Human Toxicity Potential

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 46287 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Edgar G Hertwich - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • An update of the Human Toxicity Potential with special consideration of conventional air pollutants
    2006
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    We present updated values for the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) of 349 pollutants. The HTP is a characterization method used to weight emissions, such as those listed in life-cycle inventories and ...

  • The Human Toxicity Potential and a strategy for evaluating model performance in life-cycle impact assessment
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2001
    Co-Authors: Thomas E Mckone, Edgar G Hertwich
    Abstract:

    LBNL - 48254 E RNEST O RLANDO L AWRENCE B ERKELEY N ATIONAL L ABORATORY The Human Toxicity Potential and a Strategy for Evaluating Model Performance in Life-Cycle Impact Assessment T.E. McKone and E.G. Hertwich Environmental Energy Technologies Division July 2001 This paper was prepared for publication in the Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Research Supported in part by: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory

  • The Human Toxicity Potential and a Strategy for Evaluating Model Performance in Life Cycle Impact Assessment
    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2001
    Co-Authors: Thomas E Mckone, Edgar G Hertwich
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) is a quantita tive toxic equivalency Potential (TEP) that has been introduced previously to express the Potential harm of a unit of chemical released into the environment. HTP includes both inherent Toxicity and generic source-to-dose relationships for pollutant emissions. Three issues associated with the use of HTP in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) are evaluated here. First is the use of regional multimedia models to define source-to-dose relationships for the HTP. Second is uncertainty and variability in sourceto-dose calculations. And third is model performance evaluation for TEP models. Using the HTP as a case study, we consider important sources of uncertainty/variability in the development of source-to-dose models — including parameter variability/uncertainty, model uncertainty, and decision rule uncertainty. Once sources of uncertainty are made explicit, a model performance evaluation is appropriate and useful and thus introduced. Model performance evaluation can illustrate the relative value of increasing model complexity, assembling more data, and/or providing a more explicit representation of uncertainty. This work reveals that an understanding of the uncertainty in TEPs as well as a model performance evaluation are needed to a) refine and target the assessment process and b) improve decision making.

  • Human Toxicity Potentials for life-cycle assessment and toxics release inventory risk screening.
    Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2001
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), a calculated index that reflects the Potential harm of a unit of chemical released into the environment, is based on both the inherent Toxicity of a compound and its Potential dose. It is used to weight emissions inventoried as part of a life-cycle assessment (LCA) or in the toxics release inventory (TRI) and to aggregate emissions in terms of a reference compound. Total emissions can be evaluated in terms of benzene equivalence (carcinogens) and toluene equivalents (noncarcinogens). The Potential dose is calculated using a generic fate and exposure model, CalTOX, which determines the distribution of a chemical in a model environment and accounts for a number of exposure routes, including inhalation, ingestion of produce, fish, and meat, and dermal contact with water and soil. Toxicity is represented by the cancer potency q1* for carcinogens and the safe dose (RfD, RfC) for noncarcinogens. This article presents cancer and noncancer HTP values for air and surface-water emissions of 330 compounds. This list covers 258 chemicals listed in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency TRI, or 79 weight-% of the TRI releases to air reported in 1997.

  • A decision-analytic framework for impact assessment part I: LCA and decision analysis
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2001
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, James K. Hammitt
    Abstract:

    Life-cycle assessments (LCAs) are conducted to satisfy the aspiration of decision makers to consider the environment in their decision making. This paper reviews decision analysis and discusses how it can be used to structure the assessment and to integrate characterization and valuation. The decision analytic concepts of objectives (goals) and attributes (indicators of the degree to which an objective is achieved) are used to describe steps of the assessment of the entire impact chain. Decision analysis distinguishes among different types of objectives and attributes; it describes how these relate to each other. Impact indicators such as the Human Toxicity Potential are constructed attributes. A means-ends objectives network can show how the different constructed attributes relate to the objective of protecting the environment. As LCA takes disparate environmental impacts into account, it needs to assess their relative importance. Trade-off methods in decision analysis are grouped into utility theory and multicriteria decision aids; they have different advantages and disadvantages, but are all more sophisticated than simple weighting. The performance of the different trade-off methods has not yet been tested in an LCA context. In the second part of the paper, we present criteria for the development of characterization methods.

Wenhua Piao - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Environmental analysis of three wastewater treatment plants based on the life cycle assessment
    IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2019
    Co-Authors: Zhuoran Wang, Mingji Jin, Wenhua Piao
    Abstract:

    Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology was applied to examine the environmental effects of three wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) with different size and processes located in northeast China. These WWTPs were assessed with acidification Potential (AP), eutrophication Potential (EP), global warming Potential (GWP), and Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) as environmental impact categories. Among the processes the wastewater treatment line had the greatest environmental impact for all plants and impact categories due to the electricity consumption in the aerobic reactor. And the highest environmental impacts observed in the S-WWTP that operated by A2O process.

  • life cycle assessment and economic efficiency analysis of integrated management of wastewater treatment plants
    Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016
    Co-Authors: Wenhua Piao
    Abstract:

    Abstract This paper evaluates several Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) processes, an integrated sludge management system, and waste sludge disposal methods in a large city based on life cycle analysis (LCA) and economic efficiency analysis (EEA) together. Among the three WWTP processes considered, the A2O process (S-WWTP) showed the lowest eutrophication Potential (EP) and global warming Potential (GWP), but the highest acidification Potential (AP) and Human Toxicity Potential (HTP). Simple integration of sludge treatment by combining two sludge treatment lines resulted in enhanced anaerobic digestion and production of less sludge. For final sludge disposal, incineration with integrated sludge management showed the highest reduction of life cycle impact analysis (LCIA) in all four categories. The simple integration of sludge management could reduce the sludge handling cost by 6.1%. As a final sludge disposal method, incineration with integration of sludge management was the most economic: reducing operation and management (O&M) cost by 33%. These results demonstrated that application of LCA and EEA would be a useful tool for optimizing an integrated sludge-management system. The proposed integrated sludge-management alternatives could provide a valuable example for managing several WWTPs in a large city.

Toyohisa Fujita - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • removal of arsenic from wastewater using iron compound comparing two different types of adsorbents in the context of lca
    Resources Conservation and Recycling, 2009
    Co-Authors: Gjergj Dodbiba, Teiji Nukaya, Yousuke Kamioka, Yuji Tanimura, Toyohisa Fujita
    Abstract:

    Abstract A study was carried out in order to compare the environmental performance of two different types of adsorbents in removing arsenic (As) from wastewater. A FeCl 3 -based adsorbent and a poly-Fe-based adsorbent were first synthesized and their abilities in adsorbing As from wastewater were investigated in terms of the adsorption density and the rate of adsorption. Here, it should be noted that the main material being used in the synthesis of the poly-Fe-based adsorbent was a waste product, known as polyferric sulfate or poly-Fe in short, which exits the manufacturing process of titanium dioxide. Both adsorbents were then compared in the context of life-cycle assessment (LCA). In other words, the experimental results (i.e. the value of the adsorption density and the rate of adsorption) were input into the LCA model in order to assess the environmental performance of each adsorbent in removing arsenic. An estimate for the environmental burden of each option was finally calculated as the sum of the depletion of abiotic resources (ADP), the global warming Potential (GWP), the acidification Potential (AP), the photo-oxidant formation Potential (POCP), the eutrophication Potential (EP), and the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP). The main finding of this study was that the adsorption of arsenic by using the poly-Fe-based adsorbent is more attractive treatment option in the environmental protection point of view than the adsorption by using the FeCl 3 -based adsorbent, which generates a relatively larger environmental burden.

  • the recycling of plastic wastes from discarded tv sets comparing energy recovery with mechanical recycling in the context of life cycle assessment
    Journal of Cleaner Production, 2008
    Co-Authors: Gjergj Dodbiba, Kunihiko Takahashi, Jun Sadaki, Toyohisa Fujita
    Abstract:

    Abstract Two treatment options, i.e. energy recovery and mechanical recycling of plastic wastes from discarded TV sets, were compared in the context of life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. An estimate for the environmental burden of each option was calculated as the sum of the depletion of abiotic resources (ADP), the global warming Potential (GWP), the acidification Potential (AP), the photo-oxidant formation Potential (POCP), the eutrophication Potential (EP), and the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP). After calculating the environmental burden of each treatment option, a sensitivity analysis was conducted. The ultimate aim was to indicate which parameters of the system have the strongest influence on the results of the LCA in order to find ways for lowering the environmental burden, and ultimately suggest a “design strategy” for TV sets. The main finding of this study was that mechanical recycling of plastics is more attractive treatment option in environmental terms than incineration for energy recovery, which generates a larger environmental burden. Finally, based on the results of sensitivity analysis, a “design strategy” was suggested, i.e. reducing the number of plastic types being used in the manufacturing process of TVs – preferably excluding the PVC.

Thomas E Mckone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • An update of the Human Toxicity Potential with special consideration of conventional air pollutants
    2006
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    We present updated values for the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) of 349 pollutants. The HTP is a characterization method used to weight emissions, such as those listed in life-cycle inventories and ...

  • confronting workplace exposure to chemicals with lca examples of trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene in metal degreasing and dry cleaning
    Environmental Science & Technology, 2005
    Co-Authors: Stefanie Hellweg, Thomas E Mckone, Evangelia Demou, Martin Scheringer, Konrad Hungerbuhler
    Abstract:

    Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) aims to assess all environmental impacts “from cradle to grave”. Nevertheless, existing methods for Life-Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) generally do not consider impacts from chemical exposure at the workplace. This is a severe drawback, because neglecting occupational health effects may result in product or process optimizations at the expense of workers' health. We adapt an existing LCIA method to consider occupational health effects from the use of perchloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) in dry cleaning and metal degreasing. The results show that, in applications such as metal degreasing and dry cleaning, long-term (steady-state) concentrations at the workplace are up to 6 orders of magnitude higher than ambient air levels. Legal threshold values may be exceeded, depending on machine technology, size, and surrounding working conditions. The impact from workplace exposure to the total Human-Toxicity Potential of the complete life cycle of PCE and TCE (including us...

  • The Human Toxicity Potential and a strategy for evaluating model performance in life-cycle impact assessment
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2001
    Co-Authors: Thomas E Mckone, Edgar G Hertwich
    Abstract:

    LBNL - 48254 E RNEST O RLANDO L AWRENCE B ERKELEY N ATIONAL L ABORATORY The Human Toxicity Potential and a Strategy for Evaluating Model Performance in Life-Cycle Impact Assessment T.E. McKone and E.G. Hertwich Environmental Energy Technologies Division July 2001 This paper was prepared for publication in the Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Research Supported in part by: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory

  • The Human Toxicity Potential and a Strategy for Evaluating Model Performance in Life Cycle Impact Assessment
    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2001
    Co-Authors: Thomas E Mckone, Edgar G Hertwich
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) is a quantita tive toxic equivalency Potential (TEP) that has been introduced previously to express the Potential harm of a unit of chemical released into the environment. HTP includes both inherent Toxicity and generic source-to-dose relationships for pollutant emissions. Three issues associated with the use of HTP in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) are evaluated here. First is the use of regional multimedia models to define source-to-dose relationships for the HTP. Second is uncertainty and variability in sourceto-dose calculations. And third is model performance evaluation for TEP models. Using the HTP as a case study, we consider important sources of uncertainty/variability in the development of source-to-dose models — including parameter variability/uncertainty, model uncertainty, and decision rule uncertainty. Once sources of uncertainty are made explicit, a model performance evaluation is appropriate and useful and thus introduced. Model performance evaluation can illustrate the relative value of increasing model complexity, assembling more data, and/or providing a more explicit representation of uncertainty. This work reveals that an understanding of the uncertainty in TEPs as well as a model performance evaluation are needed to a) refine and target the assessment process and b) improve decision making.

  • Human Toxicity Potentials for life-cycle assessment and toxics release inventory risk screening.
    Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2001
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), a calculated index that reflects the Potential harm of a unit of chemical released into the environment, is based on both the inherent Toxicity of a compound and its Potential dose. It is used to weight emissions inventoried as part of a life-cycle assessment (LCA) or in the toxics release inventory (TRI) and to aggregate emissions in terms of a reference compound. Total emissions can be evaluated in terms of benzene equivalence (carcinogens) and toluene equivalents (noncarcinogens). The Potential dose is calculated using a generic fate and exposure model, CalTOX, which determines the distribution of a chemical in a model environment and accounts for a number of exposure routes, including inhalation, ingestion of produce, fish, and meat, and dermal contact with water and soil. Toxicity is represented by the cancer potency q1* for carcinogens and the safe dose (RfD, RfC) for noncarcinogens. This article presents cancer and noncancer HTP values for air and surface-water emissions of 330 compounds. This list covers 258 chemicals listed in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency TRI, or 79 weight-% of the TRI releases to air reported in 1997.

William S. Pease - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • An update of the Human Toxicity Potential with special consideration of conventional air pollutants
    2006
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    We present updated values for the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP) of 349 pollutants. The HTP is a characterization method used to weight emissions, such as those listed in life-cycle inventories and ...

  • Human Toxicity Potentials for life-cycle assessment and toxics release inventory risk screening.
    Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2001
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Sarah F. Mateles, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), a calculated index that reflects the Potential harm of a unit of chemical released into the environment, is based on both the inherent Toxicity of a compound and its Potential dose. It is used to weight emissions inventoried as part of a life-cycle assessment (LCA) or in the toxics release inventory (TRI) and to aggregate emissions in terms of a reference compound. Total emissions can be evaluated in terms of benzene equivalence (carcinogens) and toluene equivalents (noncarcinogens). The Potential dose is calculated using a generic fate and exposure model, CalTOX, which determines the distribution of a chemical in a model environment and accounts for a number of exposure routes, including inhalation, ingestion of produce, fish, and meat, and dermal contact with water and soil. Toxicity is represented by the cancer potency q1* for carcinogens and the safe dose (RfD, RfC) for noncarcinogens. This article presents cancer and noncancer HTP values for air and surface-water emissions of 330 compounds. This list covers 258 chemicals listed in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency TRI, or 79 weight-% of the TRI releases to air reported in 1997.

  • A systematic uncertainty analysis of an evaluative fate and exposure model.
    Risk Analysis, 2000
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, Thomas E Mckone, William S. Pease
    Abstract:

    Multimedia fate and exposure models are widely used to regulate the release of toxic chemicals, to set cleanup standards for contaminated sites, and to evaluate emissions in life-cycle assessment. CalTOX, one of these models, is used to calculate the Potential dose, an outcome that is combined with the Toxicity of the chemical to determine the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), used to aggregate and compare emissions. The comprehensive assessment of the uncertainty in the Potential dose calculation in this article serves to provide the information necessary to evaluate the reliability of decisions based on the HTP A framework for uncertainty analysis in multimedia risk assessment is proposed and evaluated with four types of uncertainty. Parameter uncertainty is assessed through Monte Carlo analysis. The variability in landscape parameters is assessed through a comparison of Potential dose calculations for different regions in the United States. Decision rule uncertainty is explored through a comparison of the HTP values under open and closed system boundaries. Model uncertainty is evaluated through two case studies, one using alternative formulations for calculating the plant concentration and the other testing the steady state assumption for wet deposition. This investigation shows that steady state conditions for the removal of chemicals from the atmosphere are not appropriate and result in an underestimate of the Potential dose for 25% of the 336 chemicals evaluated.

  • parameter uncertainty and variability in evaluative fate and exposure models
    Risk Analysis, 1999
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, Thomas E Mckone, William S. Pease
    Abstract:

    The Human Toxicity Potential, a weighting scheme used to evaluate toxic emissions for life cycle assessment and toxics release inventories, is based on Potential dose calculations and Toxicity factors. This paper evaluates the variance in Potential dose calculations that can be attributed to the uncertainty in chemical-specific input parameters as well as the variability in exposure factors and landscape parameters. A knowledge of the uncertainty allows us to assess the robustness of a decision based on the Toxicity Potential; a knowledge of the sources of uncertainty allows us to focus our resources if we want to reduce the uncertainty. The Potential dose of 236 chemicals was assessed. The chemicals were grouped by dominant exposure route, and a Monte Carlo analysis was conducted for one representative chemical in each group. The variance is typically one to two orders of magnitude. For comparison, the point estimates in Potential dose for 236 chemicals span ten orders of magnitude. Most of the variance in the Potential dose is due to chemical-specific input parameters, especially half-lives, although exposure factors such as fish intake and the source of drinking water can be important for chemicals whose dominant exposure is through indirect routes. Landscape characteristics are generally of minor importance.

  • Evaluating toxic impact assessment methods : What works best?
    Environmental Science & Technology, 1998
    Co-Authors: Edgar G Hertwich, William S. Pease, Thomas E Mckone
    Abstract:

    An analysis was conducted that tested the usefulness of four methods-Toxicity-based scoring, sustainable process index, concentration/Toxicity equivalency, and Human Toxicity Potential-for assessing Human health impacts of chemical emissions. Each assessment method uses a different model with varying levels of complexity and sophistication to calculate a toxic equivalency Potential. This indicator is a ratio that expresses Human health risks associated with release of a toxic chemical relative to those of an equivalent, equally toxic release of a reference chemical. Predicted impacts of the compared toxicants depend on whether and how exposure is considered by each evaluation method. Relative Toxicity scores produced by these methods vary by 3 orders of magnitude when the same compounds are analyzed; thus, method selection is critical. The Human Toxicity Potential method is preferred for comparing toxic emissions. Of the four methods investigated, it incorporates the most comprehensive approach to exposure assessment. Pollutants are ranked on the basis of health risks, assessed by using an explicit characterization of total Human exposure to a toxicant.