IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v20y2000i4p439-454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Uncertainty Analysis of an Evaluative Fate and Exposure Model

Author

Listed:
  • Edgar G. Hertwich
  • Thomas E. McKone
  • William S. Pease

Abstract

Multimedia fate and exposure models are widely used to regulate the release of toxic chemicals, to set cleanup standards for contaminated sites, and to evaluate emissions in life‐cycle assessment. CalTOX, one of these models, is used to calculate the potential dose, an outcome that is combined with the toxicity of the chemical to determine the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), used to aggregate and compare emissions. The comprehensive assessment of the uncertainty in the potential dose calculation in this article serves to provide the information necessary to evaluate the reliability of decisions based on the HTP. A framework for uncertainty analysis in multimedia risk assessment is proposed and evaluated with four types of uncertainty. Parameter uncertainty is assessed through Monte Carlo analysis. The variability in landscape parameters is assessed through a comparison of potential dose calculations for different regions in the United States. Decision rule uncertainty is explored through a comparison of the HTP values under open and closed system boundaries. Model uncertainty is evaluated through two case studies, one using alternative formulations for calculating the plant concentration and the other testing the steady state assumption for wet deposition. This investigation shows that steady state conditions for the removal of chemicals from the atmosphere are not appropriate and result in an underestimate of the potential dose for 25% of the 336 chemicals evaluated.

Suggested Citation

  • Edgar G. Hertwich & Thomas E. McKone & William S. Pease, 2000. "A Systematic Uncertainty Analysis of an Evaluative Fate and Exposure Model," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 439-454, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:20:y:2000:i:4:p:439-454
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.204043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.204043
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.204043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    2. Yacov Y. Haimes, 2011. "On the Complex Quantification of Risk: Systems‐Based Perspective on Terrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(8), pages 1175-1186, August.
    3. Kathrin Fenner & Martin Scheringer & Konrad Hungerbühler, 2003. "Joint Persistence of Transformation Products in Chemicals Assessment: Case Studies and Uncertainty Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 35-53, February.
    4. Deborah H. Bennett & Manuele D. Margni & Thomas E. McKone & Olivier Jolliet, 2002. "Intake Fraction for Multimedia Pollutants: A Tool for Life Cycle Analysis and Comparative Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(5), pages 905-918, October.
    5. Xu, Changqing & Shi, Wenxiao & Hong, Jinglan & Zhang, Fangfang & Chen, Wei, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of food waste-based biogas generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 169-177.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:20:y:2000:i:4:p:439-454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.