Roland Hischier

Life cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials: State of the art and strategies to overcome existing gaps

The use of engineered nanomaterials offers advantages as well as disadvantages from a sustainability perspective. It is important to identify such points as early as possible in order to be able to build on existing strengths, while counteracting disadvantages. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a suitable method to assess the environmental performance of a product or process. But so far studies applying LCA to the area of nanotechnology have been scarce. One reason might be that the LCA framework has a whole list of issues that need further precision in order to be applicable to nanotechnologies: system boundaries and a functional unit have to be chosen in a way that allows one to do a comparison of equal functionalities; adequate and comprehensive life cycle inventory data for engineered nanomaterials are the key on the level of inventory analysis; and the impact assessment step requires a clear definition of the degree of detail on the level of nanoparticle emissions. The LCA studies existing thus far in the area of nanotechnology have barely begun to cover all these aspects. Thus, in order to improve the current situation, the authors propose to go ahead in each of the LCA stages as far as scientific advances allow. For the inventory modelling this means e.g. that comprehensive, transparently documented and quality ensured data of the most important engineered nanomaterials should be collected and made available in a widely-accepted format. Concerning nanoparticle emissions, as many parameters as possible have to be collected pertaining to the production, use, and the disposal phase of these engineered nanomaterials. Furthermore, on the level of impact assessment, relevant physical characteristics have to be identified for a toxicity assessment of nanoparticles and a consensus has to be found for a limited but sufficient number of independent parameters influencing toxicity to be collected.

Life cycle assessment of post-consumer plastics production from waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) treatment residues in a Central European plastics recycling plant

Plastics play an increasingly important role in reaching the recovery and recycling rates defined in the European WEEE Directive. In a recent study we have determined the life cycle environmental impacts of post-consumer plastics production from mixed, plastics-rich WEEE treatment residues in the Central European plant of a market-leading plastics recycler, both from the perspective of the customers delivering the residues and the customers buying the obtained post-consumer recycled plastics. The results of our life cycle assessments, which were extensively tested with sensitivity analyses, show that from both perspectives plastics recycling is clearly superior to the alternatives considered in this study (i.e. municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) and virgin plastics production). For the three ReCiPe endpoint damage categories, incineration in an MSWI plant results in an impact exceeding that of the examined plastics recycling facility each by about a factor of 4, and the production of virgin plastics has an impact exceeding that of the post-consumer recycled (PCR) plastics production each by a factor of 6-10. On a midpoint indicator level the picture is more differentiated, showing that the environmental impacts of the recycling options are lower by 50% and more for almost all impact factors. While this provides the necessary evidence for the environmental benefits of plastics recycling compared to existing alternatives, it can, however, not be taken as conclusive evidence. To be conclusive, future research will have to address the fate of hazardous substances in the outputs of such recycling systems in more detail.

Environmental impacts of an international conference

A conference in the conventional form is a very resource-demanding process with considerable environmental impacts. As the host of the 15th International Environmental Informatics Symposium, held in Zurich, October 10–12, 2001, EMPA assessed the effectiveness of different measures to reduce the environmental impact of the conference using the life cycle assessment (LCA) method. During the preparation of the conference, we considered the following measures to make the symposium more ‘‘environmentally friendly’’:

Life cycle assessment of facade coating systems containing manufactured nanomaterials

Nanotechnologies are expected to hold considerable potential for the development of new materials in the construction sector. Up to now the environmental benefits and risks of products containing manufactured nanomaterials (MNM) have been quantified only to a limited extent. This study aims to assess the potential environmental, health and safety impacts of coatings containing MNM using Life-cycle assessment: Do paints containing MNM result in a better environmental performance than paints not containing MNM? The study shows that the results depend on a number of factors: (i) The MNM have to substitute an (active) ingredient of the initial paint composition and not simply be an additional ingredient. (ii) The new composition has to extend the lifetime of the paint for such a time period that the consumption of paint along the life cycle of a building is reduced. (iii) Releases of MNM have to be reduced to the lowest level possible (in particular by dumping unused paint together with the packaging). Only when all these boundary conditions are fulfilled, which is the case only for one of the three paint systems examined, is an improved environmental performance of the MNM-containing paint possible for the paint compositions examined in this study.

Framework for LCI modelling of releases of manufactured nanomaterials along their life cycle

PurposeNumerous publications in the last years stressed the growing importance of nanotechnology in our society, highlighting both positive as well as in the negative topics. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is amongst the most established and best-developed tool in the area of product-related assessment. In order to use this tool in the area of nanotechnology, clear rules of how emissions of nanomaterials should be taken into account on the level of life cycle inventory (LCI) modelling are required—i.e. what elements and properties need to be reported for an emission of a nanomaterial. The objective of this paper is to describe such a framework for an adequate and comprehensive integration of releases of nanomaterials.MethodsWith a three-step method, additional properties are identified that are necessary for an adequate integration of releases of nanomaterials into LCA studies.Result and discussionIn the first step, a comprehensive characterisation of the release of a nanomaterial is compiled—based on reviewing scientific publications, results from expert workshops and publications from public authorities and international organisations. In the second step, this comprehensive overview is refined to a list containing only those properties that are effectively relevant for LCA studies—i.e. properties that influence the impacts in the areas of human toxicity and ecotoxicity, respectively. For this, an academic approach is combined with a second, more practical, view point, resulting together in a prioritisation of this list of properties. Finally, in a third step, these findings are translated into the LCA language—by showing how such additional properties could be integrated into the current LCA data formats for a broader use by the LCA community.ConclusionsAs a compromise between scholarly knowledge and the (toxicological) reality, this paper presents a clear proposal of an LCI modelling framework for the integration of releases of nanomaterials in LCA studies. However, only the broad testing of this framework in various situations will show if the suggested simplifications and reductions keep the characterisation of releases of nanomaterials specific enough and/or if assessment is accurate enough. Therefore, a next step has to come from the impact assessment, by the development of characterisation factors as a function of size and shape of such releases.

LICARA nanoSCAN - A tool for the self-assessment of benefits and risks of nanoproducts

The fast penetration of nanoproducts on the market under conditions of significant uncertainty of their environmental properties and risks to humans creates a need for companies to assess sustainability of their products. Evaluation of the potential benefits and risks to build a coherent story for communication with clients, authorities, consumers, and other stakeholders is getting to be increasingly important, but SMEs often lack the knowledge and expertise to assess risks and communicate them appropriately. This paper introduces LICARA nanoSCAN, a modular web based tool that supports SMEs in assessing benefits and risks associated with new or existing nanoproducts. This tool is unique because it is scanning both the benefits and risks over the nanoproducts life cycle in comparison to a reference product with a similar functionality in order to enable the development of sustainable and competitive nanoproducts. SMEs can use data and expert judgment to answer mainly qualitative and semi-quantitative questions as a part of tool application. Risks to public, workers and consumers are assessed, while the benefits are evaluated for economic, environmental and societal opportunities associated with the product use. The tool provides an easy way to visualize results as well as to identify gaps, missing data and associated uncertainties. The LICARA nanoSCAN has been positively evaluated by several companies and was tested in a number of case studies. The tool helps to develop a consistent and comprehensive argument on the weaknesses and strengths of a nanoproduct that may be valuable for the communication with authorities, clients and among stakeholders in the value chain. LICARA nanoSCAN identifies areas for more detailed assessments, product design improvement or application of risk mitigation measures.

Evaluating the sustainability of electronic media: Strategies for life cycle inventory data collection and their implications for LCA results

This paper compares two Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies independently carried out to assess the environmental impacts of electronic versus print media. Although the two studies lead to the same ...

Human health characterization factors of nano-TiO2 for indoor and outdoor environments

PurposeThe increasing use of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) in industrial applications and consumer products is leading to an inevitable release of these materials into the environment. This makes it necessary to assess the potential risks that these new materials pose to human health and the environment. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology has been recognized as a key tool for assessing the environmental performance of nanoproducts. Until now, the impacts of ENMs could not be included in LCA studies due to a lack of characterization factors (CFs). This paper provides a methodological framework for identifying human health CFs for ENMs.MethodsThe USEtox™ model was used to identify CFs for assessing the potential carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects on human health caused by ENM emissions in both indoor (occupational settings) and outdoor environments. Nano-titanium dioxide (nano-TiO2) was selected for defining the CFs in this study, as it is one of the most commonly used ENMs. For the carcinogenic effect assessment, a conservative approach was adopted; indeed, a critical dose estimate for pulmonary inflammation was assumed.Results and discussionWe propose CFs for nano-TiO2 from 5.5E−09 to 1.43E−02 cases/kgemitted for both indoor and outdoor environments and for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects.ConclusionsThese human health CFs for nano-TiO2 are an important step toward the comprehensive application of LCA methodology in the field of nanomaterial technology.

Guidelines for consistent reporting of exchanges/to nature within life cycle inventories (LCI)

Data availability and data quality are still critical factors for successful LCA work. The SETAC-Europe LCA Working Group ‘Data Availability and Data Quality’ has therefore focused on ongoing developments toward a common data exchange format, public databases and accepted quality measures to find science-based solutions than can be widely accepted. A necessary prerequisite for the free flow and exchange of life cycle inventory (LCI) data and the comparability of LCIs is the consistent definition, nomenclature, and use of inventory parameters. This is the main subject of the subgroup ‘Recommended List of Exchanges’ that presents its results and findings here:•Rigid parameter lists for LCIs are not practical; especially, compulsory lists of measurements for all inventories are counterproductive. Instead, practitioners should be obliged to give the rationale for their scientific choice of selected and omitted parameters. The standardized (not: mandatory!) parameter list established by the subgroup can help to facilitate this.•The standardized nomenclature of LCI parameters and the standardized list of measurement bases (units) for these parameters need not be appliedinternally (e.g. in LCA software), but should be adhered to inexternal communications (data for publication and exchange). Deviations need to be clearly stated.•Sum parameters may or may not overlap - misinterpretations in either direction introduce a bias of unknown significance in the subsequent life cycle impact assessments (LCIA). The only person who can discriminate unambiguously is the practitioner who measures or calculates such values. Therefore, a clear statement of independence or overlap is necessary for every sum parameter reported.•Sum parameters should be only used when the group of emissions as such is measured. Individually measured emission parameters should not be hidden in group or sum parameters.•Problematic substances (such as carcinogens, ozone depleting agents and the like) maynever be obscured in group emissions (together with less harmful substances or with substances of different environmental impact), butmust be determined and reported individually, as mentioned in paragraph 3.3 of this article.•Mass and energy balances should be carried out on a unit process level. Mass balances should be done on the level of the entire mass flow in a process as well as on the level of individual chemical elements.•Whenever possible, practitioners should try to fill data gaps with their knowledge of analogous processes, environmental expert judgements, mass balance calculations, worst case assumptions or similar estimation procedures.

The Transition from Desktop Computers to Tablets: A Model for Increasing Resource Efficiency

Sales statistics of computing devices show that users are not replacing units one by one, but rather adding additional devices to their hardware portfolios. This chapter describes the outcomes of a first attempt to quantify the ecological implications of changes in the use of ICT hardware for computing services by using LCA and applying three different perspectives ranging from individual devices to global sales of desktop, laptop, and tablet computers. In particular, it addresses the question of which effect actually predominates: the increase in efficiency induced by the emergence of new technologies or the growing energy consumption due to an increased number of devices combined with a higher utilization rate by individual users. The comparison shows a clear reduction of the environmental impact per hour of active use; and the smaller the device, the smaller the impact due to the active use of the device. However, when the evolution in the use of these kinds of devices is taken into account as well, the picture changes. The calculations show that the higher in-use efficiency of individual devices is fully compensated by the efforts for the production of the increasing number of devices in use, without even considering increased use time. If increased use intensity is assumed as well, a clear increase of the overall impact per day can be observed.