Anneke Wegener Sleeswijk

GLOBOX : A spatially differentiated global fate, intake and effect model for toxicity assessment in LCA

GLOBOX is a model for the calculation of spatially differentiated LCA toxicity characterisation factors on a global scale. It can also be used for human and environmental risk assessment. The GLOBOX model contains equations for the calculation of fate, intake and effect factors, and equations for the calculation of LCA characterisation factors for human toxicity and ecotoxicity. The model is differentiated on the level of 239 countries/territories and 50 seas/oceans. Each region has its own set of homogeneous compartments, and the regions are interconnected by atmospheric and aquatic flows. Multimedia transport and degradation calculations are largely based on the EUSES 2.0 multimedia model, and are supplemented by specific equations to account for the advective air and water transport between different countries and/or seas. Metal-specific equations are added to account for speciation in fresh and marine surface water. Distribution parameters for multimedia transport equations are differentiated per country or sea with respect to geographic features, hydrology, and climate. The model has been tested with nitrobenzene as a test chemical, for emissions to all countries in the world. Spatially differentiated characterisation factors turn out to show wide ranges of variation between countries, especially for releases to inland water and soil compartments. Geographic position, distribution of lakes and rivers and variations in environmental temperature and rain rate are decisive parameters for a number of different characterisation factors. Population density and dietary intake play central roles in the variation of characterisation factors for human toxicity. Among the countries that show substantial deviations from average values of the characterisation factors are not only small and remote islands, but also countries with a significant economic production rate, as indicated by their GDPs. It is concluded that spatial differentiation between countries is an important step forward with respect to the improvement of LCA toxicity characterisation factors.

Similarities, Differences and Synergisms Between HERA and LCA—An Analysis at Three Levels

ABSTRACT Linkages between Human and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be analyzed at three levels: the basic equations to describe environmental behavior and dose-response relationships of chemicals; the overall model structure of these tools; and the applications of the tools. At level 1 few differences exist: both tools use essentially the same fate and effect models, including their coefficients and data. At level 2 distinctive differences emerge: regional or life-cycle perspective, emission pulses or fluxes, scope of chemicals and types of impacts, use of characterization factors, spatial and temporal detail, aggregation of effects, and the functional unit as basis of the assessment. Although the two tools typically differ in all these aspects, only the functional unit issue renders the tools fundamentally different, expressing itself also in some main characteristics of the modeling structure. This impedes full integration, which is underpinned in mathematical terms. At level 3 the aims of the tools are complementary: quantified risk estimates of chemicals for HERA versus quantified product assessment for LCA. Here, beneficial synergism is possible between the two tools, as illustrated by some cases. These also illustrate that where full integration is suggested, in practice this is not achieved, thus in fact supporting the conclusions.

6th SETAC-Europe Meeting: LCA - Selected Papers uses

Most former methods for the impact assessment of toxic releases in LCA gave a relative yardstick for the potential toxic effect of a substance, with no allowance being made for intermedia transport and degradation. These factors may be of major influence on the degree of (eco)toxic effects to be expected. As part of its work on substance policy, RIVM has developed a computer model calledUniform System for the Evaluation of Substances (USES) to assess, as realistically as possible, the degree to which the no-effect level is transgressed in practice. This model makes allowances for the fate of substances in the environment.An important offspring of the project is not only that substance assessment has been linked to the LCA method, but also that it shows LCA users how they can establish the LCA equivalency factors for the (eco)toxicity of “unknown” substances by themselves, and how they can recalculate the equivalency factors that were reported from the project. This last point is particularly of interest because the new list of equivalency factors suffers from serious uncertainties due to data gaps.Lastly, some future perspectives as to further modelling activities is discussed, in particular with respect to a generic fate model for all emission-related impact types.

Modelling fate for LCA

Until now, impact assessment within LCA has mainly focussed on the substance hazard for some impacts, whereas, for other impacts, substance fate is included in the assessment as well. The main goal of this paper is to define the position of fate modelling in LCIA, and to specify the requirements for a general LCA fate model. A proposal is made to clearly distinguish an impact-category independent fate analysis from a separate exposure analysis and an impact-category related impact analysis, and to use a global multimedia model as a modelling basis. This modelling basis might be supplemented with substance-specific models for a number of substances.