Atmospheric pollution by PM 2.5 and microplastics: risks and scientific advances

• Colichón Carranza, Rodrigo Dávid ^[1] ; Torres-del Aguila, Alexis ^[1] ; Lozano Carranza, Carlos Mauricio ^[1] ; Lozano Chung, Andi ^[2]
  1. [1] Universidad César Vallejo, Facultad De Ingeniería Y Arquitectura.Tarapoto, Perú
  2. [2] Universidad Nacional de San Martín. Tarapoto, Perú
• Localización: eVitroKhem: Revista de Innovación en Ingeniería Biomédica y Química, ISSN-e 3072-7944, Nº. 1, 2022 (Ejemplar dedicado a: eVitroKhem)
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • Introduction: Pollution by fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and microplastics (PMs) appeared as a growing environmental and public health problem. PM2.5 particles, with a diameter of less than 2.5 μm, penetrated deeply into the respiratory system, while PMs, plastic fragments smaller than 5 mm, acted as carriers of pollutants. Scientific evidence indicated that their combination could increase respiratory, cardiovascular and oncological risks.Development: International and local studies reported variable concentrations of PM2.5, from low values in Villavicencio and Tarapoto to critical levels in Shanghai, New Delhi and Brazilian cities, where WHO recommendations were widely exceeded, especially in winter. Research such as that of Zhu et al. and Abbasi identified PMs in PM2.5 fractions, using techniques such as FTIR spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM/EDS). The main sources were documented to include transportation, industrial emissions, domestic combustion and degradation of major plastics. Meteorological factors such as temperature, humidity and wind speed influenced particle dispersion. Spatial and temporal variability evidenced the need for integrated and accurate monitoring systems.Conclusions: The interaction between PM2.5 and PMs generated a complex environmental risk scenario, requiring public policies to reduce emissions and regulate the use of plastics. Methodological advances improved detection, although limitations persisted in understanding their chronic effects. Evidence supported that early and coordinated action was key to mitigate impacts on health and the environment.