title: Comparison of the substrate effect on VOC emissions from water based varnish and latex paint.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The building materials are recognised to be major contributors to indoor air contamination by volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The improvement of the quality of the environment within buildings is a topic of increasing research and public interest. Legislation in preparation by the European Commission may induce, in the near future, European Union Member States to solicit the industries of paints, varnishes and flooring materials for taking measures, in order to reduce the VOC emissions resulting from the use of their products. Therefore, product characterisation and information about the influence of environmental parameters on the VOC emissions are fundamental for providing the basic scientific information required to allow architects, engineers, builders, and building owners to provide a healthy environment for building occupants. On the other hand, the producers of coating building materials require this information to introduce technological alterations, when necessary, in order to improve the ecological quality of their products, and to make them more competitive. Studies of VOC emissions from wet materials, like paints and varnishes, have usually been conducted after applying the material on inert substrates, due to its non-adsorption and non-porosity properties. However, in real indoor environments, these materials are applied on substrates of a different nature. One aim of this work was to study, for the first time, the VOC emissions from a latex paint applied on concrete. The influence of the substrate (uncoated cork parquet, eucalyptus parquet without finishing and pine parquet with finishing) on the emissions of VOC from a water-based varnish was also studied. For comparison purposes, polyester film (an inert substrate) was used for both wet materials.
  
  
  METHODS
  The specific emission rates of the major VOCs were monitored for the first 72 h of material exposure in the atmosphere of a standardized test chamber. The air samples were collected on Tenax TA and analysed using thermal desorption online with gas chromatography provided with both mass selective detection and flame ionisation detection. A double exponential model was applied to the VOC concentrations as a function of time to facilitate the interpretation of the results.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The varnish, which was introduced in the test chamber 23 h after the application of the last layer of material, emitted mainly glycolethers. Only primary VOCs were emitted, but their concentrations varied markedly with the nature of the substrate. The higher VOC concentrations were observed for the parquets of cork and eucalyptus, which indicated that they have a much higher porosity and, therefore, a higher power of VOC adsorption than the finished pine parquet (and polyester film). The paint was introduced in the chamber just after its application. Only primary VOCs were emitted (esters, phthalates, glycolethers and white spirit) but some compounds, like 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol and diethylphthalate, were only observed for paint/polyester, which suggested that they were irreversibly adsorbed by the paint/concrete. Compared with the inert substrate, the rate of VOC emissions was lower for concrete in the wet-stage (first hours after the paint application) but slightly higher later (dry-stage) as a consequence of desorption.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  As to varnish, the substrates without finishing, like cork and eucalyptus parquets, displayed a higher power of adsorption of VOCs than the pine parquet with finishing, probably because they have a higher porosity. As concerns paint, the total masses of VOCs emitted were lower for concrete than for polyester, indicating that concrete reduces the global VOC emissions from the latex paint. Concrete is seen to have a strong power of adsorption of VOCs. Some compounds, namely 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)ethanol, diethylphthalate and TEXANOL (this partially), were either irreversibly adsorbed by the concrete or desorbed very slowly (at undetected levels). A similar behaviour had not been reported for gypsum board, a paint substrate studied before.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The present data suggest that concrete may be a recommendable substrate for paint in an indoor environment. As the nature of the substrate conditions the rate and nature of VOC emissions from wet materials, it must be explicit when emissions from composite materials are reported, in order to allow comparisons and labelling of the product in terms of indoor air quality.
authors.affiliation: LAQUIPAI, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre, 687, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal.
authors.forename: Gabriela V
authors.initials: GV
authors.lastname: Silva
authors.forename: M Teresa S D
authors.initials: MT
authors.lastname: Vasconcelos
authors.forename: Armando M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Santos
authors.forename: Eduardo O
authors.initials: EO
authors.lastname: Fernandes
mesh_terms: D016902:Air Pollution, Indoor / Q000032:analysis*; D003252:Construction Materials; D004784:Environmental Monitoring; D007840:Latex / Q000737:chemistry*; D008422:Materials Testing; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D009930:Organic Chemicals / Q000032:analysis; D010150:Paint; D016062:Porosity; D014835:Volatilization
chemical_list: D007840:Latex; D009930:Organic Chemicals