Uncertainty in multi-media fate and transport models: a case study for TNT life cycle assessment.

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an evaluation method used by decision-makers to help assess the relative environmental impacts of various industrial processes. Despite that many LCA methods remain sensitive to uncertain input data, which can reduce the utility of their results, uncertainty arising from constituent LCA models remains poorly understood. Here, we begin to address this problem by evaluating the extent to which parameter-value uncertainty affects the SimpleBox 2.0 fate and transport model, which serves as a backbone for many LCA ecotoxicological impact categories. Two Monte Carlo type sampling methods were used to evaluate dispersion in steady-state concentration values for three chemicals involved in grenade production: toluene, 2,4-dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT), and 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT). Parameters were first sampled stochastically one-at-a-time, then by randomly exploring a local patch of the parameter space. We confirmed that global temperatures contribute primarily to the overall variance of model results, which at most spanned approximately 8 decades in magnitude. These results are consistent with previous results obtained for the whole of the LCA method. LCA methods carry out calculations iteratively; a reduction in the error of a single component, such as the fate and transport model, may therefore improve its performance and utility as a decision-making aid.

[1]  J. Sangster,et al.  Octanol‐Water Partition Coefficients of Simple Organic Compounds , 1989 .

[2]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Do we need a paradigm shift in life cycle impact assessment? , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment , 1999 .

[4]  Eddie Schrevens,et al.  Parameter uncertainty in LCA: stochastic sampling under correlation , 2010 .

[5]  Mark A J Huijbregts,et al.  Including ecotoxic impacts on warm‐blooded predators in life cycle impact assessment , 2012, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[6]  Elisabeth Hochschorner,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of a PFHE Shell Grenade , 2004 .

[7]  L. Phillips.  A theory of requisite decision models , 1984 .

[8]  David Pennington,et al.  Spatial differentiation of chemical removal rates from air in life cycle impact assessment , 2011 .

[9]  Frank Wania,et al.  A global distribution model for persistent organic chemicals , 1995 .

[10]  Mark A J Huijbregts,et al.  Quantifying the trade-off between parameter and model structure uncertainty in life cycle impact assessment. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[11]  W. Shiu,et al.  A critical review of Henry’s law constants for chemicals of environmental interest , 1981 .

[12]  Jennifer Seed,et al.  Meeting The Common Needs of a More Effective and Efficient Testing and Assessment Paradigm for Chemical Risk Management , 2010, Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews.

[13]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment. Part I: calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate, exposure and effects model USES-LCA. , 2000, Chemosphere.

[14]  Manuele Margni,et al.  Spatial variability of intake fractions for Canadian emission scenarios: a comparison between three resolution scales. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Shang-Lien Lo,et al.  Quantifying and reducing uncertainty in life cycle assessment using the Bayesian Monte Carlo method. , 2005, The Science of the total environment.

[16]  T. Seager,et al.  Coupling multi-criteria decision analysis, life-cycle assessment, and risk assessment for emerging threats. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[17]  Michael A. Major.  Octanol Water Partition Coefficients of Surface and Ground Water Contaminants Found at Military Installations , 1989 .

[18]  A. Horvath,et al.  Assessing regional intake fractions in North America. , 2009, The Science of the total environment.

[19]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Decision analysis: practice and promise , 1988 .

[20]  Jonathan I Levy,et al.  Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment , 2010, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[21]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  James S. Chickos,et al.  Estimating Solid-Liquid Phase Change Enthalpies and Entropies , 1999 .

[23]  Frank Wania,et al.  Assessing the long‐range transport potential of polybrominated diphenyl ethers: A comparison of four multimedia models , 2003, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[24]  Regina M. Murphy.  Introduction to Chemical Processes: Principles, Analysis, Synthesis , 2005 .

[25]  Ad M J Ragas,et al.  Model and input uncertainty in multi-media fate modeling: benzo[a]pyrene concentrations in Europe. , 2008, Chemosphere.

[26]  J. William Owens,et al.  LCA impact assessment categories , 1996 .

[27]  Donald W. Scott,et al.  TOLUENE: THERMODYNAMIC PROPERTIES, MOLECULAR VIBRATIONS, AND INTERNAL ROTATION , 1962 .

[28]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Coupling Multicriteria Decision Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Nanomaterials , 2008 .

[29]  Zachary A. Collier,et al.  Risk-based standards: integrating top–down and bottom–up approaches , 2014, Environment Systems and Decisions.

[30]  Ming-Lung Hung,et al.  Quantifying system uncertainty of life cycle assessment based on Monte Carlo simulation , 2008 .

[31]  Brandes Lj,et al.  SimpleBox 2.0: a nested multimedia fate model forevaluating the environmental fate of chemicals , 1996 .

[32]  Paul Mushak,et al.  Hormesis and Its Place in Nonmonotonic Dose–Response Relationships: Some Scientific Reality Checks , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[33]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  Part II: Dealing with parameter uncertainty and uncertainty due to choices in life cycle assessment , 1998 .

[34]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  Assessing the Relative Importance of Spatial Variability in Emissions Versus Landscape Properties in Fate Models for Environmental Exposure Assessment of Chemicals , 2012, Environmental Modeling & Assessment.

[35]  Richard D. Deveaux,et al.  Applied Smoothing Techniques for Data Analysis , 1999, Technometrics.

[36]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  Development of regional characterization factors for aquatic eutrophication , 2009 .

[37]  Ingemar Wadsö,et al.  Calorimetric determination of enthalpies of solution of slightly soluble liquids II. Enthalpy of solution of some hydrocarbons in water and their use in establishing the temperature dependence of their solubilities , 1976 .

[38]  H. V. Kehiaian,et al.  Enthalpies of vaporization of organic compounds : a critical review and data compilation , 1985 .

[39]  David Evans,et al.  How LCA studies deal with uncertainty , 2002 .

[40]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  Uncertainty calculation in life cycle assessments , 2004 .

[41]  Anna Björklund,et al.  Survey of approaches to improve reliability in lca , 2002 .

[42]  Walter Klöpffer,et al.  Multicompartmental fate of persistent substances , 2007, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[43]  T E McKone,et al.  A Systematic Uncertainty Analysis of an Evaluative Fate and Exposure Model , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.