A dynamic probabilistic material flow modeling method

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 76, Issue , 2016, Pages 69-80

  Bornhöft, Nikolaus A ^a,b   Sun, Tian Yin ^a   Hilty, Lorenz M ^a,b   Nowack, Bernd ^a  

^a SWISS FEDERAL LABORATORIES FOR MATERIALS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Bayesian modeling; Environmental exposure assessment; Material flow modeling; Prediction model; Simulation; Uncertainty handling

Indexed keywords

CARBON; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; FLOW CONTROL; FORECASTING; MATERIALS HANDLING; YARN;

BAYESIAN MODEL; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; MATERIAL FLOW; PREDICTION MODEL; SIMULATION; UNCERTAINTY HANDLING;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; FLOW MODELING; MATERIAL FLOW ANALYSIS; PREDICTION; PROBABILITY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

SWITZERLAND;

EID: 84949676121     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.11.012     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Baccini P., Brunner P.H. Metabolism of the Anthroposphere 1991, Springer, Berlin, Germany. 10.1007/978-3-662-02693-9.
2. Bornhöft N.A., Nowack B., Hilty L.M. Material flow modelling for environmental exposure assessment - a critical review of four approaches using the comparative implementation of an idealized example. 27th International Conference on Informatics for Environmental Protection. B. Page, a. G. Fleischer 2013, 379-388. Shaker, Hamburg, Germany. J. Göbel, V. Wohlgemuth (Eds.).
3. Carlin B.P., Louis T.A. Bayes and Empirical Bayes Methods for Data Analysis 2000, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton.
4. Daly R., Shen Q., Aitken S. Learning Bayesian networks: approaches and issues. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 2011, 26(2):99-157. 10.1017/S0269888910000251.
5. Gottschalk F., Nowack B. Release of engineered nanomaterials to the environment. J. Environ. Monit. 2011, 13:1145-1155. 10.1039/C0EM00547A.
6. Gottschalk F., Scholz R.W., Nowack B. Probabilistic material flow modeling for assessing the environmental exposure to compounds: methodology and an application to engineered nano-TiO2 particles. Environ. Model. Softw. 2010, 25:320-332. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.08.011.
7. 2, ZnO, Ag, CNT, fullerenes) for different regions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43:9216-9222. 10.1021/es9015553.
8. Hunter J.D. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2007, 9(3):90-95. others. 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55.
9. ifu Hamburg GmbH "Umberto" V. 5.6 2014, from, accessed: 05.09.14. http://www.umberto.de.
10. Jones E., Oliphant T., Peterson P., others SciPy: Open Source Scientific Tools for Python 2001, URL. http://www.scipy.org/.
11. Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt Pressemitteilung Nr. 30/2003 - Alter Fahrzeugbestand 2013.
12. Leontief W. Input-output Economics 1986, Oxford University Press.
13. MacLeod M., Scheringer M., McKone T.E., Hungerbuhler K. The state of multimedia mass-balance modeling in environmental science and decision-making. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44(22):8360-8364. 10.1021/es103297w.
14. McKinney W. "pandas: a python Data Analysis library." V. 0.15.1 2014, from, accessed: 01.12.14. http://pandas.pydata.org/.
15. Money E.S., Reckhow K.H., Wiesner M.R. The use of Bayesian networks for nanoparticle risk forecasting: model formulation and baseline evaluation. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 426(0):436-445. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.03.064.
16. Mueller N.C., Nowack B. Exposure modeling of engineered nanoparticles in the environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42:4447-4453. 10.1021/es7029637.
17. Müller E., Hilty L.M., Widmer R., Schluep M., Faulstich M. Modeling metal stocks and flows: a review of dynamic material flow analysis methods. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48(4):2102-2113. 10.1021/es403506a.
18. Page B., Kreutzer W. The Java Simulation Handbook : Simulating Discrete Event Systems with UML and Java 2005, Shaker, Aachen, Germany.
19. Piccinno F., Gottschalk F., Seeger S., Nowack B. Industrial production quantities and uses of ten engineered nanomaterials in Europe and the world. J. Nanoparticle Res. 2012, 14(9):1-11. 10.1007/s11051-012-1109-9.
20. Python Software Foundation Python Language Reference 2014, Vol. 2.7. from, accessed: 2014-08-07. http://www.python.org.
21. Savolainen K., Alenius H., Norppa H., Pylkkänen L., Tuomi T., Kasper G. Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials and nanotechnologies-a review. Toxicology 2010, 269(2-3):92-104. 10.1016/j.tox.2010.01.013.
22. Scott D.W. Multivariate Density Estimation : Theory, Practice, and Visualization 1992, Wiley, New York. 10.1002/9780470316849.
23. Stiftung entsorgung schweiz Swico, and stiftung Licht recycling schweiz (2014). Fachbericht 2014.
24. Sun T.Y., Gottschalk F., Hungerbühler K., Nowack B. Comprehensive probabilistic modelling of environmental emissions of engineered nanomaterials. Environ. Pollut. 2014, 185(0):69-76. 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.10.004.
25. TU Vienna Institute for Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management. STAN, SubSTance Flow ANalysis 2012, Vol. 2.5. from, accessed: 05.09.14. http://www.stan2web.net/.
26. van der Walt S., Colbert S.C., Varoquaux G. The NumPy array: a structure for efficient numerical computation. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2011, 13(2):22-30. 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37.
27. Walser T., Gottschalk F. Stochastic fate analysis of engineered nanoparticles in incineration plants. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 80:241-251. 10.3390/ijerph120505581.
28. Wick P., Clift M.J.D., Rösslein M., Rothen-Rutishauser B. A brief summary of carbon nanotubes science and technology: a health and safety perspective. ChemSusChem 2011, 4(7):905-911. 10.1002/cssc.201100161.