Combination effect of light and toxicity in algal tests

The sensitivity of Scenedesmus subspicatus against potassium dichromate is positively correlated to the photon flux density during the algal growth inhibition test. Low photon flux densities led to significantly reduced maximum effects and higher EC50 levels. To improve the testing of colored substances, we distinguished between the toxic effect (chemical part, represented by potassium dichromate) and the shading effect (physical part, simulated by reduced light intensities during the test) of a hypothetical light absorbing substance. The contribution of these single effects to the total inhibition varied greatly. At high concentrations of potassium dichromate (1.6 and 3.2 mg L(-1)) the physical part never exceeded 25% of the total inhibition, not even at strongest light reduction, while at low concentrations (0.2 and 0.4 mg L(-1)) the physical effect became more prominent when halving the amount of available light. Further, the combination effect of the chemical and the physical effect could be calculated well only by using the concept of independent action. Thus, if chemical and physical effects are measured in combination, as is the case in tests with dye-stuffs, the current test protocol for the algal growth inhibition test may lead to incorrect estimations of the toxic potential.     

Scope insensitivity in contingent valuation of complex environmental amenities

It has been argued that respondents in contingent valuation (CV) surveys, asked to value complex environmental amenities, will state willingness to pay (WTP) independently of the scope of the project. Such insensitivity to scope would be at odds with rational choice, and could therefore imply that CV is not a theoretically valid method for biodiversity valuation. The scope test in the present CV study was applied to endangered species preservation. Respondents were split in four sub-samples facing different scopes of endangered species preservation. The design allowed for both external and internal scope tests. Furthermore, the tests were split according to elicitation format. Of four external tests of insensitivity to scope, one was rejected, two gave mixed results, depending on either the type of test or elicitation format, and for the last one the null hypothesis could not be rejected. Of five internal tests, insensitivity to scope was rejected in three cases, one test gave mixed results, and one could not be rejected. Survey design features of the CV study, especially an unfamiliar sub-group of endangered species, could explain the apparent insensitivity to scope observed.     

Hazard property classification of waste according to the recent propositions of the EC using different methods

Hazard classification of waste is a necessity, but the hazard properties (named “H” and soon “HP”) are still not all defined in a practical and operational manner at EU level. Following discussion of subsequent draft proposals from the Commission there is still no final decision. Methods to implement the proposals have recently been proposed: tests methods for physical risks, test batteries for aquatic and terrestrial ecotoxicity, an analytical package for exhaustive determination of organic substances and mineral elements, surrogate methods for the speciation of mineral elements in mineral substances in waste, and calculation methods for human toxicity and ecotoxicity with M factors.In this paper the different proposed methods have been applied to a large assortment of solid and liquid wastes (>1 0 0).Data for 45 wastes – documented with extensive chemical analysis and flammability test – were assessed in terms of the different HP criteria and results were compared to LoW for lack of an independent classification. For most waste streams the classification matches with the designation provided in the LoW. This indicates that the criteria used by LoW are similar to the HP limit values.This data set showed HP 14 ‘Ecotoxic chronic’ is the most discriminating HP. All wastes classified as acute ecotoxic are also chronic ecotoxic and the assessment of acute ecotoxicity separately is therefore not needed. The high number of HP 14 classified wastes is due to the very low limit values when stringent M factors are applied to total concentrations (worst case method). With M factor set to 1 the classification method is not sufficiently discriminating between hazardous and non-hazardous materials. The second most frequent hazard is HP 7 ‘Carcinogenic’. The third most frequent hazard is HP 10 ‘Toxic for reproduction’ and the fourth most frequent hazard is HP 4 “Irritant – skin irritation and eye damage”. In a stepwise approach, it seems relevant to assess HP 14 first, then, if the waste is not classified as hazardous, to assess subsequently HP 7, HP 10 and HP 4, and then if still not classified as hazardous, to assess the remaining properties.The elements triggering the HP 14 classification in order of importance are Zn, Cu, Pb, Cr, Cd and Hg. Progress in the speciation of Zn and Cu is essential for HP 14. Organics were quantified by the proposed method (AFNOR XP X30-489) and need no speciation. Organics can contribute significantly to intrinsic toxicity in many waste materials, but they are only of minor importance for the assessment of HP 14 as the metal concentrations are the main HP 14 classifiers. Organic compounds are however responsible for other toxicological characteristics (hormone disturbance, genotoxicity, reprotoxicity…) and shall be taken into account when the waste is not HP 14 classified.