investigates emissions sampling methods employed for qualitative identification of compounds in e-liquids and their resultant aerosols to assess what capture methods may be sufficient to identify harmful and potentially harmful constituents present. Three popular e-liquid flavors (cinnamon, mango, vanilla) were analyzed using qualitative gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in the un-puffed state. Each liquid was also machine-puffed under realistic-use flow rate conditions and emissions were captured using two techniques: filter pads and methanol impingers. GC-MS analysis was conducted on the emissions captured using both techniques from all three e-liquids. The e-liquid GC-MS analysis resulted in positive identification of 13 compounds from the cinnamon flavor e-liquid, 31 from mango, and 19 from vanilla, including a number of compounds observed in all e-liquid experiments. Nineteen compounds were observed in emissions which were not present in the un-puffed e-liquid. Qualitative GC-MS analysis of the emissions samples identify compounds observed in all three samples: e-liquid, impinge, and filter pads, and each subset thereof. A limited number of compounds were observed in emissions captured with impingers, but were not observed in emissions captured using filter pads; a larger number of compounds were observed on emissions collected from the filter pads, but not those captured with impingers. It is demonstrated that sampling methods have different sampling efficiencies and some compounds might be missed using only one method. It is recommended to investigate filter pads, impingers, thermal desorption tubes, and solvent extraction resins to establish robust sampling methods for emissions testing of e-cigarette emissions.

Keywords: electronic cigarettes; emissions; regulatory science; flavor; harmful and potentially harmful constituents; e-liquid; tobacco product characteristics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/2/323/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/2/323/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:2:p:323-:d:131673

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().