Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
failing to predict toxicity-related impacts and resource depletion (e.g., metals),
thus eventually leading to high risks in decision-making processes if used as
a stand-alone indicator to quantify and manage environmental sustainability.
These studies thus counter the apparent trend of the LCA studies to focus
on energy requirements and climate change, and call for the use of these indi-
cators as mere facilitators or catalysts for conducting full LCAs. The increas-
ing gain in credibility of the models assessing toxicity-related impacts, for
example, with the advent of the USEtox consensus model,
7, 5 9
as well as the
recent advances that start emerging in the assessment of impacts caused by
nanoparticles (e.g., Eckelman et al.
29
) are signals that some hurdles, which
render a difficult broadly encompassing LCA, may soon fall and eventually
allow the results of LCA studies to be more consistent and usable.
11.2.4.4 Interpretation
The main limitations in the LCA studies conducted thus far are in fact due
to missing life cycle stages and impact categories. More generally speaking,
very few of the case studies provide assessment of uncertainties, a crucial
point in a rapidly evolving field.
11.2.5 Gaps and Further Needs
Table 11.2 summarizes the gaps identified in the literature review of LCA
studies on nanoproducts. The next section will propose and further discuss
for each step of the LCA potential strategies to meet these needs, address-
ing the following questions: (i) how to identify the required LCA scope and
the life cycle risks of new nanomaterials and nanoproducts compared with
conventional products; (ii) how to better assess the inventory of emissions
associated with nanomaterial engineering compared with the processing of
conventional products; (iii) which mechanisms affect the fate, exposure, and
biological effects of nanoparticles; and (iv) how to interpret results for fast-
changing technologies, with limited data availability and high uncertainties.
11.3 Recommendations and Strategies for
Improving Nano-Specific LCAs
11.3.1 Nano-Specificities for Scope and Goal Definition
11.3.1.1 Identification of LCA Scope and of Main Risk of Nanomaterials
We first need to refine the assessment framework, relating impacts to func-
tional units—the unit that characterizes the service offered by the final prod-
uct as the basis to compare nano- and classic technologies.
