4.8 Article

New Perspectives on Nanomaterial Aquatic Ecotoxicity: Production Impacts Exceed Direct Exposure Impacts for Carbon Nanotoubes

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 46, 期 5, 页码 2902-2910

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es203409a

关键词

-

资金

  1. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  2. Directorate For Engineering [1120329] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Environmental impacts due to engineered nanomaterials arise both from releases of the nanomaterials themselves as well as from their synthesis. In this work, we employ the USEtox model to quantify and compare aquatic ecotoxicity impacts over the life cycle of carbon nanotubes (CNTs). USEtox is an integrated multimedia fate, transport, and toxicity model covering large classes of organic and inorganic substances. This work evaluates the impacts of non-CNT emissions from three methods of synthesis (arc ablation, CVD, and HiPco), and compares these to the modeled ecotoxicity of CNTs released to the environment. Parameters for evaluating CNT ecotoxicity are bounded by a highly conservative worst case scenario and a realistic scenario that draws from existing literature on CNT fate, transport, and ecotoxicity. The results indicate that the ecotoxicity impacts of nanomaterial production processes are roughly equivalent to the ecotoxicity of CNT releases under the unrealistic worst case scenario, while exceeding the results of the realistic scenario by 3 orders of magnitude. Ecotoxicity from production processes is dominated by emissions of metals from electricity generation. Uncertainty exists for both production and release stages, and is modeled using a combination of Monte Carlo simulation and scenario analysis. The results of this analysis underscore the contributions of existing work on CNT fate and transport, as well as the importance of life cycle considerations in allocating time and resources toward research on mitigating the impacts of novel materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据