|
Slide 53 -
|
Nanotechnology – Applications and Implications for Superfund RISKeLearning Session 9: November 8, 2007
“Looking Forward:
Nanotechnology and Superfund”
Moderator: Heather Henry, SBRP/NIEHS Overview of ORD Draft Nanotechnology Research Strategy
Randy Wentsel
National Program Director, Contaminated Sites/Resource Conservation, ORD/EPA Where Does the Nano Go?
David Rejeski
Director,
Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies,
Woodrow Wilson Center
Product Use and Diversity
Government Collaborations
Funding Allocation
Research Approaches
EPA STAR
NTP
NIEHS Grantees Nanotechnology: Applications and Implications Session 1: January 18, 2007
“Introduction to Nanotechnology”
Nora Savage, EPA ORD NCER
Nigel Walker, NIEHS NTP RISKeLearning Advantages to Nanotechnology:
New properties
Enable greater efficiency Nano-enabled
consumer products Walker 2 Session 2: February 13, 2007
“Metal Remediation”
Mason Tomson, Rice University
Shas Mattigod, PNNL Nanotechnology: Applications RISKeLearning Session 3: March 15, 2007
“DNAPL Remediation”
Matt Hull, Luna Innovations, Inc.
Peter Vikesland, Virginia Tech
Greg Lowry, Carnegie Mellon University Groundwater Remediation
Drinking Water TCE, CT
DNAPLs Mattigod SAMMS
Nano Magnetite
NZVI, EZVI As, Cr, Hg
Actinides Lowry 3 Session 4: April 19, 2007
“Superfund Site Remediation”
Marti Otto, EPA OSRTI
Mary Logan, RPM, EPA Region 5 Nanotechnology: Applications RISKeLearning Session 5: May 31, 2007
“Environmental Sensors”
Paul Gilman, ORCAS
Desmond Stubbs, ORCAS
Ian Kennedy, UC - Davis Groundwater and Soil
Remediation TCE
TCA
DNAPLs
PCE NZVI
EZVI
BNP Wearable
Real-Time
Qualitative
Quantifiable Dog-on-a-Chip
Exposure Monitors
Environ. Detectors
DNA Assay Gilman, Stubbs Logan 4
Environment Session 6: August 16, 2007
“Fate and Transport”
Richard Zepp, EPA, NERL/ERD
Paul Westerhoff, Arizona State University Nanotechnology: Implications RISKeLearning Session 7: September 12, 2007
“Human Toxicology and
Risk Assessment” Session 8: October 18, 2007
“Nanomaterials and Ecotoxicology” Nanoparticles NOM complexation filtration Westerhoff Natural
Organic
Matter Sediments NP (NP)x UV sorption aggregation 5 Session 7: September 12, 2007
“Human Toxicology and
Risk Assessment”
Kevin Dreher, US EPA
Agnes Kane & Robert Hurt, Brown University
Stephen Roberts, University of Florida Nanotechnology: Implications RISKeLearning Session 8: October 18, 2007
“Nanomaterials and Ecotoxicology”
Stephen Klaine, Clemson University
Patrick Larkin, Santa Fe Comm. College Control 45 min 1 hour 20 hours Klaine Larkin Unique “Nano-ness”
could mean
unique toxicities
relative to
bulk materials. Kane 6 Challenges
Diversity of products, rapidly evolving
Variability
Quality Control
Characterization
Environmental interactions, which ones are critical?
Opportunities
Applications
Collaborations
Funding
Future Directions
Policy: David Rejeski
Research: Randy Wentsel
Discussion: Audience!! Nanotechnology: Applications and Implications for Superfund RISKeLearning 7 EPA
Michael Gill (ORD/Reg 9), Marian Olsen (Reg 1), Marti Otto (OSWER/TIFSD), Mitch Lasat (ORD/NCER), Warren Layne (Reg 5), Charles Maurice (ORD/Reg 5), Jayne Michaud (OSWER), Nora Savage (ORD/NCER), Barbara Walton (ORD), Randy Wentsel (ORD)
CLU-IN Staff, & Jeff Heimerman (TIFSD)
SBRP/NIEHS
Kathy Ahlmark, Beth Anderson, David Balshaw, Heather Henry, Claudia Thompson, Sally Tinkle, William Suk
MDB, NIEHS-Contractor
Maureen Avakian, Larry Reed, Larry Whitson
Nanotechnology: Planning Committee RISKeLearning THANKS! 8 Where Does the Nano Go?
End-of-Life Strategies for
Nanotechnologies David Rejeski
Director, Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Washington, DC 9 Some History 1976 Congress passes the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, regulating hazardous waste from its production to its disposal. 1976 President Gerald Ford signs the Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce environmental and human health risks. 1977 President Jimmy Carter signs the Clean Air Act Amendments to strengthen air quality standards and protect human health. 1978 Residents discover that Love Canal, New York, is contaminated by buried leaking chemical containers. 1980 Congress creates Superfund to clean up hazardous waste sites. Writing with atoms. D.M. Eigler, E.K. Schweizer. Positioning single atoms with a scanning tunneling microscope. Nature 344, 524-526 (1990). 10 Why Address Nanotechnology End-of-Life Issues?
Little is known about effects of nanomaterials and nanowastes on human health or the environment
Nanomaterials may behave differently in the environment than bulk materials
Nanomaterials are already in commerce and in the waste stream
No law deals specifically with nanotechnology 11 Nano Products in the Waste Stream Disposable
(Use for Less
Than 1 Year) Short-Term
Durable
(Use for
1-5 Years) Long-Term
Durable
(Use for
Over 5 Years) Consumable
(Does Not
Enter Waste
Stream Directly) Over 5 Years Less Than
1 Year 1-5 Years Indirectly Enters
Waste Stream 12 Source: RS/RAE. 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties, The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering, London, UK. Table 4.1. Available at: http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm
Note: Estimated global production rates for various nanomaterials and devices are based on international chemical journals and reviews and market research. Estimated Global Production Rates for Various Nanomaterials and Devices 13 The Case of Carbon Nanotubes 27 firms producing carbon nanotubes
globally. Production concentrated in the
U.S. and Japan but shifting to Korea and
China. 108 metric tons produced in year 2004
>1000 metric tons annual production estimated within five years End-of-life issues (incineration, land-filling, recycling) unresolved From: “Analysis of Nanotechnology from an Industrial Ecology Perspective,” Deanna Lekas, Yale
School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, 2005. Uses: sporting goods, conductive composites, batteries,
fuel cells, solar cells, field emission displays, biomedical
uses, fibers/fabrics, sensors. 14 Carbon Nanotube Production Inputs Note: Inputs from one CNT manufacturer using the CVD production process. 15 Extraction & Processing Manufacture of
Nanomaterial Use End-of-Life Distribution / Transport Manufacture of
Nanoproduct Distribution / Transport Waste and the Nanotech Life Cycle “The potential benefits of nanotechnologies should be assessed in terms of life cycle assessment (LCA).” UK Royal Society (2004), Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. ? Amount of nano waste
Complexity of nano waste 16 CAA = Clean Air Act
CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CWA = Clean Water Act
FIFRA = Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
RCRA = Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act
TSCA = Toxic Substances Control Act
Product Programs in this context refer to FIFRA, TSCA, and CAA §211. Extraction & Processing Manufacture of
Nanomaterial Use End-of-Life Distribution / Transport Manufacture of
Nanoproduct Distribution / Transport Regulations Across the Life Cycle 17 THONG: Protesting Nanotex outside Eddie Bauer, Chicago
http://www.treehugger .com/files/2005/05/nanotech_street_1.php ETC Group: Nano-Hazard Symbol Competition
http://www.etcgroup.org/en/materials/publications.html?pub_id=604
Environmental Defense
(with DuPont)
http://www.nanoriskframework.org NGO Activities NRDC: Supermodel Angela Lindvall talks nanotechnology
http://www.itsyournature.org/video/Tips/183
Protest at Molecular Foundry opening, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Extraction Manufacture of
Nanomaterial Use Disposal Distribution / Transport Manufacture of
Nanoproduct Distribution / Transport 18 Public Perception Concerns “We’re gonna be killed or cured.” “Industry can deliver better products, like better paints. But what about the guy who is making the paint, or spraying it?” “What happens if they don’t break down? How do we get rid of them?” “Are there labels?” “It’s like nuclear power. It’s a great concept, but what do you do with the waste products?” “It’s so small, it can wind up in places you don’t expect it… that’s a worry – it getting in unintended places and having unintended consequences.” “What is going to be the long-term effect? Extraction Manufacture of
Nanomaterial Use Disposal Distribution / Transport Manufacture of
Nanoproduct Distribution / Transport Quotes from: Macoubrie, Jane. (2005) “Informed Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Trust in Government,” January. and Francesconi, Robert. (2005) “Facilitator’s Report of Findings: Nanotechnology Experimental Issue Groups,” July. 19 Available at: http://www.nanotechproject.org/132/where-does-the-nano-go-new-report-on-end-of-life-regulation-of-nanotechnologies 20 Key objectives:
Clean up inactive and abandoned hazardous waste sites;
Create incentives for proper future handling of hazardous substances.
Addresses contamination the system failed to address prospectively. CERCLA 21 Is there a hazardous substance (or pollutant or contaminant)?
Is there a release or substantial threat of release?
Is the release from a facility?
Is the release into the environment? Four Key Questions Could the Superfund Statute Apply to Nanomaterials? 22 Liability is retroactive, strict, and joint and several for wide range of parties, including:
- site owners/operators, generators, and transporters; and
- covers federal facilities.
Statutory liability approach could:
- provide authority to require cleanups, if nanomaterials are determined at a later date to be hazardous substances;
- may influence firm behavior today with respect to handling and disposal of nanomaterials.
Nanomaterials and CERCLA Liability Manufacture of
Nanomaterial Use Disposal Distribution / Transport Manufacture of
Nanoproduct Distribution / Transport Liability Impact (psychological) 23 Virtually all of the Superfund statutory authorities are broad enough in theory to cover nanomaterials.
Key threshold issue is whether any nanomaterials are or will constitute hazardous substances.
Highlights importance of how EPA assesses and designates nanomaterials under CERCLA and other statutes.
Emphasizes critical need for EPA to invest in and encourage human health and eco- toxicity data collection and development. Conclusions 24 68 ........ TRICHLOROETHANE .......................................025323–89–1
69 ........ HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE ..............000077–47–4
70 ........ 1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE ............................. 000122–66–7
71 ........ NANOMATERIALS ????
72 ........ VANADIUM .......................................................007440–62–2
73 ........ FORMALDEHYDE ............................................000050–00–0 CAS Number Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 206 / Thursday, October 25, 2007 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry [ATSDR–235]
Proposed Substances To Be Evaluated
for Set 22 Toxicological Profiles Inclusion of Nanomaterials in Tox Testing 25 Minimize Risks with LCA and DfE Dark Green: Nanotechnology is applied directly to solve environmental problems. Light Green: Nanotechnology provides environmental benefits for other applications. Right Green: Nano-based processes and products are designed to be environmentally low-impact. Large Potential Benefits, Minimal Downsides 26 Convened in October 2006 by:
The European Commission’s Nano & Converging Science and Technologies Unit
EPA’s Office of Research & Development, and
The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies
Involved international LCA and nano experts
Purpose: determine whether existing LCA tools and methods are adequate to use on a new technology Nano LCA Key Conclusions:
Use a case-study approach
Do not wait to have near-perfect data (won’t exist anyway).
Be modest and open about uncertainties.
Use a critical and independent review to ensure credibility.
Build the knowledge base with an international inventory of evolving nano LCA’s.
Use the LCA results to improve the design of products and processes.
Promote best practices and successes. 27 For More Information www.nanotechproject.org David Rejeski
Phone: (202) 691-4255
Email: david.rejeski@wilsoncenter.org 28 Overview of ORD Draft Nanotechnology Research Strategy (NRS) 29 OUTLINE Briefing Purpose
Nanotechnology Research Strategy (NRS)
Background
Rationale
Key Themes and Questions
Anticipated results
Path Forward – Next Steps
Writing Team 30 Briefing Purpose Explain EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD) draft NRS (relationship to the EPA White Paper and the Nanotechnology Environmental and Health Implications Workgroup Report (under NNI)
Stimulate discussion on increased collaboration and linkage of research products 31 Guides the nanotechnology research program within EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD)
Describes initiation of ORD in-house research program
Builds upon research needs identified in the Agency Nanotechnology White Paper and the NNI
Describes key research questions under four themes and seven primary research questions Purpose of Strategy 32 Rationale Nanotechnology Environmental and Health Implications (NEHI) Interagency Working Group of NSET, (NSTC, 2006)
EPA White Paper on Nanotechnology (EPA, 2007)
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_EHS_research_needs.pdf EPA 100/B-07/001 | February 2007
www.epa.gov/osa Nanotechnology White Paper Office of the Science Advisor
Science Policy Council http://www.epa.gov/OSA/pdfs/nanotech/epa-nanotechnology-whitepaper-0207.pdf 33 National Collaboration Activities Joint RFAs – DOE, NIEHS/NIH, NIOSH, and NSF
Research project collaborations with NTP
National research strategy collaborations with CPSC, FDA, NIEHS
International research strategy collaborations with EC, Singapore 34 International Collaboration Activities Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Chemicals Committee – Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials (WPMN)
International Meetings – Applications & Implications (Region 5)
International research strategy collaborations with EC, Singapore
ANSI, ISO & ASTM participation 35 Document Organization Introduction
Background
Research Strategy Overview
Research Themes – for each science question:
Background/Program Relevance
Research Activities
Anticipated Outcomes
Implementation and Research Linkages
Appendix A – side by side table of White Paper research needs versus ORD research plans
Appendix B – ORD Description 36 Life Cycle Stages Environmental Pathways Fate & Transport Exposure Effects Risk Assessment Risk Management Feedstocks Manufacture Distribution Storage Use Disposal Air Water Soil Food
Air Primary
contaminants Secondary
contaminants Inhalation Ingestion Dermal
absorption Ecosystems Health Analytical Detection Method Development Performance
Indicators Modeling Economics
Regulatory and Voluntary
Measures Adaptation/
Revitalization/
Restoration/
Remediation Risk
Characterization 37 Four Research Themes Sources, Fate, Transport, and Exposure
Human Health and Ecological Research to Inform Risk Assessment and Test Methods
Risk Assessment Methods and Case Studies
Preventing and Mitigating Risks 38 Theme 1: Sources, Fate, Transport, and Exposure Key Science Questions (Two of Four)
Which nanomaterials have a high potential for release from a life-cycle perspective?
What technologies exist, can be modified, or must be developed to detect and quantify engineered materials in environmental media and biological samples? 39 Life Cycle Anticipated Outcomes
Collaborative effort to identify industries, processes, and products which have relatively high potential to release engineered nanomaterials into the environment
Determine the industries of importance and identify where gaps in information preclude a full assessment of emission/release points of concern
Produce a systematic assessment of the production, use, and ultimate fate of nanomaterials to understand the potential for emissions/releases into the environment
Understand which industries pose the greatest potential to emit/release nanomaterials of concern and to inform decision-makers about the overall impact of engineered nanomaterials
Conduct assessments for the highest priority industry categories, results of which will be used to guide industry and nanomaterial selection for assessment.
Produce comparative assessments to inform decision-makers at what stage in the lifecycle of engineered nanomaterials interventions could be used to avoid future environmental impacts. 40 Detection – Anticipated Outcomes Establishment of research partnerships with NIST, NCI and/or DOE for the purpose of characterizing nanomaterials for laboratory studies
Development of analytical methods for the detection of carbon-based nanomaterials in environmental matrices
Development of analytical methods for the detection of non-carbon-based nanomaterials in environmental matrices
In cooperation with other federal agencies develop standardized reference materials in a variety of representative environmental matrices.
41 Theme 1: Sources, Fate, Transport, and Exposure What are the major processes that govern the environmental fate of engineered nanomaterials, and how are these related to physical and chemical properties of those materials?
What are the indicators of exposure that will result from releases of engineered nanomaterials?
42 Environmental Fate and Transport – Anticipated Outcomes Develop a scientific understanding of the processes that govern the fate and transport of engineered nanomaterials.
Develop a scientific understanding and measure the chemical and physical properties of engineered nanomaterials and how they influence and impact the fate and transport processes.
Identify the exposure pathways associated with production, end-use and disposal in differing environmental matrices of engineered nanomaterials.
Improve the scientific understanding of detection methodologies for quantifying engineered nanomaterials.
Develop multiple predictive models for understanding and measuring the transport of engineered nanomaterials 43 Exposure – Anticipated Results Identification of the dominant exposure pathways to ecological receptors of interest
An assessment of the applicability of the Agency’s current exposure models to nanomaterials
Identification of the physicochemical properties required to inform exposure
Identification of indicators of exposure through the application of genomics, proteomics and metabolomics. 44 Theme 2: Human Health and Ecological Research to Inform Risk Assessment and Test Methods Key Science Question
What are the effects of engineered nanomaterials on human and ecological receptors, and how can those effects be best quantified and predicted?
45 Human and Ecological Effects Characterization of NM health and ecological effects; identification of physicochemical properties and factors that regulate NM dosimetry, fate, and toxicity
Identification of testing methods/approaches to predict in vivo toxicity of NMs; characterizing molecular expression profiles that may provide biomarkers of NM exposure and/or toxicity
Provide the necessary expertise for review of premanufacture notice applications and assess the adequacy of harmonized test guidelines from NMs to OPPTS and internationally to OECD.
Health and ecological research will address the gap in our knowledge regarding the toxicity of nanomaterials which has impeded the ability to conduct accurate life cycle analysis. 46 Theme 3: Risk Assessment Methods and Case Studies Key Science Question
How do Agency risk assessment and regulatory approaches need to be amended to incorporate the special characteristics of engineered nanomaterials?
47 Risk Assessment – Anticipated Outcomes CEA approach will be used for case studies of selected nanomaterials
Three case studies incorporating peer consultation input will be developed in FY07 for evaluation in a workshop.
A summary report of the workshop identifying and prioritizing research needed to support comprehensive assessment of selected nanomaterials will be developed in FY08
Identification of special properties of nanomaterials in developing data and carrying out risk assessments. 48 Theme 4: Preventing and Mitigating Risks Key Science Question
What technologies or practices can be applied to minimize risks of engineered nanomaterials throughout their life cycle, and to use nanotechnology to minimize other risks? 49 Risk Mitigation – Anticipated Results An evaluation of the efficacy of existing pollution control approaches and technologies to manage releases of engineered nanomaterials to all media during their production.
ORD will collaborate with industry and academia to report on opportunities to reduce the environmental implications of nanomaterial production by employing greener synthesis approaches
ORD will identify design production processes that are sustainable, minimize or eliminate any emissions/releases, and reduce energy consumption during the manufacturing of nanomaterials and products
ORD will report on the viability and performance on the use of nanotechnology for the abatement and remediation of conventional toxic pollution. 50 Anticipated Outcomes and Next Steps Focused research projects to address risk assessment and management needs for nanomaterials in support of the various environmental statues for which the EPA is responsible
Currently undergoing Agency-wide review
Planned Federal agency (NSET) review
External peer review – December 2007
51 Writing Team Nora Savage, Co-Lead
Randy Wentsel, Co-lead
Michele Aston, NERL Douglas Mckinney, NRMRL
J. Michael Davis, NCEA Jeff Morris, OSP
Steve Diamond, NHEERL Dave Mount, NHEERL
Kevin Dreher, NHEERL Carlos Nunez, NRMRL
Maureen Gwinn, NHEERL Chon Shoaf, NCEA
Thomas Holdsworth, NRMRL Barb Walton, NHEERL
Keith Houck, NCCT Eric Weber, NERL
Elaine Hubal, NCCT 52 Thank You After viewing the links to additional resources, please complete our online feedback form.
Thank You Links to Additional Resources Feedback Form 53
|