Literature DB >> 28618056

Improving substance information in USEtox® , part 1: Discussion on data and approaches for estimating freshwater ecotoxicity effect factors.

Erwan Saouter1, Karin Aschberger2, Peter Fantke3, Michael Z Hauschild3, Stephanie K Bopp2, Aude Kienzler2, Alicia Paini2, Rana Pant1, Michela Secchi1, Serenella Sala1.   

Abstract

The scientific consensus model USEtox® is recommended by the European Commission as the reference model to characterize life cycle chemical emissions in terms of their potential human toxicity and freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity impacts in the context of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System Handbook and the Environmental Footprint pilot phase looking at products (PEF) and organizations (OEF). Consequently, this model has been systematically used within the PEF/OEF pilot phase by 25 European Union industry sectors, which manufacture a wide variety of consumer products. This testing phase has raised some questions regarding the derivation of and the data used for the chemical-specific freshwater ecotoxicity effect factor in USEtox. For calculating the potential freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity impacts, USEtox bases the effect factor on the chronic hazard concentration (HC50) value for a chemical calculated as the arithmetic mean of all logarithmized geometric means of species-specific chronic median lethal (or effect) concentrations (L[E]C50). We investigated the dependency of the USEtox effect factor on the selection of ecotoxicological data source and toxicological endpoints, and we found that both influence the ecotoxicity ranking of chemicals and may hence influence the conclusions of a PEF/OEF study. We furthermore compared the average measure (HC50) with other types of ecotoxicity effect indicators, such as the lowest species EC50 or no-observable-effect concentration, frequently used in regulatory risk assessment, and demonstrated how they may also influence the ecotoxicity ranking of chemicals. We acknowledge that these indicators represent different aspects of a chemical's ecotoxicity potential and discuss their pros and cons for a comparative chemical assessment as performed in life cycle assessment and in particular within the PEF/OEF context. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:3450-3462.
© 2017 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC. © 2017 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chemical regulation; Environmental toxicology; Fate modeling; Life cycle assessment; Organization Environmental Footprint; Product Environmental Footprint; USEtox®

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28618056     DOI: 10.1002/etc.3889

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem        ISSN: 0730-7268            Impact factor:   3.742


  6 in total

1.  Toward harmonizing ecotoxicity characterization in life cycle impact assessment.

Authors:  Peter Fantke; Nicoló Aurisano; Jane Bare; Thomas Backhaus; Cécile Bulle; Peter M Chapman; Dick De Zwart; Robert Dwyer; Alexi Ernstoff; Laura Golsteijn; Hanna Holmquist; Olivier Jolliet; Thomas E McKone; Mikołaj Owsianiak; Willie Peijnenburg; Leo Posthuma; Sandra Roos; Erwan Saouter; Diederik Schowanek; Nico M van Straalen; Martina G Vijver; Michael Hauschild
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.742

2.  A toxicity-based analysis of Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI): a case study in Nova Scotia.

Authors:  Stephanie Taylor; Stuart Johnston Edwards; Tony R Walker
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  An (Eco)Toxicity Life Cycle Impact Assessment Framework for Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances.

Authors:  Hanna Holmquist; Peter Fantke; Ian T Cousins; Mikołaj Owsianiak; Ioannis Liagkouridis; Gregory M Peters
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Using REACH for the EU Environmental Footprint: Building a Usable Ecotoxicity Database, Part I.

Authors:  Erwan Saouter; Fabrizio Biganzoli; Rana Pant; Serenella Sala; Donald Versteeg
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 2.992

5.  Comparing Options for Deriving Chemical Ecotoxicity Hazard Values for the European Union Environmental Footprint, Part II.

Authors:  Erwan Saouter; Deidre Wolff; Fabrizio Biganzoli; Donald Versteeg
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 2.992

6.  Exposure and Toxicity Characterization of Chemical Emissions and Chemicals in Products: Global Recommendations and Implementation in USEtox.

Authors:  Peter Fantke; Weihsueh A Chiu; Lesa Aylward; Richard Judson; Lei Huang; Suji Jang; Todd Gouin; Lorenz Rhomberg; Nicolò Aurisano; Thomas McKone; Olivier Jolliet
Journal:  Int J Life Cycle Assess       Date:  2021-04-05       Impact factor: 4.141

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.