高级搜索

化学品替代评估框架及方法

,  ,  ,  ,  , 

downloadPDF

上一篇

下一篇

李潍, 涂铿, 陈希超, 赵旭, 刘芸, 于云江. 化学品替代评估框架及方法[J]. 生态毒理学报, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
引用本文: 李潍, 涂铿, 陈希超, 赵旭, 刘芸, 于云江. 化学品替代评估框架及方法[J]. 生态毒理学报, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
shu
LI Wei, TU Keng, CHEN Xichao, ZHAO Xu, LIU Yun, YU Yunjiang. Framework and Methodology of Chemical Alternative Assessment[J]. Asian journal of ecotoxicology, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
Citation: LI Wei, TU Keng, CHEN Xichao, ZHAO Xu, LIU Yun, YU Yunjiang. Framework and Methodology of Chemical Alternative Assessment[J]. Asian journal of ecotoxicology, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
shu

化学品替代评估框架及方法

  • 1. 生态环境部华南环境科学研究所, 广州 510655;

  • 2. 国家环境保护环境污染物健康风险评价重点实验室, 广州 510535

    • 作者简介: 李潍(1997—)，女，硕士，研究方向为化学品替代评估与化学品风险评估，E-mail:liwei@scies.org
    通讯作者: 刘芸(1983-),女,硕士,正高级工程师,主要研究方向为化学品替代评估和化学品环境健康风险评估。E-mail:liuyun@scies.org;  于云江(1964—)，男，博士，研究员，主要研究方向为环境与健康。E-mail:yuyunjiang@scies.org
  • 基金项目:

    国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFC3902200)；广西重点研发计划(桂科AB24999047)；中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项(PM-zx703-202406-179)

  • 中图分类号: X171.5

Framework and Methodology of Chemical Alternative Assessment

  • 1. South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China;

  • 2. State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution Health Risk Assessment, Guangzhou 510535, China

    • Corresponding authors: LIU Yun ;  YU Yunjiang
  • Fund Project:

  • 摘要: 随着全球环境管理法规愈发严格，企业需要不断寻找被管控有毒有害化学品的替代品，替代也成为源头减少环境污染，实现绿色发展的重要途径。为减少“遗憾替代”，提高替代品的环境友好性，各国政府、非政府组织和学者研究开发了化学品替代评估方法。本文首先分析梳理了化学品替代评估发展的3个阶段，综述了国内外现有替代评估技术方法，总结替代评估中比较评估和决策评估2个关键步骤。其次，以美国环境保护局、德国联邦环境署和经济合作与发展组织等政府和非政府组织的替代评估方法为主，结合已有研究进展，介绍和比较了化学品分级评估和决策评估的框架、指标体系以及评估方法，可为我国有毒有害原料替代品的分级、评估和决策提供方法基础。最后，基于现有方法，针对我国化学品替代评估方法体系建设和替代工程示范提出建议和展望。
    Abstract: As global environmental regulations become more and more stringent, companies must continuously search for and develop alternatives to regulated toxic and hazardous chemicals to comply with these regulations and avoid using harmful chemicals. To reduce “regrettable substitutions” and improve the environmental friendliness of alternatives, various institutions, including governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGO) and researchers, have developed methods for the chemical alternative assessment. This study first summarizes the three stages in the development of chemical alternative assessment, reviews existing frameworks both domestic and international, and divides the alternative assessment into two key steps: the grading assessment and the decision-making assessment. Secondly, based on the methods used by governmental organizations and NGOs such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the German Federal Environmental Agency, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, and incorporating progress from existing research, this study introduces and compares the indices and methods used in the chemical grading and the decision-making assessments. This comparison provides a methodological foundation for grading, assessing, and making decisions about toxic and hazardous raw material alternatives in China. Finally, based on existing methods, this study offers suggestions and prospects for constructing a system of alternative assessment methods for chemicals and demonstrating alternative projects in China.
  • 加载中
  • Li D S, Suh S. Health risks of chemicals in consumer products: A review[J]. Environment International, 2019, 123: 580-587
    Geueke B, Groh K, Muncke J. Food packaging in the circular economy: Overview of chemical safety aspects for commonly used materials[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 193: 491-505
    Huang L, Ernstoff A, Fantke P, et al. A review of models for near-field exposure pathways of chemicals in consumer products[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 574: 1182-1208
    United States Government Printing Office. The Clean Water Act[S]. Washington, DC: Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives, 2023
    United States Government Printing Office. The Clean Air Act[S]. Washington, DC: Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives, 2023
    Tao M Y, Li D S, Song R S, et al. OrganoRelease—A framework for modeling the release of organic chemicals from the use and post-use of consumer products[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2018, 234: 751-761
    Fantke P, Illner N. Goods that are good enough: Introducing an absolute sustainability perspective for managing chemicals in consumer products[J]. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 2019, 15: 91-97
    de Boer J, Stapleton H M. Toward fire safety without chemical risk[J]. Science, 2019, 364(6437): 231-232
    Jhamb S, Liang X D, Gani R, et al. Systematic model-based methodology for substitution of hazardous chemicals[J]. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2019, 7(8): 7652-7666
    European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC[S]. Brussels: European Commission, 2006
    Li M, Harten P F, Cabezas H. Experiences in designing solvents for the environment[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2002, 41(23): 5867-5877
    Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Transitioning to safer chemicals: A toolkit for employers and workers[EB/OL]. (2021-05-29)[2024-11-18]. http://www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_chemicals/why_transition.html
    Fantke P, Weber R, Scheringer M. From incremental to fundamental substitution in chemical alternatives assessment[J]. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy, 2015, 1: 1-8
    Blum A, Behl M, Birnbaum L, et al. Organophosphate ester flame retardants: Are they a regrettable substitution for polybrominated diphenyl ethers?[J]. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 2019, 6(11): 638-649
    McMullan J T. Refrigeration and the environment：Issues and strategies for the future[J]. International Journal of Refrigeration, 2002, 25(1): 89-99
    Arnold S M, Greggs B, Goyak K O, et al. A quantitative screening-level approach to incorporate chemical exposure and risk into alternative assessment evaluations[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2017, 13(6): 1007-1022
    Geiser K, Tickner J, Edwards S, et al. The architecture of chemical alternatives assessment[J]. Risk Analysis, 2015, 35(12): 2152-2161
    Kwiatkowski C F, Andrews D Q, Birnbaum L S, et al. Scientific basis for managing PFAS as a chemical class[J]. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 2020, 7(8): 532-543
    Fantke P, Huang L, Overcash M, et al. Life cycle based alternatives assessment (LCAA) for chemical substitution[J]. Green Chemistry, 2020, 22(18): 6008-6024
    Oguzcan S, Dvarioniene J, Tugnoli A, et al. Environmental impact assessment model for substitution of hazardous substances by using life cycle approach[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2019, 254(Pt A): 112945
    Phillips K A, Yau A, Favela K A, et al. Suspect screening analysis of chemicals in consumer products[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2018, 52(5): 3125-3135
    Zimmerman J B, Anastas P T. Chemistry toward substitution with no regrets[J]. Science, 2015, 347(6227): 1198-1199
    The Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute. Five chemicals study: Alternatives assessment process guidance[R]. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2006
    The Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute. Five chemicals alternatives assessment study[R]. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2006
    Rossi M, Tickner J, Geiser K. Alternatives assessment framework of the Lowell Center for Sustainable Production[R]. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Lowell, 2006
    Ad Hoc Working Group on Substitution and Alternatives of the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee of the Stockholm Convention. Report of the persistent organic pollutants review committee on the work of its fifth meeting. Addendum: General guidance on considerations related to alternatives and substitutes for listed persistent organic pollutants and candidate chemicals[R]. Geneva: United Nations Environment Program, 2009
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Design for the environment alternatives assessments[EB/OL]. (2015-08-15)[2024-11-18]. https://www.epa.gov/saferchoice/design-environment-alternatives-assessments
    California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Developing regulatory alternatives analysis methodologies for the California green chemistry initiative[R]. State of California: California Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2015
    GHS Sub-Committee. Globally harmonized system of classifications and labeling of chemicals (GHS)[R]. New York: United Nations, 2023
    Federal Environmental Agency. Guide on Sustainable Chemicals: A Decision Tool for Substance Manufacturers, Formulators and End Users of Chemicals[S]. Berlin: Federal Environmental Agency, 2011
    Clean Production Action (CPA). Promote safer chemicals and products with GreenScreen®[EB/OL]. (2024-05-10)[2024-11-18]. http://www.greenscreenchemicals.org/
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Safer chemical ingredients list (SCIL)[EB/OL]. (2024-01-10)[2024-11-18]. https://www.epa.gov/saferchoice/safer-ingredients
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). EPA’s Safer Choice Program Master Criteria for Safer Ingredients[S]. Washington, DC: Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics, 2012
    European Chemical Agency. Guidance on the preparation of an application for authorization[R]. Helsinki: European Chemical Agency, 2011
    European Chemical Agency. Strategy to promote substitution to safer chemicals through innovation[R]. Helsinki: European Chemical Agency, 2018
    California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Safer consumer products[R]. Sacramento: California Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2013
    Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Guidance on key considerations for the identification and selection of safer chemical alternatives[R]. Paris: Environment, Health and Safety, Environment Directorate, OECD, 2021
    Technical Alternative Assessment Guide Team. Interstate chemicals clearinghouse alternatives assessment guide[R]. Washington, DC: Interstate Chemicals Clearinghouse, 2017
    Gauthier A M, Fung M, Panko J, et al. Chemical assessment state of the science: Evaluation of 32 decision-support tools used to screen and prioritize chemicals[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2015, 11(2): 242-255
    Tickner J, Jacobs M, Malloy T, et al. Advancing alternatives assessment for safer chemical substitution: A research and practice agenda[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2019, 15(6): 855-866
    Blum A, Behl M, Birnbaum L, et al. Organophosphate ester flame retardants: Are they a regrettable substitution for polybrominated diphenyl ethers?[J]. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 2019, 6(11): 638-649
    Zheng Z Y, Peters G M, Arp H P H, et al. Combining in silico tools with multicriteria analysis for alternatives assessment of hazardous chemicals: A case study of decabromodiphenyl ether alternatives[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2019, 53(11): 6341-6351
    Zheng Z Y, Arp H P H, Peters G, et al. Combining In silico tools with multicriteria analysis for alternatives assessment of hazardous chemicals: Accounting for the transformation products of decaBDE and its alternatives[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2021, 55(2): 1088-1098
    London R L, Gluge J, Scheringer M. Are hazard assessment methods in the assessment of chemical alternatives suitable for REACH?[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2024, 58(42): 18811-18821
    London R L, Gluge J, Scheringer M. Multiple-criteria decision analysis for assessments of chemical alternatives (MCDA-ACA)[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2024, 58(43): 19315-19324
    Arnold S M, Greggs B, Goyak K O, et al. A quantitative screening-level approach to incorporate chemical exposure and risk into alternative assessment evaluations[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2017, 13(6): 1007-1022
    Brown L A, Fisk G, Cohen M A, et al. Using an alternatives assessment framework to evaluate waterborne versus solventborne basecoats used in automotive refinishing[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2022, 18(4): 1101-1113
    van Dijk J, Figuière R, Dekker S C, et al. Managing PMT/vPvM substances in consumer products through the concepts of essential-use and functional substitution: A case-study for cosmetics[J]. Environmental Science Processes & Impacts, 2023, 25(6): 1067-1081
    National Academy of Sciences of United States. A framework to guide selection of chemical alternatives[R]. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences of United States, 2014
    Eliason P, Morose G. Safer alternatives assessment: The Massachusetts process as a model for state governments[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2011, 19(5): 517-526
    Malloy T F, Sinsheimer P J, Blake A, et al. Use of multi-criteria decision analysis in regulatory alternatives analysis: A case study of lead free solder[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2013, 9(4): 652-664
    Malloy T F, Zaunbrecher V M, Batteate C M, et al. Advancing alternative analysis: Integration of decision science[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2017, 125(6): 066001
    McFadden R D. The business case for transitioning to safer chemicals[J]. New Solutions, 2011, 21(3): 403-416
    Jacobs M M, Malloy T F, Tickner J A, et al. Alternatives assessment frameworks: Research needs for the informed substitution of hazardous chemicals[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2016, 124(3): 265-280
    Gerst M D, Kenney M A, Howard B E, et al. A decision-analytic approach to screening in chemical alternatives assessment[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2020, 29(3): 1597-1604
    Malloy T F, Zaunbrecher V M, Batteate C M, et al. Advancing alternative analysis: Integration of decision science[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2017, 125(6): 066001
    Tickner J A, Schifano J N, Blake A, et al. Advancing safer alternatives through functional substitution[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2015, 49(2): 742-749
    Lavoie E T, Heine L G, Holder H, et al. Chemical alternatives assessment: Enabling substitution to safer chemicals[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2010, 44(24): 9244-9249
    国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 产品生态设计通则: GB/T 24256—2009[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2009
    国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 生态设计产品评价通则: GB/T 32161—2015[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2016
  • 加载中
WeChat 点击查看大图
计量
  • 文章访问数:  358
  • HTML全文浏览数:  358
  • PDF下载数:  59
  • 施引文献:  0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2024-04-01
李潍, 涂铿, 陈希超, 赵旭, 刘芸, 于云江. 化学品替代评估框架及方法[J]. 生态毒理学报, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
引用本文: 李潍, 涂铿, 陈希超, 赵旭, 刘芸, 于云江. 化学品替代评估框架及方法[J]. 生态毒理学报, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
shu
LI Wei, TU Keng, CHEN Xichao, ZHAO Xu, LIU Yun, YU Yunjiang. Framework and Methodology of Chemical Alternative Assessment[J]. Asian journal of ecotoxicology, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
Citation: LI Wei, TU Keng, CHEN Xichao, ZHAO Xu, LIU Yun, YU Yunjiang. Framework and Methodology of Chemical Alternative Assessment[J]. Asian journal of ecotoxicology, 2024, 19(6): 152-162. doi: 10.7524/AJE.1673-5897.20240401001
shu

化学品替代评估框架及方法

    通讯作者: 刘芸(1983-),女,硕士,正高级工程师,主要研究方向为化学品替代评估和化学品环境健康风险评估。E-mail:liuyun@scies.org;  于云江(1964—)，男，博士，研究员，主要研究方向为环境与健康。E-mail:yuyunjiang@scies.org
    作者简介: 李潍(1997—)，女，硕士，研究方向为化学品替代评估与化学品风险评估，E-mail:liwei@scies.org
  • 1. 生态环境部华南环境科学研究所, 广州 510655;
  • 2. 国家环境保护环境污染物健康风险评价重点实验室, 广州 510535
  • 收稿日期:  2024-04-01
基金项目:

国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFC3902200)；广西重点研发计划(桂科AB24999047)；中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项(PM-zx703-202406-179)

摘要: 随着全球环境管理法规愈发严格，企业需要不断寻找被管控有毒有害化学品的替代品，替代也成为源头减少环境污染，实现绿色发展的重要途径。为减少“遗憾替代”，提高替代品的环境友好性，各国政府、非政府组织和学者研究开发了化学品替代评估方法。本文首先分析梳理了化学品替代评估发展的3个阶段，综述了国内外现有替代评估技术方法，总结替代评估中比较评估和决策评估2个关键步骤。其次，以美国环境保护局、德国联邦环境署和经济合作与发展组织等政府和非政府组织的替代评估方法为主，结合已有研究进展，介绍和比较了化学品分级评估和决策评估的框架、指标体系以及评估方法，可为我国有毒有害原料替代品的分级、评估和决策提供方法基础。最后，基于现有方法，针对我国化学品替代评估方法体系建设和替代工程示范提出建议和展望。

English Abstract

    全文HTML

参考文献 (60)

返回顶部

目录

/

返回文章
返回

Copyright © 2019 中国科学院生态环境研究中心

京ICP备05002858号-9