How suitable is LCA for nanotechnology assessment? Overview of current methodological pitfalls and potential solutions: 65th LCA Discussion Forum, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, May 24, 2017

The 65th Life Cycle Assessment Discussion Forum was held on May 24, 2017, to discuss the state of research and application with regard to nanotechnology. This conference report presents the highlights of the forum.While all presenters agreed on the relevance of the life cycle assessment (LCA) and risk assessment (RA) methods to offer valuable environmental sustainability assessment ofmanufactured nanomaterials (MNMs), a recurring theme during the forum was the continued lack of environmental data on the manufacturing, release and impacts of such MNMs. Different strategies and research pathways were proposed to tackle this dearth of representative data. The first session provided an overview of the current state-of-the-art in environmental assessment of MNMs from the perspective of regulation, industry and research. The main concern for all these stakeholders is to offer representative environmental assessment and avoid risks in a sector that is rapidly developing. System modellers then proposed, in the second session, different strategies to consider the current lack of knowledge (e.g. uncertainty and potential evolution) in representation ofMNMs production pathways. Prospective modelling, global sensitivity analysis and dynamic probabilistic methods were all shown to be relevant tools to deal with the scarce information. Presenters from the third session subsequently discussed the requirements of evaluating potential impacts (i.e. toxicity) of MNMs if they are released into the environment. Techniques for the characterisation of their effects were introduced, but the consideration of nano-specificities and a clear focus on a limited amount of MNMs were identified as major research challenges that still need attention. The final session then offered a review of how the RA method can be used to complement LCA studies and quantify adverse environmental and human health effects due to exposure at specific sites. All presentations from the 65th discussion forum are available for download (www.lcaforum.ch), and the video recordings can be watched online (http://www.video.ethz.ch/ events/lca/2017/spring/65th.html).

[1]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Indoor exposure to toluene from printed matter matters: complementary views from life cycle assessment and risk assessment. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  George Gray,et al.  An Approach to Integrating Occupational Safety and Health into Life Cycle Assessment: Development and Application of Work Environment Characterization Factors , 2015 .

[3]  Anna Maria Ferrari,et al.  Human health characterization factors of nano-TiO2 for indoor and outdoor environments , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[4]  Roland Hischier,et al.  Life cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials: state of the art and strategies to overcome existing gaps. , 2012, The Science of the total environment.

[5]  Konrad Hungerbühler,et al.  A network perspective reveals decreasing material diversity in studies on nanoparticle interactions with dissolved organic matter , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Riego Sintes Juan,et al.  NANoREG framework for the safety assessment of nanomaterials , 2017 .

[7]  Chris Yuan,et al.  Deriving characterization factors on freshwater ecotoxicity of graphene oxide nanomaterial for life cycle impact assessment , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[8]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Integrating Human Indoor Air Pollutant Exposure within Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[9]  Olivier Jolliet,et al.  Toward a general physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model for intravenously injected nanoparticles , 2016, International journal of nanomedicine.

[10]  Stig Irving Olsen,et al.  Freshwater ecotoxicity characterisation factor for metal oxide nanoparticles: a case study on titanium dioxide nanoparticle. , 2015, The Science of the total environment.

[11]  Steffen Foss Hansen,et al.  Development of Comparative Toxicity Potentials of TiO2 Nanoparticles for Use in Life Cycle Assessment. , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  L. Breedveld.  Combining LCA and RA for the integrated risk management of emerging technologies , 2013 .

[13]  Olivier Jolliet,et al.  Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling of polyethylene glycol-coated polyacrylamide nanoparticles in rats , 2014, Nanotoxicology.

[14]  Helmut Rechberger,et al.  Applying Fuzzy and Probabilistic Uncertainty Concepts to the Material Flow Analysis of Palladium in Austria , 2015 .

[15]  Beatrice Salieri,et al.  Most important factors of variability and uncertainty in an LCA study of nanomaterials – Findings from a case study with nano titanium dioxide , 2017 .

[16]  Jeroen B. Guinée,et al.  Applying an ex-ante life cycle perspective to metal recovery from e-waste using bioleaching , 2016 .

[17]  Cesar A. Barbero,et al.  Polyaniline nanoparticles for near-infrared photothermal destruction of cancer cells , 2015, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[18]  M. Villares.  Applying a life cycle perspective to research on metal recovery from electronic waste using bioleaching , 2015 .

[19]  Alexis Laurent,et al.  Analysis of current research addressing complementary use of life-cycle assessment and risk assessment for engineered nanomaterials: have lessons been learned from previous experience with chemicals? , 2012, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[20]  M. Eckelman,et al.  Integrating life cycle assessment into managing potential EHS risks of engineered nanomaterials: reviewing progress to date , 2015, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[21]  H. Norppa,et al.  Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials and nanotechnologies--a review. , 2010, Toxicology.

[22]  Christoph Studer,et al.  Sameness: The regulatory crux with nanomaterial identity and grouping schemes for hazard assessment. , 2015, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[23]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Environmental risk analysis for nanomaterials: Review and evaluation of frameworks , 2012, Nanotoxicology.

[24]  P. Padey,et al.  From LCAs to simplified models: a generic methodology applied to wind power electricity. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  Paolo Masoni,et al.  Combining life cycle assessment and qualitative risk assessment: the case study of alumina nanofluid production. , 2014, The Science of the total environment.

[26]  Tobias Walser,et al.  Combination of life cycle assessment, risk assessment and human biomonitoring to improve regulatory decisions and policy making for chemicals , 2017 .

[27]  R. Feynman.  There’s plenty of room at the bottom , 2011 .

[28]  Robin Girard,et al.  LCA of emerging technologies: addressing high uncertainty on inputs' variability when performing global sensitivity analysis. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[29]  Fadri Gottschalk,et al.  Stochastic fate analysis of engineered nanoparticles in incineration plants , 2014 .

[30]  Yoram Cohen,et al.  Simulation tool for assessing the release and environmental distribution of nanomaterials , 2015, Beilstein journal of nanotechnology.

[31]  Anneke Wegener Sleeswijk.  Regional LCA in a global perspective. A basis for spatially differentiated environmental life cycle assessment , 2011 .

[32]  Olivier Jolliet,et al.  Human health no-effect levels of TiO2 nanoparticles as a function of their primary size , 2017, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[33]  Wouter Fransman,et al.  LICARA nanoSCAN - A tool for the self-assessment of benefits and risks of nanoproducts. , 2016, Environment international.