Abstract
Although technological and environmental benefits are important stimuli for nanotechnology development, these technologies have been contested from an environmental point of view. The steady growth of applications of engineered nanomaterials has heated up the debate on quantifying the environmental repercussions. The two main scientific methods to address these environmental repercussions are risk assessment and life-cycle assessment. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these methods, and the relation between them, have been a topic of debate in the world of traditional chemistry for over two decades. Here we review recent developments in this debate in general and for the emerging field of nanomaterials specifically. We discuss the pros and cons of four schools of thought for combining and integrating risk assessment and life-cycle assessment and conclude with a plea for action.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
World Nanomaterials to 2016 — Industry Market Research, Market Share, Market Size, Sales, Demand Forecast, Market Leaders, Company Profiles, Industry Trends (Freedonia, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2txlQlU
Future Challenges Related to the Safety of Manufactured Nanomaterials: Report from the Special Session (OECD, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2spcMz5
Meyer, D. E., Curran, M. A. & Gonzalez, M. A. An examination of silver nanoparticles in socks using screening-level life cycle assessment. J. Nanopart. Res. 13, 147–156 (2011).
Toumey, C. Quick lessons on environmental nanotech. Nat. Nanotech. 10, 566–567 (2015).
Meyer, D. E., Curran, M. A. & Gonzalez, M. A. An examination of existing data for the industrial manufacture and use of nanocomponents and their role in the life cycle impact of nanoproducts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 1256–1263 (2009).
Hicks, A. L. & Theis, T. L. A comparative life cycle assessment of commercially available household silver-enabled polyester textiles. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22, 256–265 (2016).
Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 Concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (European Parliament, Council of the European Union, 2006); http://go.nature.com/2sYN1EA
Toxic Substances Control Act (US Congress, 2002); http://www.epw.senate.gov/tsca.pdf
Assessing and Managing Chemicals under TSCA (EPA, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2sYKmKX
Walser, T., Demou, E., Lang, D. J. & Hellweg, S. Prospective environmental life cycle assessment of nanosilver t-shirts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 4570–4578 (2011).
Saha, A., Saha, D. & Ranu, B. C. Copper nano-catalyst: sustainable phenyl-selenylation of aryl iodides and vinyl bromides in water under ligand free conditions. Org. Biomol. Chem. 7, 1652–1657 (2009).
Polshettiwar, V. & Varma, R. S. Green chemistry by nano-catalysis. Green Chem. 12, 743–754 (2010).
Wang, S. et al. Motion charged battery as sustainable flexible-power-unit. ACS Nano 7, 11263–11271 (2013).
Owens, J. W. Life-cycle assessment in relation to risk assessment: An evolving perspective. Risk Anal. 17, 359–365 (1997).
Olsen, S. I. et al. Life cycle impact assessment and risk assessment of chemicals — A methodological comparison. Environ. Impact Assess. 21, 385–404 (2001).
Udo de Haes, H. A., Wegener Sleeswijk, A. & Heijungs, R. Similarities, differences and synergisms between HERA and LCA — An analysis at three levels. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12, 431–449 (2006).
van Leeuwen, C. J. & Hermens, J. L. M. Risk Assessment of Chemicals: An Introduction (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995).
Paustenbach, D. The practice of health risk assessment in the United States (1975–1995): How the U. S. and other countries can benefit from that experience. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 1, 29–79 (1995).
Boersema, J. J. & Reijnders, L. Principles of Environmental Sciences Ch. 12 (Springer 2009).
Sperber, W. H. Hazard identification: From a quantitative to a qualitative approach. Food Control 12, 223–228 (2001).
Ropeik, D. & Gray, G. M. Risk: A Practical Guide for Deciding What's Really Safe and What's Really Dangerous in the World Around You (Houghton Mifflin, 2002).
Savolainen, K. et al. Nanosafety 2015–2025: Towards Safe and Sustainable Nanomaterial and Nanotechnology Innovations (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, 2013).
Mihelcic, J. R. & Zimmerman, J. B. Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design (Wiley, 2014).
Hua, J., Vijver, M. G., Chen, G., Richardson, M. K. & Peijnenburg, W. J. G. M. Dose metrics assessment for differently shaped and sized metal-based nanoparticles. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35, 2466–2473 (2016).
Regulatory Aspects of Nanomaterials (European Commission, 2017); http://go.nature.com/2sYEuBl
Second Regulatory Review on Nanomaterials (European Commission, 2017); http://go.nature.com/2trJe3A
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework ISO 14040:2016 (ISO, 2006).
Hauschild, M. Z. & Huijbregts, M. A. J. Selection of Impact Categories and Classification of LCI Results to Impact Categories Ch. 2 (Springer, 2014).
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines ISO 14040:2016 (ISO, 2006).
Frankl, P. & Rubik, F. Life Cycle Assessment in Industry and Business Ch. 5 (Springer, 2000).
Vink, E. T. H., Rábago, K. R., Glassner, D. A. & Gruber, P. R. Applications of life cycle assessment to NatureWorks polylactide (PLA) production. Polym. Degrad. Stabil. 80, 403–419 (2003).
Clift, R. & Druckman, A. (eds) Taking Stock of Industrial Ecology Ch. 15 (Springer, 2015).
Clift, R. Life cycle assessment and ecolabelling. J. Clean. Prod. 1, 155–159 (1993).
The International Environmental Product Declaration System (EPD, 2017); http://www.environdec.com/
European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on Packaging and Packaging Waste (European Parliament, Council of the European Union, 1994); http://go.nature.com/2stX2Gm
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (US Congress, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2txKouN
Matthews, S. H., Hendrickson, C. & Weber, C. L. The importance of carbon footprint estimation boundaries. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 5839–5842 (2008).
Sorensen, B. The role of life-cycle analysis in risk assessment. Int. J. Environ. Pollut. 6, 729–746 (1996).
Tukker, A. Risk analysis, life cycle assessment — the common challenge of dealing with the precautionary frame (based on the toxicity controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands). Risk Anal. 22, 821–831 (2002).
Boize, M. et al. Relevance of life cycle analysis (LCA) for assessing health impacts: Comparison with quantitative health risk assessments (QHRA). Envir. Risques Sante 7, 265–277 (2008).
Breedveld, L. Combining LCA and RA for the integrated risk management of emerging technologies. J. Risk Res. 16, 459–468 (2013).
Kobayashi, Y., Peters, G. M. & Khan, S. J. Towards more holistic environmental impact assessment: hybridisation of life cycle assessment and quantitative risk assessment. Procedia CIRP 29, 378–383 (2015).
Guinée, J. B. & Heijungs, R. A proposal for the classification of toxic substances within the framework of life cycle assessment of products. Chemosphere 26, 1925–1944 (1993). This paper presents the first example of the 'knowledge integration' school of thought.
Guinée, J. B. et al. USES uniform system for the evaluation of substances. Inclusion of fate in LCA characterisation of toxic releases applying USES 1.0. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1, 133–138 (1996).
Hauschild, M. & Wenzel, H. Environmental Assessment of Products Vol. 2 (Chapman & Hall, 1998).
Huijbregts, M. A. J. 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. Chemosphere 41, 541–573 (2000).
Bennett, D. H., Margni, M. D., McKone, T. E. & Jolliet, O. Intake fraction for multimedia pollutants: a tool for life cycle analysis and comparative risk assessment. Risk Anal. 22, 905–918 (2002).
Gandhi, N. et al. New method for calculating comparative toxicity potential of cationic metals in rreshwater: application to copper, nickel and zinc. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 5195–5201 (2010).
van Zelm, R., Huijbregts, M. A. J. & van de Meent, D. Transformation products in the life cycle impact assessment of chemicals. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 1004–1009 (2010).
Potting, J. & Hauschild, M. Spatial differentiation in life-cycle assessment via the site-dependent characterisation of environmental impact from emissions. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2, 209–216 (1997).
Bellekom, S., Potting, J. & Benders, R. Feasibility of applying site-dependent impact assessment of acidification in LCA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 11, 417–424 (2006).
Azevedo, L. B., Henderson, A. D., van Zelm, R., Jolliet, O. & Huijbregts, M. A. J. Assessing the importance of spatial variability versus model choices in life cycle impact assessment: the case of freshwater eutrophication in Europe. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 13565–13570 (2013).
Wegener Sleeswijk, A. Regional LCA in a global perspective. A basis for spatially differentiated environmental life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass. 16, 106–122 (2011).
Hellweg, S. & Milài Canals, L. Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science 344, 1109–1113 (2014).
Posthuma, L., Suter, G. W. II & Traas, T. P. Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology (CRC Press, 2002).
Harder, R., Heimersson, S., Svanström, M. & Peters, G. M. Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment of wastewater management. 1. Estimating the burden of disease associated with pathogens. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 9438–9445 (2014).
Heimersson, S., Harder, R., Peters, G. M. & Svanström, M. Including pathogen risk in life cycle assessment of wastewater management. 2. Quantitative comparison of pathogen risk to other impacts on human health. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 9446–9453 (2014).
Assies, J. A. A risk-based approach to life-cycle impact assessment. J. Hazard. Mater. 61, 23–29 (1998).
Sonnemann, G., Castells, F. & Schuhmacher, M. Integrated Life-Cycle and Risk Assessment for Industrial Processes Ch. 6 (CRC Press, 2004).
Harder, R., Holmquist, H., Molander, S., Svanstrom, M. & Peters, G. M. Review of environmental assessment case studies blending elements of risk assessment and life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 13083–13093 (2015).
Guinée, J. B. et al. Human and ecological life cycle tools for the integrated assessment of systems (HELIAS). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 11, 19–28 (2006).
Bare, J. C. Risk assessment and life-cycle impact assessment (LCIA) for human health cancerous and noncancerous emissions: Integrated and complementary with consistency within the USEPA. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12, 493–509 (2006).
Flemström, K., Carlson, R. & Erixon, M. Relationships Between Life Cycle Assessment and Risk Assessment — Potentials and Obstacles (Naturvardsverket, 2004).
Spina, F., Ioppolo, G., Salomone, R., Bart, J. C. J. & Milazzo, M. F. in Pathways to Environmental Sustainability (eds Salomone, R. & Saija, G.) 117–126 (Springer, 2014).
Vermeire, T. G., van der Zandt, P. T. J., Roelfzema, H. & Van Leeuwen, C. J. Uniform system for the evaluation of substances I — Principles and structure. Chemosphere 29, 23–38 (1994). This paper presents the first example of the 'chain perspective' school of thought.
Heijungs, R. Harmonization of methods for impact assessment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2, 217–224 (1995).
Potting, J., Schöpp, W., Blok, K. & Hauschild, M. Site-dependent life-cycle impact assessment of acidification. J. Ind. Ecol. 2, 63–87 (1998).
Carpenter, A. C., Gardner, K. H., Fopiano, J., Benson, C. H. & Edil, T. B. Life cycle based risk assessment of recycled materials in roadway construction. Waste Manage. 27, 1458–1464 (2007).
Wegener Sleeswijk, A. & Heijungs, R. GLOBOX: a spatially differentiated global fate, intake and effect model for toxicity assessment in LCA. Sci. Total Environ. 408, 2817–2832 (2010).
Pennington, D. W., Margni, M., Payet, J. & Jolliet, O. Risk and regulatory hazard-based toxicological effect indicators in life-cycle assessment (LCA). Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12, 450–475 (2006).
Guinée, J. B. et al. Evaluation of risks of metal flows and accumulation in economy and environment. Ecol. Econ. 30, 47–65 (1998).
Grieger, K. D. 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? J. Nanopart. Res. 14, 958 (2012).
Wardak, A., Gorman, M. E., Swami, N. & Deshpande, S. Identification of risks in the life-cycle of nanotechnology-based products. J. Ind. Ecol. 12, 435–448 (2008).
Willis, H. H. & Florig, H. K. Potential exposures and risks from beryllium-containing products. Risk Anal. 22, 1019–1033 (2002).
Shatkin, J. A. Informing environmental decision making by combining life cycle assessment and risk analysis. J. Ind. Ecol. 12, 278–281 (2008).
Shatkin J. A. Nanotechnology: Health and Environmental Risks Ch. 6 (CRC Press, 2012).
Shatkin, J. A. & Kim, B. Cellulose nanomaterials: life cycle risk assessment, and environmental health and safety roadmap. Environ. Sci. Nano 2, 477–499 (2015).
Shih, H. C. & Ma, H. W. Life cycle risk assessment of bottom ash reuse. J. Hazard. Mater. 190, 308–316 (2011).
Sharratt, P. N. & Choong, P. M. A life-cycle framework to analyse business risk in process industry projects. J. Clean. Prod. 10, 479–493 (2002). This paper can be considered as a first example of the 'RA for LCA hotspots' school of thought.
Socolof, M. L. & Geibig, J. R. Evaluating human and ecological impacts of a product life cycle: The complementary roles of life-cycle assessment and risk assessment. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12, 510–527 (2006).
Sweet, L. & Strohm, B. Nanotechnology — Life-cycle risk management. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12, 528–551 (2006).
Lim, S.-R., Lam, C. W. & Schoenung, J. M. Priority screening of toxic chemicals and industry sectors in the U. S. toxics release inventory: A comparison of the life cycle impact-based and risk-based assessment tools developed by U.S. EPA. J. Environ. Manage. 92, 2235–2240 (2011).
Kuczenski, B., Geyer, R. & Boughton, B. Tracking toxicants: Toward a life cycle aware risk assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 45–50 (2011).
Benetto, E., Tiruta-Barna, L. & Perrodin, Y. Combining lifecycle and risk assessments of mineral waste reuse scenarios for decision making support. Environ. Impact Assess. 27, 266–285 (2007). This paper presents the first example of the 'combining results' school of thought.
Linkov, I. et al. For nanotechnology decisions, use decision analysis. Nano Today 8, 5–10 (February, 2013).
Tsang, M. P., Bates, M. E., Madison, M. & Linkov, I. Benefits and risks of emerging technologies: Integrating life cycle assessment and decision analysis to assess lumber treatment alternatives. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 11543–11550 (2014).
Rotolo, D., Hicks, D. & Martin, B. R. What is an emerging technology? Res. Policy 44, 1827–1843 (2015).
Hischier, R. & Walser, T. Life cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials: state of the art and strategies to overcome existing gaps. Sci. Total Environ. 425, 271–282 (2012).
Klöpffer, W. et al. Nanotechnology and Life Cycle Assessment. A Systems Approach to Nanotechnology and the Environment (Technical University of Denmark, 2007); http://orbit.dtu.dk/files/3374746/NanoLCA_3.07.pdf
Vaseashta, A. Life Cycle Analysis of Nanoparticles — Risk, Assessment, and Sustainability (Destech, 2015).
Wender, B. A. et al. Illustrating anticipatory life cycle assessment for emerging photovoltaic technologies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 10531–10538 (2014).
Miller, S. A. & Keoleian, G. A. Framework for analyzing transformative technologies in life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 3067–3075 (2015).
Tecchio, P., Freni, P., De Benedetti, B. & Fenouillot, F. Ex-ante life cycle assessment approach developed for a case study on bio-based polybutylene succinate. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 316–325 (2016).
Villares, M., Işıldar, A., Mendoza Beltran, A. & Guinée, J. Applying an ex-ante life cycle perspective to metal recovery from e-waste using bioleaching. J. Clean. Prod. 129, 315–328 (2016).
Selck, H., Handy, R. D., Fernandes, T. F., Klaine, S. J. & Petersen, E. J. Nanomaterials in the aquatic environment: A European Union–United States perspective on the status of ecotoxicity testing, research priorities, and challenges ahead. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35, 1055–1067 (2016).
Adam, V., Loyaux-Lawniczak, S. & Quaranta, G. Characterization of engineered TiO2 nanomaterials in a life cycle and risk assessments perspective. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 11175–11192 (2015).
Pereira, S. R. & Coelho, M. C. Can nanomaterials be a solution for application on alternative vehicles? — A review paper on life cycle assessment and risk analysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energ. 40, 4969–4979 (2015).
Beck, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (Sage, 1992).
Swierstra, T. & Rip, A. Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. Nanoethics 1, 3–20 (2007).
Collingridge, D. The Social Control of Technology (St. Martin's Press, 1980).
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank L. Breedveld for helpful discussions while preparing this manuscript and L. van Oers for assistance with some of the figures.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information (PDF 239 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Vijver, M. et al. Setting the stage for debating the roles of risk assessment and life-cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials. Nature Nanotech 12, 727–733 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2017.135
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2017.135
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
Analytical methods for assessing antimicrobial activity of nanomaterials in complex media: advances, challenges, and perspectives
Journal of Nanobiotechnology (2023)
-
Environmental sustainability analysis of biofuels: a critical review of LCA studies
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy (2023)
-
High efficiency hierarchical porous composite microfiltration membrane for high-temperature particulate matter capturing
npj Materials Degradation (2021)
-
Ex ante life cycle assessment of GaAs/Si nanowire–based tandem solar cells: a benchmark for industrialization
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2020)