Towards harmonizing natural resources as an area of protection in life cycle impact assessment

Purpose. In this paper, we summarize the discussion and present the findings of an expert group effort under the umbrella of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative proposing natural resources as an Area of Protection (AoP) in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). Methods: As a first step, natural resources have been defined for the LCA context with reference to the overall UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) framework. Second, existing LCIA methods have been reviewed and discussed. The reviewed methods have been evaluated according to the considered type of natural resources and their underlying principles followed (use-to-availability ratios, backup technology approaches, or thermodynamic accounting methods). Results and discussion. There is currently no single LCIA method available that addresses impacts for all natural resource categories, nor do existing methods and models addressing different natural resource categories do so in a consistent way across categories. Exceptions are exergy and solar energy-related methods, which cover the widest range of resource categories. However, these methods do not link exergy consumption to changes in availability or provisioning capacity of a specific natural resource (e.g., mineral, water, land etc.). So far, there is no agreement in the scientific community on the most relevant type of future resource indicators (depletion, increased energy use or cost due to resource extraction, etc.). To address this challenge, a framework based on the concept of stock/fund/flow resources is proposed to identify, across natural resource categories, whether depletion/dissipation (of stocks and funds) or competition (for flows) is the main relevant aspect. Conclusions. An LCIA method—or a set of methods—that consistently address all natural resource categories is needed in order to avoid burden shifting from the impact associated with one resource to the impact associated with another resource. This paper is an important basis for a step forward in the direction of consistently integrating the various natural resources as an Area of Protection into LCA

Life cycle human health impacts of 875 pesticides

PurposeResidues in field crops grown and harvested for human consumption are the main contributor to overall human exposure toward agricultural pesticides for the general population. However, exposure from crop residues is currently not considered in life cycle assessment practice. We therefore present a consistent framework for characterizing human toxicological impacts associated with pesticides applied to agricultural crops in the frame of life cycle impact assessment based on state-of-the-art data and methods.MethodsWe combine a dynamic multicrop plant uptake model designed for evaluating human exposure to residues for a wide range of pesticide-crop combinations with latest findings of pesticide dissipation kinetics in crops and post-harvest food processing. Outcome is a set of intake fractions and characterization factors for 875 organic pesticides and six major food crops along with specific confidence intervals for each factor.Results and discussionIntake fractions aggregating exposure via crop residues and exposure via fractions lost to air and soil for pesticides applied to agricultural crops vary between 10−8 and 10−1 kg intake per kilogram applied as a function of pesticide and crop. Intake fractions are typically highest for lettuce and tomato and lowest for potato due to differences in application times before crop harvest and soil as additional barrier for uptake into potato tubers. Uncertainty in intake fractions is mainly associated with dissipation dynamics in crops, where results demonstrate that using pesticide- and crop-specific data is crucial. Combined with the uncertainty in effect modeling, characterization factors per pesticide and crop show squared geometric mean standard deviations ranging from 38 to 15,560 over a variability range across pesticide-crop combinations of 10 orders of magnitude.ConclusionsOur framework is operational for use in current life cycle impact assessment models, is made available for USEtox, and closes an important gap in the assessment of human exposure to pesticides. For ready use in life cycle assessment studies, we present pesticide-crop combination-specific characterization factors normalized to pesticide mass applied and provide default data for application times and loss due to post-harvest food processing. When using our data, we emphasize the need to consult current pesticide regulation, since each pesticide is registered for use on certain crops only, which varies between countries.<br/

Building a European exposure science strategy

Exposure information is a critical element in various regulatory and non-regulatory frameworks in Europe and elsewhere. Exposure science supports to ensure safe environments, reduce human health risks, and foster a sustainable future. However, increasing diversity in regulations and the lack of a professional identity as exposure scientists currently hamper developing the field and uptake into European policy. In response, we discuss trends, and identify three key needs for advancing and harmonizing exposure science and its application in Europe. We provide overarching building blocks and define six long-term activities to address the identified key needs, and to iteratively improve guidelines, tools, data, and education. More specifically, we propose creating European networks to maximize synergies with adjacent fields and identify funding opportunities, building common exposure assessment approaches across regulations, providing tiered education and training programmes, developing an aligned and integrated exposure assessment framework, offering best practices guidance, and launching an exposure information exchange platform. Dedicated working groups will further specify these activities in a consistent action plan. Together, these elements form the foundation for establishing goals and an action roadmap for successfully developing and implementing a European Exposure Science Strategy 2020 2030, which is aligned with advances in science and technology.We thank Claudia Cascio and Amelie Crépet for input to the initial manuscript. Open access was kindly provided by the German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA).peer-reviewe

Parameterization Models for Pesticide Exposure via Crop Consumption

An approach for estimating human exposure to pesticides via consumption of six important food crops is presented that can be used to extend multimedia models applied in health risk and life cycle impact assessment. We first assessed the variation of model output (pesticide residues per kg applied) as a function of model input variables (substance, crop, and environmental properties) including their possible correlations using matrix algebra. We identified five key parameters responsible for between 80% and 93% of the variation in pesticide residues, namely time between substance application and crop harvest, degradation half-lives in crops and on crop surfaces, overall residence times in soil, and substance molecular weight. Partition coefficients also play an important role for fruit trees and tomato (Kow), potato (Koc), and lettuce (Kaw, Kow). Focusing on these parameters, we develop crop-specific models by parametrizing a complex fate and exposure assessment framework. The parametric models thereby reflect the framework's physical and chemical mechanisms and predict pesticide residues in harvest using linear combinations of crop, crop surface, and soil compartments. Parametric model results correspond well with results from the complex framework for 1540 substance-crop combinations with total deviations between a factor 4 (potato) and a factor 66 (lettuce). Predicted residues also correspond well with experimental data previously used to evaluate the complex framework. Pesticide mass in harvest can finally be combined with reduction factors accounting for food processing to estimate human exposure from crop consumption. All parametric models can be easily implemented into existing assessment frameworks