Suchergebnisse

AbstractRenewable energy technologies (wind turbines, solar cells, biofuels, etc.) are often referred to as 'clean' or 'green' energy sources, while jobs linked to the field of environmental protection and energy efficiency are referred to as 'green' jobs. The energy efficiency of clean technologies, which is likely to reduce and/or eliminate reliance on fossil fuels, is acknowledged. However, the potential contribution of green technologies and associated practices to ill health and environmental pollution resulting from consumption of energy and raw materials, generation of waste, and the negative impacts related to some life cycle phases of these technologies are discussed. Similarly, a point is made that the green jobs theme is mistakenly oversold because the employment opportunities generated by transitioning to green technologies are not necessarily safe and healthy jobs. Emphasis is put on identifying the hazards associated with these green designs, assessing the risks to the environment and worker health and safety, and either eliminating the hazards or minimizing the risks as essential elements to the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of green technologies. The perception that it is not always economically possible to consider all risk factors associated with renewable energy technologies at the beginning without hampering their implementation, especially in the poor developing countries, is dismissed. Instead, poor countries are encouraged to start implementing environmentally sound practices while transitioning to green technologies in line with their technological development and overall economic growth.

The development of alternative testing strategies (ATS) for hazard assessment of new and emerging materials is high on the agenda of scientists, funders, and regulators. The relatively large number of nanomaterials on the market and under development means that an increasing emphasis will be placed on the use of reliable, predictive ATS when assessing their safety. We have provided recommendations as to how ATS development for assessment of nanomaterial hazard may be accelerated. Predefined search terms were used to identify the quantity and distribution of peer‐reviewed publications for nanomaterial hazard assessment following inhalation, ingestion, or dermal absorption. A summary of knowledge gaps relating to nanomaterial hazard is provided to identify future research priorities and areas in which a rich data set might exist to allow ATS identification. Consultation with stakeholders (e.g., academia, industry, regulators) was critical to ensure that current expert opinion was reflected. The gap analysis revealed an abundance of studies that assessed the local and systemic impacts of inhaled particles, and so ATS are available for immediate use. Development of ATS for assessment of the dermal toxicity of chemicals is already relatively advanced, and these models should be applied to nanomaterials as relatively few studies have assessed the dermal toxicity of nanomaterials to date. Limited studies have investigated the local and systemic impacts of ingested nanomaterials. If the recommendations for research prioritization proposed are adopted, it is envisioned that a comprehensive battery of ATS can be developed to support the risk assessment process for nanomaterials. Some alternative models are available for immediate implementation, while others require more developmental work to become widely adopted. Case studies are included that can be used to inform the selection of alternative models and end points when assessing the pathogenicity of fibers and mode of action of nanomaterial toxicity.

Advanced material development, including at the nanoscale, comprises costly and complex challenges coupled to ensuring human and environmental safety. Governmental agencies regulating safety have announced interest toward acceptance of safety data generated under the collective term New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), as such technologies/approaches offer marked potential to progress the integration of safety testing measures during innovation from idea to product launch of nanomaterials. Divided in overall eight main categories, searchable databases for grouping and read across purposes, exposure assessment and modeling, in silico modeling of physicochemical structure and hazard data, in vitro high-throughput and high-content screening assays, dose-response assessments and modeling, analyses of biological processes and toxicity pathways, kinetics and dose extrapolation, consideration of relevant exposure levels and biomarker endpoints typify such useful NAMs. Their application generally agrees with articulated stakeholder needs for improvement of safety testing procedures. They further fit for inclusion and add value in nanomaterials risk assessment tools. Overall 37 of 50 evaluated NAMs and tiered workflows applying NAMs are recommended for considering safer-by-design innovation, including guidance to the selection of specific NAMs in the eight categories. An innovation funnel enriched with safety methods is ultimately proposed under the central aim of promoting rigorous nanomaterials innovation. ; acceptedVersion ; Peer reviewed