USEtox fate and ecotoxicity factors for comparative assessment of toxic emissions in life cycle analysis: sensitivity to key chemical properties

被引:150
作者
Henderson, Andrew D. [1 ]
Hauschild, Michael Z. [2 ]
van de Meent, Dik [3 ,4 ]
Huijbregts, Mark A. J. [3 ]
Larsen, Henrik Fred [2 ]
Margni, Manuele [5 ]
McKone, Thomas E. [6 ]
Payet, Jerome [7 ]
Rosenbaum, Ralph K. [2 ]
Jolliet, Olivier [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Environm Hlth Sci, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Tech Univ Denmark, Dept Engn Management, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Environm Sci, NL-6500 GL Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm RIVM, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, Netherlands
[5] Ecole Polytech Montreal, CIRAIG, Stn Ctr Ville, Montreal, PQ H3C 3A7, Canada
[6] Univ Calif Berkeley, Lawrence Berkeley Lab, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[7] Cycleco, F-01500 Amberieu, France
关键词
Characterization factors; Fate modeling; Freshwater ecotoxicity; Life Cycle Impact Assessment; Model comparison; USEtox; DIFFERENT LCIA METHODS; MULTIMEDIA FATE; EFFECT INDICATORS; MODEL; POLLUTANTS; TRANSPORT; RISK; FRAMEWORK; CONSENSUS; INSIGHTS;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-011-0294-6
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The USEtox model was developed in a scientific consensus process involving comparison of and harmonization between existing environmental multimedia fate models. USEtox quantitatively models the continuum from chemical emission to freshwater ecosystem toxicity via chemical-specific characterization factors (CFs) for Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). This work provides understanding of the key mechanisms and chemical parameters influencing fate in the environment and impact on aquatic ecosystems. USEtox incorporates a matrix framework for multimedia modeling, allowing separation of fate, exposure, and ecotoxicity effects in the determination of an overall CF. Current best practices, such as incorporation of intermittent rain and effect factors (EF) based on substance toxicity across species, are implemented in the model. The USEtox database provides a dataset of over 3,000 organic chemicals, of which approximately 2,500 have freshwater EFs. Freshwater characterization factors for these substances, with a special focus on a subset of chemicals with characteristic properties, were analyzed to understand the contributions of fate, exposure, and effect on the overall CFs. The approach was based on theoretical interpretation of the multimedia model components as well as multidimensional graphical analysis. For direct emission of a substance to water, the EF strongly controls freshwater ecotoxicity, with a range of up to 10 orders of magnitude. In this release scenario, chemical-specific differences in environmental fate influence the CF for freshwater emissions by less than 2 orders of magnitude. However, for an emission to air or soil, the influence of the fate is more pronounced. Chemical partitioning properties between water, air, and soil may drive intermedia transfer, which may be limited by the often uncertain, media-specific degradation half-life. Intermedia transfer may be a function of landscape parameters as well; for example, direct transfer from air to freshwater is limited by the surface area of freshwater. Overall, these altered fate factors may decrease the CF up to 8 orders of magnitude. This work brings new clarity to the relative contributions of fate and freshwater ecotoxicity to the calculation of CFs. In concert with the USEtox database, which provides the most extensive compilation of CFs to date, these findings enable those undertaking LCIA to understand and contextualize existing and newly calculated CFs.
引用
收藏
页码:701 / 709
页数:9
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
Aldenberg T, 2002, ENVIRON ECOL RISK AS, P49
[2]  
[Anonymous], MULTIMEDIA ENV MODEL
[3]  
[Anonymous], LBNL47254
[4]   A food web bioaccumulation model for organic chemicals in aquatic ecosystems [J].
Arnot, JA ;
Gobas, FAPC .
ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY, 2004, 23 (10) :2343-2355
[5]   Intake fraction for multimedia pollutants: A tool for life cycle analysis and comparative risk assessment [J].
Bennett, DH ;
Margni, MD ;
McKone, TE ;
Jolliet, O .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2002, 22 (05) :905-918
[6]  
Brandes L.J., 1996, 719101029 NAT I PUBL
[7]   The clearwater consensus: the estimation of metal hazard in fresh water [J].
Diamond, Miriam L. ;
Gandhi, Nilima ;
Adams, William J. ;
Atherton, John ;
Bhavsar, Satyendra P. ;
Bulle, Cecile ;
Campbell, Peter G. C. ;
Dubreuil, Alain ;
Fairbrother, Anne ;
Farley, Kevin ;
Green, Andrew ;
Guinee, Jeroen ;
Hauschild, Michael Z. ;
Huijbregts, Mark A. J. ;
Humbert, Sebastien ;
Jensen, Karen S. ;
Jolliet, Olivier ;
Margni, Manuele ;
McGeer, James C. ;
Peijnenburg, Willie J. G. M. ;
Rosenbaum, Ralph ;
van de Meent, Dik ;
Vijver, Martina G. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2010, 15 (02) :143-147
[8]   Comparison of three different LCIA methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and Eco-indicator 99 - Does it matter which one you choose? [J].
Dreyer, LC ;
Niemann, AL ;
Hauschild, MZ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2003, 8 (04) :191-200
[9]   Comparing estimates of persistence and long-range transport potential among multimedia models [J].
Fenner, K ;
Scheringer, M ;
MacLeod, M ;
Matthies, M ;
McKone, T ;
Stroebe, M ;
Beyer, A ;
Bonnell, M ;
Le Gall, AC ;
Klasmeier, J ;
Mackay, D ;
Van De Meent, D ;
Pennington, D ;
Scharenberg, B ;
Suzuki, N ;
Wania, F .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2005, 39 (07) :1932-1942
[10]   Species sensitivity distributions revisited: A critical appraisal [J].
Forbes, VE ;
Calow, P .
HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 2002, 8 (03) :473-492