Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGuinée, Jeroen Ben
dc.contributor.authorHeijungs, Reinouten
dc.contributor.authorVijver, Martina Gen
dc.contributor.authorPeijnenburg, Willie J G Men
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-09T12:16:08Z
dc.date.available2018-01-09T12:16:08Z
dc.date.issued2017-08-04
dc.identifier.citationSetting the stage for debating the roles of risk assessment and life-cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials. 2017, 12 (8):727-733 Nat Nanotechnolen
dc.identifier.issn1748-3395
dc.identifier.pmid28775351
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/nnano.2017.135
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10029/621056
dc.description.abstractAlthough technological and environmental benefits are important stimuli for nanotechnology development, these technologies have been contested from an environmental point of view. The steady growth of applications of engineered nanomaterials has heated up the debate on quantifying the environmental repercussions. The two main scientific methods to address these environmental repercussions are risk assessment and life-cycle assessment. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these methods, and the relation between them, have been a topic of debate in the world of traditional chemistry for over two decades. Here we review recent developments in this debate in general and for the emerging field of nanomaterials specifically. We discuss the pros and cons of four schools of thought for combining and integrating risk assessment and life-cycle assessment and conclude with a plea for action.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to Nature nanotechnologyen
dc.titleSetting the stage for debating the roles of risk assessment and life-cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalNature Nanotechnol 2017, 12(8):727-33en
html.description.abstractAlthough technological and environmental benefits are important stimuli for nanotechnology development, these technologies have been contested from an environmental point of view. The steady growth of applications of engineered nanomaterials has heated up the debate on quantifying the environmental repercussions. The two main scientific methods to address these environmental repercussions are risk assessment and life-cycle assessment. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these methods, and the relation between them, have been a topic of debate in the world of traditional chemistry for over two decades. Here we review recent developments in this debate in general and for the emerging field of nanomaterials specifically. We discuss the pros and cons of four schools of thought for combining and integrating risk assessment and life-cycle assessment and conclude with a plea for action.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record