Top

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Published in:

01-01-2016 | LCIA OF IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS

Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment: the effect of modelling choices in the context of sewage sludge management

Authors: Robin Harder, Gregory M. Peters, Sverker Molander, Nicholas J. Ashbolt, Magdalena Svanström

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 1/2016

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Purpose

Recent attempts to include adverse effects of pathogens on human health in life cycle assessment (LCA) have focused on integrating results obtained through quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) as an impact category in LCA. This study aimed to investigate whether the use of QMRA can be an adequate way of integrating pathogen impact potential in LCA and to quantify how pathogen impact potential is affected by choices regarding model structure and mathematical relationships used.

Methods

This study was performed for the context of sewage sludge management and is based on pathogen concentrations in treated sludge reported in the literature. Eight reference pathogens were included in order to address important microbial groups. The pathogen impact potential associated with land application of sewage sludge was quantified based on a QMRA model for eight distinct exposure pathways. The modelling choices investigated were linearisation of dose-response and severity assessment and different modelling approaches and parameter choices in fate and exposure assessment.

Results and discussion

The linearisation of effect and severity assessment had a minor impact on the results for exposure pathways where pathogen doses were low but had a major impact where pathogen doses were high. The assumptions regarding fate and exposure conditions, such as pathogen decay time, number of individuals exposed and frequency of exposure, had a significant effect on overall pathogen impact potential. If pathogen impact potential is to be integrated in LCA, a range of different parameterisations for each exposure event may be warranted rather than only the one with the highest risk per individual exposed as commonly reported for QMRAs. This is also in line with the ordinary LCA practice of focusing on average rather than extreme conditions.

Conclusions

This study suggests that the use of QMRA can be an adequate way of integrating adverse effects of pathogens on human health in LCA. However, analysts should be careful when choosing model parameters such as the number of people exposed or the frequency of exposure, as LCA may require a different parameterisation than an ordinary risk assessment (RA). Therefore, a direct integration of the results of a QMRA study into LCA may be problematic. Also, in order to avoid potential bias, analysts should carefully consider whether or not pathogen impact potential and human toxicity potential need to be estimated based on a similar set of exposure pathways.

previous article Estimating land transformation area caused by nickel mining considering regional variation

next article Evaluation of environmental friendliness of concrete paving eco-blocks using LCA approach

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Aramaki T, Galal M, Hanaki K (2006) Estimation of reduced and increasing health risks by installation of urban wastewater systems. Water Sci Technol 53(9):247–252CrossRef

Bengtsson M, Tillman A-M (2004) Actors and interpretations in an environmental controversy: the Swedish debate on sewage sludge use in agriculture. Resour Conserv Recycl 42:65–82CrossRef

Bofill-Mas S, Albinana-Gimenez N, Clemente-Casares P, Hundesa A, Rodriguez-Manzano J, Allard A, Calvo M, Girones R (2006) Quantification and stability of human adenoviruses and polyomavirus JCPyV in wastewater matrices. Appl Environ Microbiol 72(12):7894–7896CrossRef

Brooks JP, McLaughlin MR, Gerba CP, Pepper IL (2012) Land application of manure and class B biosolids: an occupational and public quantitative microbial risk assessment. J Environ Qual 41:2009–2023CrossRef

Corominas L, Foley J, Guest JS, Hospido A, Larsen HF, Morera S, Shaw A (2013) Life cycle assessment applied to wastewater treatment: state of the art. Water Res 47:5480–5492CrossRef

Eisenberg JN, Brookhart A, Rice G, Brown M, Colford JM Jr (2002) Disease transmission models for public health decision making: analysis of epidemic and endemic conditions caused by waterborne pathogens. Environ Health Perspect 110(8):783–790CrossRef

Eisenberg JN, Soller JA, Scott J, Eisenberg DM, Colford JM Jr (2004) A dynamic model to assess microbial health risks associated with beneficial uses of biosolids. Risk Anal 24(1):221–236CrossRef

Eisenberg JN, Moore K, Soller JA, Eisenberg DM, Colford JM Jr (2008) Microbial risk assessment framework for exposure to amended sludge projects. Environ Health Perspect 116(6):727–733CrossRef

Gale P (2005) Land application of treated sewage sludge: quantifying pathogen risks from consumption of crops. J Appl Microbiol 98:380–396CrossRef

Gao T, Wang XC, Chen R, Ngo HH, Guo W (2015) Disability adjusted life year (DALY): a useful tool for quantitative assessment of environmental pollution. Sci Total Environ 511:268–287CrossRef

Goedkoop MJ, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008 A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition Report I: Characterisation

Haas CN, Rose JB, Gerba CP (2014) Quantitative microbial risk assessment, 2nd edn. Wiley

Harder R, Heimersson S, Svanström M, Peters GM (2014) Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment of wastewater management—part 1: estimating the burden of disease associated with pathogens. Environ Sci Technol 48(16):9338–9445CrossRef

Harder R, Schoen M, Peters G (2015) Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment of wastewater management. Implications for the choice of functional unit. Environ Sci Technol 49:14−15

Hauschild MZ, Goedkoop M, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, Jolliet O, Margni M, De Schryver A, Humbert S, Laurent A, Sala S, Pant R (2013) Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):683–697CrossRef

Heimersson S, Harder R, Peters GM, Svanström M (2014) Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment of wastewater management—part 2: quantitative comparison of potential impacts of pathogens to other impacts on human health. Environ Sci Technol 48(16):9446–9453CrossRef

Henderson AD, Hauschild MZ, Van de Meent D, Huibregts MAJ, Larsen HF, Margni M, McKone TE, Payet J, Rosenbaum RK, Jolliet O (2011) USEtox fate and ecotoxicity factors for comparative assessment of toxic emissions in life cycle analysis: sensitivity to key chemical properties. Int J Life Cycle Ass 16:701–709

Huijbregts M, Hauschild M, Jolliet O, Margni M, McKone T, Rosenbaum RK, van de Meent D (2010) USEtox™ user manual

Kobayashi Y, Peters GM, Ashbolt NJ, Heimersson S, Svanström M, Khan SJ (2015) Global and local health burden trade-off through the hybridisation of quantitative microbial risk assessment and life cycle assessment to aid water management. Water Res 79:26–38CrossRef

Larsen HF, Olsen SI, Hauschild M, Laurent A (2009) NEPTUNE, new sustainable concepts and processes for optimization and upgrading municipal wastewater and sludge treatment, Work Package 4—Assessment of environmental sustainability and best practice, Deliverable 4.2—Methodology for including specific biological effects and pathogen aspects into LCA. Lyngby, Denmark: Technical University of Denmark

Murray C (1994) Quantifying the burden of disease: the technical basis for disability-adjusted life years. B World Health Organ 72:429–445

Rosenbaum RK, Huijbregts MAJ, Henderson AD, Margni M, McKone TE, Van de Meent D, Hauschild MZ, Shaked S, Li DS, Gold LS, Jolliet O (2011) USEtox human exposure and toxicity factors for comparative assessment of toxic emissions in life cycle analysis: sensitivity analysis to key chemical properties. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:710–727

Sales-Ortells H, Medema G (2015) Microbial health risks associated with exposure to stormwater in a water plaza. Water Res 74:34–46CrossRef

Schoen ME, Xue X, Hawkins TR, Ashbolt NJ (2014) Comparative human health risk analysis of coastal community water and waste service options. Environ Sci Technol 48(16):9728–9736CrossRef

Soller JA (2009) The potential implications of person-to-person transmission of viral infection for US EPA’s Groundwater Rule. J Water Health 7(2):208–223

Westrell T, Schönning C, Stenström TA, Ashbolt NJ (2004) QMRA (quantitative microbial risk assessment) and HACCP (hazard analysis and critical control points) for management of pathogens in wastewater and sewage sludge treatment and reuse. Water Sci Technol 50(2):23–30

Yoshida H, Christensen TH, Scheutz C (2013) Life cycle assessment of sewage sludge management: a review. Waste Manag Res 31(11):1083–1101CrossRef

Title: Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment: the effect of modelling choices in the context of sewage sludge management
Authors: Robin Harder
Gregory M. Peters
Sverker Molander
Nicholas J. Ashbolt
Magdalena Svanström
Publication date: 01-01-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 1/2016
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0996-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results and discussion

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Session “Midpoint, endpoint or single score for decision-making?”—SETAC Europe 25th Annual Meeting, May 5th, 2015

Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment—defining the path forward

Life cycle assessment of horizontal-axis washing machines in China

Estimating land transformation area caused by nickel mining considering regional variation

Erratum to: Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment—defining the path forward

Life cycle assessment of energy generation in Poland