Eco-toxicological impact of “metals” on the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem: A comparison between eight different methodologies for Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)

The assessment of eco-toxicological impacts related to the emission of contaminants into the environment has peculiar characteristics in the context of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and many different Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methodologies can be used. However, previous studies recognized the presence of high uncertainties in the process, in particular when the analysis focuses on metal emissions. Metals are diverse inorganic substances relevant for their characteristic environmental chemistry, their high persistency into the environment and their toxicity at even low environmental concentrations. This study aims at expanding the discussion about how, and how differently, various methods for LCIA are estimating the impacts related to metals emissions, with a focus on eco-toxicological impacts. A comparison between eight different LCIA methods is presented in relative terms, using a contribution analysis at two levels: general and specific. Results show that there is a poor agreement between methods in the determination of the total eco-toxic impact attributable to metals, and in defining which metal provokes the highest eco-toxic impact per unitary emission. Furthermore, the characterization phase is critical in determining the disagreement between methods. However, some similarities were found: there is the tendency in most methods to associate the largest share of the total eco-toxicological impacts to metals. Theoretical and practical differences between methods are discussed and suggestions for the choice of the proper, case-specific, LCIA method are provided.     

Development of quantitative estimates of uncertainty in environmental risk assessments when the scientific data base is inadequate

The reasons for developing quantitative estimates of uncertainty in environmental risk assessments are discussed along with a method for developing them which involves scientific judgement. In the situation considered here the regulatory needs are ahead of the science, which makes the development of the estimates on uncertainty more difficult, but not impossible. Quantitative estimates for all uncertainties involved in the estimation of risk resulting from exposure to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in drinking water are developed and tabulated. By far the largest contribution to the uncertainty in the risk estimates for VOCs in drinking water are due to uncertainty in the extrapolation of the dose-response curve to low levels. The uncertainty due to extrapolation is on the order of 10⁴ and 10⁶. Other components of the analysis may contribute uncertainties of a few orders of magnitude. In general the largest uncertainties are in the toxicological data base and the manipulation of it needed to estimate risk. The data base and manipulations needed to estimate exposure due to VOCs in drinking water were at the more an order to magnitudes in uncertainty.     

Environmental modelling of use of treated organic waste on agricultural land: a comparison of existing models for life cycle assessment of waste systems.

Modelling of environmental impacts from the application of treated organic municipal solid waste (MSW) in agriculture differs widely between different models for environmental assessment of waste systems. In this comparative study five models were examined concerning quantification and impact assessment of environmental effects from land application of treated organic MSW: DST (Decision Support Tool, USA), IWM (Integrated Waste Management, U.K.), THE IFEU PROJECT (Germany), ORWARE (ORganic WAste REsearch, Sweden) and EASEWASTE (Environmental Assessment of Solid Waste Systems and Technologies, Denmark). DST and IWM are life cycle inventory (LCI) models, thus not performing actual impact assessment. The DST model includes only one water emission (biological oxygen demand) from compost leaching in the results and IWM considers only air emissions from avoided production of commercial fertilizers. THE IFEU PROJECT, ORWARE and EASEWASTE are life cycle assessment (LCA) models containing more detailed land application modules. A case study estimating the environmental impacts from land application of 1 ton of composted source sorted organic household waste was performed to compare the results from the different models and investigate the origin of any difference in type or magnitude of the results. The contributions from the LCI models were limited and did not depend on waste composition or local agricultural conditions. The three LCA models use the same overall approach for quantifying the impacts of the system. However, due to slightly different assumptions, quantification methods and environmental impact assessment, the obtained results varied clearly between the models. Furthermore, local conditions (e.g. soil type, farm type, climate and legal regulation) and waste composition strongly influenced the results of the environmental assessment.     

Monitoring of the booster biocide dichlofluanid in water and marine sediment of Greek marinas

Dichlofluanid (N-dichlorofluoromethylthio-N'-dimethyl-N-phenylsulphamide) is used as booster biocide in antifouling paints. The occurrence of dichlofluanid and its metabolite DMSA (N'-dimethyl-N-phenyl-sulphamide) was monitored in seawater and marine sediment from three Greek marinas. Seawater and sediment samples were collected at three representative positions and one suspected hotspot in each marina and shipped to the laboratory for chemical analysis. As part of the project, an analytical method had been developed and validated. Furthermore, some additional experiments were carried out to investigate the potential contribution of paint particle bound dichlofluanid on the total concentration in the sediment. As expected, given its known high hydrolytic degradation rate, no detectable concentrations of dichlofluanid were measured in any of the seawater samples. DMSA was detected in seawater samples at very low concentrations varying from <3 ng l(-1) (LOD) to 36 ng l(-1). During method validation, it had already been demonstrated that dichlofluanid is unstable in sediment and can therefore only be determined as its metabolite DMSA. In a separate experiment, in which marine sediment was spiked with artificial paint particles containing dichlofluanid and then analysed according to the validated method, it was demonstrated that if there is any dichlofluanid originating from paint particles, this would be determined as DMSA. No DMSA was detected in any of the sediment samples. It could therefore be concluded that there were no significant concentrations of dichlofluanid in the sediment samples.