nach oben

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Erschienen in:

01.11.2008 | LCIA OF IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS • METHODOLOGY

USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment

verfasst von: Ralph K. Rosenbaum, Till M. Bachmann, Lois Swirsky Gold, Mark A. J. Huijbregts, Olivier Jolliet, Ronnie Juraske, Annette Koehler, Henrik F. Larsen, Matthew MacLeod, Manuele Margni, Thomas E. McKone, Jérôme Payet, Marta Schuhmacher, Dik van de Meent, Michael Z. Hauschild

Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Ausgabe 7/2008

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Background, aim and scope

In 2005, a comprehensive comparison of life cycle impact assessment toxicity characterisation models was initiated by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)–Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative, directly involving the model developers of CalTOX, IMPACT 2002, USES-LCA, BETR, EDIP, WATSON and EcoSense. In this paper, we describe this model comparison process and its results—in particular the scientific consensus model developed by the model developers. The main objectives of this effort were (1) to identify specific sources of differences between the models’ results and structure, (2) to detect the indispensable model components and (3) to build a scientific consensus model from them, representing recommended practice.

Materials and methods

A chemical test set of 45 organics covering a wide range of property combinations was selected for this purpose. All models used this set. In three workshops, the model comparison participants identified key fate, exposure and effect issues via comparison of the final characterisation factors and selected intermediate outputs for fate, human exposure and toxic effects for the test set applied to all models.

Results

Through this process, we were able to reduce inter-model variation from an initial range of up to 13 orders of magnitude down to no more than two orders of magnitude for any substance. This led to the development of USEtox, a scientific consensus model that contains only the most influential model elements. These were, for example, process formulations accounting for intermittent rain, defining a closed or open system environment or nesting an urban box in a continental box.

Discussion

The precision of the new characterisation factors (CFs) is within a factor of 100–1,000 for human health and 10–100 for freshwater ecotoxicity of all other models compared to 12 orders of magnitude variation between the CFs of each model, respectively. The achieved reduction of inter-model variability by up to 11 orders of magnitude is a significant improvement.

Conclusions

USEtox provides a parsimonious and transparent tool for human health and ecosystem CF estimates. Based on a referenced database, it has now been used to calculate CFs for several thousand substances and forms the basis of the recommendations from UNEP-SETAC’s Life Cycle Initiative regarding characterisation of toxic impacts in life cycle assessment.

Recommendations and perspectives

We provide both recommended and interim (not recommended and to be used with caution) characterisation factors for human health and freshwater ecotoxicity impacts. After a process of consensus building among stakeholders on a broad scale as well as several improvements regarding a wider and easier applicability of the model, USEtox will become available to practitioners for the calculation of further CFs.

Vorheriger Artikel The need for a computational structure of LCC

Nächster Artikel Gone…but not away—addressing the problem of long-term impacts from landfills in LCA

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

The following procedure has been applied: (1) selecting those (665) chemicals from the list of 5,019 substances that had a pK _a value listed, (2) scoring substances that can donate a proton ‘a’ and those that can accept a proton as ‘b’, (3) calculating the fraction of the substance that is expected to be present in its original, neutral form at pH 7 and (4) flagging acids with pK _a <6 and bases with pK _a >8 ‘F’ [note that these are the substances with F(neutral) <10%]. Chemicals that are listed as salts need special attention. If the K _ow listed for these chemicals pertain to the salt form, the K _ow may be used to estimate K _p. If it pertains to the conjugated acid or base, it needs to be corrected: Neglecting the possible contribution of the ionic form to hydrophobicity, we can use the product F(neutral) × K _ow as a basis for estimating K _aw, K _p and BCF.

Aronson D, Boethling R, Howard P, Stiteler, W (2006) Estimating biodegradation half-lives for use in chemical screening. Chemosphere 63(11):1953–1960CrossRef

Bachmann TM (2006) Hazardous substances and human health: exposure, impact and external cost assessment at the European scale. Trace metals and other contaminants in the environment, 8. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 570

Bennett DH, Scheringer M, McKone TE, Hungerbühler K (2001) Predicting long-range transport: a systematic evaluation of two multimedia transport models. Environ Sci Technol 35(6):1181CrossRef

Cowan CE, Mackay D, Feijtel TCJ, van de Meent D, Di Guardo A, Davies J, Mackay N (eds) (1994) The multi-media fate model: a vital tool for predicting the fate of chemicals. SETAC. SETAC Press, Denver, CO

Dreyer LC, Niemann AL, Hauschild MZ (2003) Comparison of three different LCIA methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and Eco-Indicator 99: does it matter which one you choose? Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(4):191–200CrossRef

EC (1999) Externalities of fuel cycles—ExternE Project. Vol. 7—methodology, 2nd edn. European Commission DG XII, Science Research and Development, JOULE, Brussels, Luxembourg

EC (2003) Technical guidance document on risk assessment in Support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on Risk Assessment for new notified substances. Commission Regulation (EC) no. 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances. Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market—part I, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, European Chemicals Bureau, European Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra, Italy

EC (2005) ExternE—externalities of energy: Methodology 2005 update. Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, Luxembourg

ECOTOX (2001) ECOTOXicology Database system. http://www.epa.gov/ecotox

Fenner K, Scheringer M, Stroebe M, Macleod M, McKone T, Matthies M, Klasmeier J, Beyer A, Bonnell M, Le Gall AC, Mackay D, Van De Meent D, Pennington D, Scharenberg B, Suzuki N, Wania F (2005) Comparing estimates of persistence and long-range transport potential among multimedia models. Environ Sci Technol 39(7):1932CrossRef

Goedkoop M, Müller-Wenk R, Hofstetter P, Spriensma R (1998) The Eco-Indicator 99 explained. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(6):352–360CrossRef

Gold LS, Slone TH, Bernstein L (1989) Summary of carcinogenic potency and positivity for 492 rodent carcinogens in the carcinogenic potency database. Environ Health Perspect 79:259–272CrossRef

Gold LS, Manley NB, Slone TH, Rohrbach L, Backman-Garfinkel G (2005) Supplement to the carcinogenic potency database (CPDB) Results of animal bioassays published in the general literature through 1997 and by the National Toxicology Program in 1997–1998. Toxicol Sci 85(2):747–808CrossRef

Gold LS et al (2008) The carcinogenic potency database (CPDB). http://potency.berkeley.edu/chemicalsummary.html

Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998) Environmental assessment of products, vol 2: scientific background. Kluwer, Hingham, MA, USA, p 565

Hauschild MZ, Huijbregts MAJ, Jolliet O, MacLeod M, Margni M, van de Meent D, Rosenbaum RK, McKone TE (2008) Building a model based on scientific consensus for life cycle impact assessment of chemicals: the search for harmony and parsimony. Environ Sci Technol 42(19):7032–7037CrossRef

Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Lankreijer RM, Udo de Haes HA, Wegner Sleeswijk A, Ansems AMM, Eggels PG, van Duin R, Goede AP (1992) Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Centre of Environmental Sciences, Leiden, The Netherlands

Hertwich E, Matales SF, Pease WS, McKone TE (2001) Human toxicity potentials for life-cycle assessment and toxics release inventory risk screening. Environ Toxicol Chem 20(4):928–939CrossRef

Howard PH, Meylan WM (eds) (1997) Handbook of physical properties of organic chemicals. Lewis Publishers (CRC Press cop), Michigan, 1585 pp

Howard PH, Boethling RS, Jarvis WF, Meylan WM, Michalenko EM (1991) Handbook of environmental degradation rates. Lewis Publishers, Michigan

Huijbregts MAJ, Thissen U, Guinée JB, Jager T, Kalf D, van de Meent D, Ragas AMJ, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Reijnders L (2000) Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment. Part I: calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate, exposure and effects model USES-LCA. Chemosphere 41(4):541–573CrossRef

Huijbregts MAJ, Geelen LMJ, Van De Meent D, Hertwich EG, McKone TE (2005a) A comparison between the multimedia fate and exposure models CalTOX and uniform system for evaluation of substances adapted for life-cycle assessment based on the population intake fraction of toxic pollutants. Environ Toxicol Chem 24(2):486–493CrossRef

Huijbregts MAJ, Rombouts LJA, Ragas AMJ, Van de Meent D (2005b) Human-toxicological effect and damage factors of carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic chemicals for life cycle impact assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manage 1(3):181–192CrossRef

Huijbregts MAJ, Struijs J, Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Hendriks AJ, Van de Meent D (2005c) Human population intake fractions and environmental fate factors of toxic pollutants in life cycle impact assessment. Chemosphere 61(10):1495–1504CrossRef

IUCLID (2000) IUCLID CD-ROM Year 2000 edition. Public data on high volume chemicals

Jolliet O, Hauschild M (2005) The influence of the intermittent character of rain on fate and long range transport of air organic pollutants. Environ Sci Technol 39(12):4513–4522CrossRef

Jolliet O, Brent A, Goedkoop M, Itsubo N, Mueller-Wenk R, Peña C, Schenk R, Stewart M, Weidema B (2003a) The LCIA Framework. SETAC–UNEP Life Cycle Initiative, Lausanne

Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Rosenbaum RK (2003b) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330CrossRef

Jolliet O, Rosenbaum RK, Chapmann P, McKone T, Margni M, Scheringer M, van Straalen N, Wania F (2006) Establishing a framework for life cycle toxicity assessment: findings of the Lausanne review workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(3):209–212CrossRef

Kawamoto K, MacLeod M, Mackay D (2001) Evaluation and comparison of multimedia mass balance models of chemical fate: Application of EUSES and ChemCAN to 68 chemicals in Japan. Chemosphere 44(4):599–612CrossRef

Larsen HF, Hauschild MZ (2007) GM-troph: a low data demand ecotoxicity effect indicator for use in LCIA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(2):79–91CrossRef

Ligthart T et al (2004) Declaration of Apeldoorn on LCIA of Non-Ferrous Metals. http://lcinitiative.unep.fr/includes/file.asp?site=lcinit&file=38D1F49D-6D64-45AE-9F64-578BA414E499

Mackay D, Seth R (1999) The role of mass balance modelling in impact assessment and pollution prevention. In: Sikdar SK, Diweakar U (eds) Tools and methods for pollution prevention. Kluwer, The Netherlands, pp 157–179

Mackay D, Shiu WY, Lee SC, Ma KC (2006) Handbook of physical–chemical properties and environmental fate for organic chemicals. Science, Technology, Engineering, I–IV. CRC, Boca Raton

MacLeod M, Woodfine DG, Mackay D, McKone TE, Bennett DH, Maddalena R (2001) BETR North America: a regionally segmented multimedia contaminant fate model for North America. Environ Sci Pollut Res 8(3):156–163CrossRef

Maddalena RL, McKone TE, Layton DW, Hsieh DPH (1995) Comparison of multi-media transport and transformation models: regional fugacity model vs. CalTOX. Chemosphere 30(5):869–899CrossRef

Margni M (2003) Source to intake modeling in life cycle impact assessment. PhD thesis, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 138 pp

Margni M, Pennington DW, Birkved M, Larsen HF, Hauschild M (2002) Test set of organic chemicals for LCIA characterisation method comparison. OMNITOX project report

Margni M, Pennington DW, Bennett DH, Jolliet O (2004) Cyclic exchanges and level of coupling between environmental media: intermedia feedback in multimedia fate models. Environ Sci Technol 38(20):5450–5457CrossRef

McKone TE (1993) The precision of QSAR methods for estimating intermedia transfer factors in exposure assessments. SAR QSAR Environ Res 1(1):41–51CrossRef

McKone TE (2001) Ecological toxicity potentials (ETPs) for substances released to air and surface waters. Environmental Health Sciences Division, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720

McKone T, Bennett D, Maddalena R (2001) CalTOX 4.0 Technical support document, vol 1. LBNL-47254, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA

McKone TE, Kyle AD, Jolliet O, Olsen SI, Hauschild M (2006) Dose–response modeling for life cycle impact assessment—findings of the Portland Review Workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):137–140CrossRef

Meylan WM, Howard PH, Boethling RS, Aronson D, Printup H, Gouchie S (1999) Improved method for estimating bioconcentration/bioaccumulation factor from octanol/water partition coefficient. Environ Toxicol Chem 18(4):664–672CrossRef

NCMS (2008) SOLV-DB. http://solvdb.ncms.org/index.html

Pant R, Van Hoof G, Schowanek D, Feijtel TCJ, De Koning A, Hauschild M, Olsen SI, Pennington DW, Rosenbaum RK (2004) Comparison between three different LCIA methods for aquatic ecotoxicity and a product environmental risk assessment: insights from a detergent case study within OMNIITOX. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(5):295–306CrossRef

Payet J (2004) Assessing toxic impacts on aquatic ecosystems in life cycle assessment (LCA). PhD thesis, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 190 pp

Pennington DW, Margni M, Ammann C, Jolliet O (2005) Multimedia fate and human intake modeling: spatial versus nonspatial insights for chemical emissions in Western Europe. Environ Sci Technol 39(4):1119–1128CrossRef

Rosenbaum RK (2006) Multimedia and food chain modelling of toxics for comparative risk and life cycle impact assessment. PhD thesis, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 192 pp

Rosenbaum RK, Margni M, Jolliet O (2007) A flexible matrix algebra framework for the multimedia multipathway modeling of emission to impacts. Environ Int 33(5):624–634CrossRef

Scheringer M, Wegmann F, Hungerbühler K (2004) Investigating the mechanics of multimedia box models: how to explain differences between models in terms of mass fluxes? Environ Toxicol Chem 23(10):2433–2440CrossRef

Sinkkonen S, Paasivirta J (2000) Degradation half-life times of PCDDs, PCDFs and PCBs for environmental fate modeling. Chemosphere 40(9):943–949CrossRef

SRC (2008) Environmental Fate Data Base (EFDB). http://www.syrres.com/esc/efdb.htm

Stroebe M, Scheringer M, Hungerbühler K, Held H (2004) Inter-comparison of multimedia modeling approaches: modes of transport, measures of long range transport potential and the spatial remote state. Sci Total Environ 321(1–3):1–20

Travis C, Arms A (1988) Bioconcentration of organics in beef, milk, and vegetation. Environ Sci Technol 22(3):271–274CrossRef

USEPA (2007) Estimation Programs Interface EPI Suite. http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm

Van Zelm R, Huijbregts MAJ, Harbers JV, Wintersen A, Struijs J, Posthuma L, Van de Meent D (2007) Uncertainty in msPAF-based ecotoxicological effect factors for freshwater ecosystems in life cycle impact assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manage 3(2):203–210CrossRef

Vermeire T, Pieters M, Rennen M, Bos P (2001) Probabalistic assessment factors for human health risk assessment—a practical guide. National Institute for Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands

Wania F, Dugani CB (2003) Assessing the long-range transport potential of polybrominated diphenyl ethers: a comparison of four multimedia models. Environ Toxicol Chem 22(6):1252–1261CrossRef

Wania F, MacKay D (2000) A comparison of overall persistence values and atmospheric travel distances calculated by various multi-media fate models. WECC Wania Environmental Chemists Corp., under Chlorine Chemistry Council Contracts No. 9461 and 9462, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Wegmann F, Cavin L, MacLeod M, Scheringer M, Hungerbühler K (2008) A software tool for screening chemicals of environmental concern for persistence and long-range transport potential. Environ Model Softw 24(2):228–237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2008.06.014

Wenzel H, Hauschild M, Alting L (1998) Environmental assessment of products, vol 1: methodology, tools and case studies in product development. Kluwer, Hingham, MA, USA, p 560

Titel: USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment
verfasst von: Ralph K. Rosenbaum
Till M. Bachmann
Lois Swirsky Gold
Mark A. J. Huijbregts
Olivier Jolliet
Ronnie Juraske
Annette Koehler
Henrik F. Larsen
Matthew MacLeod
Manuele Margni
Thomas E. McKone
Jérôme Payet
Marta Schuhmacher
Dik van de Meent
Michael Z. Hauschild
Publikationsdatum: 01.11.2008
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Ausgabe 7/2008
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Elektronische ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0038-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Background, aim and scope

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

Recommendations and perspectives

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2008

The Italian network on LCA

Life cycle assessment of integrated food chains—a Swedish case study of two chicken meals

Gone…but not away—addressing the problem of long-term impacts from landfills in LCA

Using fuzzy numbers to propagate uncertainty in matrix-based LCI

Evaluating the variability of aquatic acidification and photochemical ozone formation characterization factors for Canadian emissions

A life cycle comparison of disposal and beneficial use of coal combustion products in Florida