TRACI: The tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Volumn 6, Issue 3-4, 2003, Pages 49-78

  Bare, Jane C ^a,b   Norris, Gregory A ^c   Pennington, David W ^d   McKone, Thomas ^e  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE   (United States)

^d JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^e LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental impact modeling life cycle assessment (LCA); Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA); Midpoint; Site dependent impact assessment; Software

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; EUTROPHICATION; GLOBAL WARMING; LAND USE; PROBABILITY;

ECOTOXICITY;

ECOLOGY;

EID: 0037600657     PISSN: 10881980     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/108819802766269539     Document Type: Review

References (77)

1. ASMI (Athena Sustainable Materials Institute). 1993. Cement and structural concrete products: Raw materials balances, energy profiles, and environmental unit factor estimates. Ottawa, Canada: ASMI.
2. ASMI. 2001. Cement and structural concrete products. Update: Raw materials balances, energy profiles, and environmental unit factor estimates. Ottawa, Canada: ASMI.
3. Bare, J. C., D. W. Pennington, and H. A. Udo de Haes. 1999. Life cycle impact assessment sophistication: International workshop. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4: 299-306.
4. Bare, J. C., P. Hofstetter, D. W. Pennington, and H. A. Udo de Haes. 2000. Life cycle impact assessment midpoints vs. endpoints: The sacrifices and the benefits. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 5: 319-326.
5. CalEPA (California Environmental Protection Agency). 1996. Risk assessment guidelines, Part 4: Technical support document: Exposure assessment and stochastic analysis. Sacramento, CA: State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
6. Cardelino, C. A. and W. L. Chameides. 1995. An observation-based model for analyzing ozone precursor relationships in the urban atmosphere. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 45: 161-180.
7. Carpenter, S., N. Caraco, D. Correll, R. Howarth, A. Sharpley, and V. Smith. 1998. Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecological Applications 8(3): 559-568.
8. Carter, W. 1994. Development of ozone reactivity scales for volatile organic compounds. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 44: 881-899.
9. Carter, W. 2000. Updated maximum incremental reactivity scale for regulatory applications. Sacramento, CA: California Air Resources Board.
10. Chameides, W. L. and E. B. Cowling, eds. 1995. The state of the southern oxidants study: Policy-relevant findings in ozone pollution research 1988 to 1994. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.
11. Daniels, M. J., F. Dominici, J. M. Samet, and S. L. Zeger. 2000. Estimating particulate matter-mortality dose-response curves and threshold levels: An analysis of daily time series for the 20 largest U.S. cities. American Journal of Epidemiology 152: 407-412.
12. De Hollander, A. E. M., J. M. Melse, E. Lebret, and P. G. N. Kramers. 1999. An aggregate public health indicator to represent the impact of multiple environmental exposures. Epidemiology 10: 606-617.
13. European Commission. 1996. Technical guidance documents in support of Directive 93/67/EEC on risk assessment of new notified substances and Regulation (EC) No. 1488/94 on risk assessment of existing substances (Parts I, II, III, and IV). EC catalog numbers CR-48-96-001, 002, 003, and 004-EN-C. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community.
14. Finnveden, G. 1997. Valuation methods within LCA: Where are the values? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2: 163-169.
15. Goedkoop, M. and R. Spriensma. 1999. The Eco-Indicator 99: A damage orientated method for life cycle impact assessment. The Hague, The Netherlands: VROM, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and the Environment.
16. Grahl, B. and E. Schmincke. 1996. Evaluation and decision-making processes in life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 1: 32-35.
17. Guinée, J. B. and R. Heijungs. 1993. A proposal for the classification of toxic substances within the framework of life cycle assessment of products. Chemosphere 26: 1925-1944.
18. Guinée, J., R. Heijungs, L. van Oers, D. van de Meent, T. Vermeire, and M. Rikken. 1996. LCA impact assessment of toxic releases: Generic modelling of fate, exposure, and effect for ecosystems and human beings with data for about 100 chemicals. No. 1996/21. The Hague, The Netherlands: VROM, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and the Environment.
19. Hauschild, M. and D. W. Pennington. 2002. Methods of effect assessment for ecotoxicity. In Towards best available practice in life cycle impact assessment, edited by Udo de Haes et al. Brussels: SETAC Europe Press.
20. Hauschild, M., H. Wenzel, A. Damborg, and J. Tørsløv. 1998. Ecotoxocity as a criterion in the environmental assessment of products. In Environmental Assessment of Products. Vol. 2, Scientific background, edited by M. Hauschild and H. Wenzel. London: Chapman and Hall.
21. Heijungs, R., J. Guinée, G. Huppes, R. Lankreijer, H. Udo de Haes, A. Wegener Sleeswijk, A. Ansems, P. Eggels, R. van Duin, and H. de Goede. 1992. Environmental life cycle assessment of products. Vol. 1, Guide and Vol. 2, Backgrounds. Leiden, The Netherlands: Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden University.
22. Heijungs, R., J. Guinée, and G. Huppes. 1997. Impact categories for natural resources and land use. CML report 138, Section: Substances and products. Leiden, The Netherlands: Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden University.
23. Hertwich, E. G., W. S. Pease, and C. P. Koshland. 1997. Evaluating the environmental impact of products and production processes: A comparison of six methods. The Science of the Total Environment 196: 13-29.
24. Hertwich, E. G., W. S. Pease, and T. E. McKone. 1998. Evaluating toxic impact assessment methods: What works best? Environmental Science and Technology 32: A138-A144.
25. Hertwich, E., T. McKone, and W. Pease. 1999. Parameter uncertainty and variability in evaluative fate and exposure models. Risk Analysis 19: 1193-1204.
26. Hertwich, E. G., S. F. Mateles, W. S. Pease, and T. E. McKone. 2001. Human toxicity potentials for life cycle analysis and toxics release inventory risk screening. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20: 928-939.
27. Hofstetter, P. 1998. Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment: A structured approach to combine models of the technosphere, ecosphere, and valuesphere. Boston: Kluwer.
28. Hofstetter, P. 1999. Top-down arguments for a goal-oriented assessment structure. Global LCA Village. 〈www.ecomed.de/journals/lca/village/W1A2_99/TopDown.htm〉 Accessed October 2002.
29. Huijbregts, M. A. J. 1999a. Priority assessment of toxic substances in the frame of LCA: Development and application of the multi-media fate, exposure, and effect model USES-LCA. Amsterdam: Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Amsterdam. 〈www.leidenuniv.nl/interfac/cml/lca2〉. Accessed June 2002.
30. Huijbregts, M. A. J. 1999b. Ecotoxicological effect factors for the terrestrial environment in the frame of LCA. Amsterdam: Interfaculty Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Amsterdam. 〈www.leiden univ.nl/interfac/cml/lca2/TerrestrialLCA.pdf〉. Accessed October 2002.
31. Huijbregts, M. A. J., U. Thissen, J. B. Guinée, T. Jager, D. van de Meent, A. M. J. Ragas, A. Wegener Sleeswijk, and L. Reijnders. 2000. Priority assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment, Part 1: Calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested multi-media fate, exposure, and effects model USES-LCA. Chemosphere 41: 541-573.
32. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 1996. Climate change 1995: The science of climate change. Edited by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: J. T. Houghton, L. G. Meira Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Maskell. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33. Jolliet, O. and P. Crettaz. 1997. Critical surface-time 95: A life cycle impact assessment methodology including fate and exposure. Lausanne, Switzerland: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
34. Kasibhatala, P., W. L. Chameides, R. D. Saylor, and D. Olerud. 1998. Relationships between regional ozone pollution and emissions of nitrogen oxides in the eastern United States. Journal of Geophysical Research 103(D17): 22663-22669.
35. Klepper, O., J. Bakker, T. P. Traas, and D. van de Meent. 1998. Mapping the potentially affected fraction (PAF) of species as a basis for comparison of ecotoxicological risks between substances and regions. Journal of Hazardous Materials 61: 337-344.
36. Levy, J. I., S. Wolff, and J. S. Evans. 2002. A regression-based approach for estimating primary and secondary particulate matter exposure efficiency. Risk Analysis. 22(5): 895-904.
37. Lindeijer, E., M. Kampen, and P. Fraanje. 1998. Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA. Report no. W-DWW-98-059. Amsterdam: 1VAM and IBN/DLO.
38. McKone, T. E. 1993. CalTOX: A multimedia total exposure model for hazardous-waste sites. UCRL-CR-111456PtI-IV. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
39. Murray, C. J. L. and A. D. Lopez, eds. 1996. The global burden of disease. The global burden of disease and injury, Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40. Nishioka, Y., J. I. Levy, G. A. Norris, A. Wilson, P. Hofstetter, and J. D. Spengler. 2002. Estimating the public health benefits of increased residential insulation for new housing. Risk Analysis 22(5): 1003-1017.
41. Nishioka, Y., G. A. Norris, and J. Levy. 2003. The TRACI midpoint- and endpoint-based method for life cycle impact assessment of primary and secondary particulates. In preparation.
42. Norris, G. 2002. Impact characterization in the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts: Methods for acidification, eutrophication, and ozone formation. Journal of Industrial Ecology 6(3/4): 83-105.
43. NRC (National Research Council). 1991. Rethinking the ozone problem in urban and regional air pollution. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
44. Owens, J. W. 1997. Life-cycle assessment: Constraints on moving from inventory to impact assessment. Journal of Industrial Ecology 1(1): 37-49.
45. Owens, J. W. 2001. Water resources in life-cycle impact assessment: Considerations in choosing category indicators. Journal of Industrial Ecology 5(2): 37-54.
46. Pennington, D. W. and J. C. Bare. 2002. Comparison of human health screening and ranking approaches: The waste minimization prioritization tool (WMPT) and toxic equivalency potentials (TEPs). Risk Analysis 21: 897-913.
47. Pennington, D. W. and P. L. Yue. 2000. Options for comparison of process design alternatives in terms of regional environmental impacts. Journal of Cleaner Production 8: 1-9.
48. x and VOC emissions. Unpublished manuscript. Paris: Ecole des Mines.
49. Schlesinger, W. 1997. Biogeochemistry: An analysis of global change. Boston: Academic Press.
50. Seppälä, J. 1997. Decision analysis as a tool for life cycle impact assessment. Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
51. Shannon, J. D. 1991. Modeled sulfur deposition trends since 1900 in North America. In Air pollution modeling and its application, Vol. 8, edited by H. van Dop and G. Kallos. New York: Plenum.
52. Shannon, J. D. 1992. Regional analysis of S emission-deposition trends in North America from 1979 through 1988. In Air pollution modeling and its application, Vol. 9, edited by H. van Dop and G. Kallos. New York: Plenum.
53. Shannon, J. D. 1996. Atmospheric pathways module. In Tracking and analysis framework (TAF) model documentation and user's guide: An interactive model for integrated assessment of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments. ANL/DIS/TM-36. Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory.
54. x and VOC as ozone precursors: A case study from the SOS Nashville/Middle Tennessee ozone study. Journal of Geophysical Research 103(D17): 22415-22423.
55. Stouthard, M. E. A., M.-L. Essink-Bot, and J. G. Bonsel. 2000. Disability weights for diseases: A modified protocol and results for a Western European region. European Journal of Public Health 10: 24-30.
56. Suter, G. W., II. 1993. Ecological risk assessment. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers.
57. Suter, G. W., II. 1998. Ecotoxicological effects extrapolation models. In Risk assessment: Logic and measurement, edited by C. L. Strojan and M. C. Newman. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Press.
58. Swan, G. 1998. Evaluation of land use in life cycle assessment. Report 1998:2. Göteborg, Sweden: Chalmers University of Technology, Center for Environmental Assessment of Product and Material Systems.
59. Swanson, M. B. and A. C. Socha, eds. 1997. Chemical ranking and scoring: Guidelines for relative assessments of chemicals. In Proceedings of the Pellston Workshop on Chemical Ranking and Scoring. Pensacola, FL: SETAC Press.
60. Udo de Haes, H. A., ed. 1996. Towards a methodology for life cycle impact assessment. Brussels: SETAC Europe.
61. Udo de Haes, H. A., G. Finnveden, M. Goedkoop, M. Hauschild, E. G. Hertwich, P. Hofstetter, O. Jolliet, W. Klöpffer, W. Krewitt, E. W. Lindeijer, R. Mueller-Wenk, S. I. Olson, D. W. Pennington, J. Potting, and B. Steen. 2002. Life cycle impact assessment: Striving towards best practice. Brussels: SETAC-Europe.
62. Udo de Haes, H. A., O. Jolliet, G. Finnveden, M. Hauschild, W. Krewitt, and R. Mueller-Wenk. 1999a. Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment, Part 1. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4(2): 66-74.
63. Udo de Haes, H. A., O. Jolliet, G. Finnveden, M. Hauschild, W. Krewitt, and R. Mueller-Wenk. 1999b. Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment, Part 2. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4(3): 167-174.
64. UNEP-SETAC (United Nations Environmental Programme-Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry). 2000. Letter of intent: Best available practice of life cycle assessment with generic application dependency. Signed by the International Council of SETAC, and UNEP, Division Technology, Industry, and Economics. 〈www.uneptie.org/pc/sustain/lca/letter-of-intent.htm〉. Accessed October 2002.
65. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1989a. Exposure factors handbook. EPA/600/8-89/043. Washington, DC: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment.
66. U.S. EPA. 1989b. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund. Vol. 1, Human health evaluation manual (Part A). EPA/540/1-89/002. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
67. U.S. EPA. 1992a. Dermal exposure assessment: Principles and applications. EPA/600/8-91/011B. Washington, DC: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment.
68. U.S. EPA. 1992b. Framework for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-92/001. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
69. U.S. EPA. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
70. U.S. EPA. 1999. The benefits and costs of the Clean Air Act: 1990 to 2010. EPA-410-R99-001. Washington, DC: EPA Office of Air and Radiation.
71. U.S. EPA. 2000. Ecological soil screening level guidance. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. 〈www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/risk/ecorisk/frdraft.pdf〉. Accessed October 2002.
72. U.S. EPA. 2001. National emissions: Global warming potentials. 〈http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/ content/EmissionsNationalGlobalWarmingPotentials.html〉. Accessed Oct. 21, 2002.
73. van Beelen, P., A. K. Fleuren-Kemila, and T. Aldenberg. 2001. The relation between extrapolated risk, expressed as potentially affected fraction, and community effects, expressed as pollution-induced community tolerance. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20: 1133-1140.
74. Volkwein, S. and W. Klopffer. 1996. The valuation step within LCA, Part 1: General principles. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 1(1): 36-39.
75. Volkwein, S., R. Gihr, and W. Klopffer. 1996. The valuation step within LCA, Part 2: A formalized method of prioritization by expert panels. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 1(4): 182-192.
76. Wenzel, H., M. Z. Hauschild, and L. Alting. 1997. Environmental assessment of products. Vol. 1, Methodology, tools and case studies in product development. London: Chapman and Hall.
77. Yang, Y. Y. and C. B. Nelson. 1986. An estimation of daily food usage factors for assessing radionuclide intakes in the US population. Health Physics 50: 245-257.