Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Added value of the emissions fractions approach when assessing a chemical's potential for adverse effects as a result of long-range transport
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Environmental Science.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9159-6652
Number of Authors: 32023 (English)In: Environmental Science Advances, ISSN 2754-7000, Vol. 2, no 10, p. 1360-1371Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

It is of considerable interest to identify chemicals which may represent a hazard and risk to environmental and human health in remote areas. The OECD POV and LRTP Screening Tool (“The Tool”) for assessing chemicals for persistence (P) and long-range transport potential (LRTP) has been extensively used for combined P and LRTP assessments in various regulatory contexts, including the Stockholm Convention (SC) on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). The approach in The Tool plots either the Characteristic Travel Distance (CTD, in km), a transport-oriented metric, or the Transfer Efficiency (TE, in %), which calculates the transfer from the atmosphere to surface compartments in a remote region, against overall persistence (POV). For a chemical to elicit adverse effects in remote areas, it not only needs to be transported and transferred to remote environmental surface media, it also needs to accumulate in these media. The current version of The Tool does not have a metric to quantify this process. We screened a list of >12 000 high production volume chemicals (HPVs) for the potential to be dispersed, transferred, and accumulate in surface media in remote regions using the three corresponding LRTP metrics of the emission fractions approach (EFA; ϕ1ϕ2ϕ3), as implemented in a modified version of The Tool. Comparing the outcome of an assessment based on CTD/TE and POV with the EFA, we find that the latter classifies a larger number of HPVs as having the potential for accumulation in remote regions than is classified as POP-like by the existing approach. In particular, the EFA identifies chemicals capable of accumulating in remote regions without fulfilling the criterion for POV. The remote accumulation fraction of the EFA is the LRTP assessment metric most suited for the risk assessment stage in Annex E of the SC. Using simpler metrics (such as half-life criteria, POV, and LRTP–POV combinations) in a hazard-based assessment according to Annex D is problematic as it may prematurely screen out many of the chemicals with potential for adverse effects as a result of long-range transport.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. Vol. 2, no 10, p. 1360-1371
National Category
Environmental Sciences Environmental Management
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-221675DOI: 10.1039/d3va00189jISI: 001060896400001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85170694998OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-221675DiVA, id: diva2:1800575
Available from: 2023-09-27 Created: 2023-09-27 Last updated: 2025-02-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

McLachlan, Michael S.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
McLachlan, Michael S.
By organisation
Department of Environmental Science
Environmental SciencesEnvironmental Management

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 93 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf