Search

Challenges in distinguishing between natural and engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) and the lack of historical records on ENM accidents have hampered attempts to estimate the accidental release and associated environmental impacts of ENMs. Building on knowledge from the nuclear power industry, we provide an assessment of the likelihood of accidental release rates of ENMs within the next 10 and 30 years. We evaluate risk predictive methodology and compare the results with empirical evidence, which enables us to propose modelling approaches to estimate accidental release risk probabilities. Results from two independent modelling approaches based on either assigning 0.5% of reported accidents to ENM-releasing accidents (M1) or based on an evaluation of expert opinions (M2) correlate well and predict severe accidental release of 7% (M1) in the next 10 years and of 10% and 20% for M2 and M1, respectively, in the next 30 years. We discuss the relevance of these results in a regulatory context.

The chemical composition and properties of environmental media determine nanomaterial (NM) transport, fate, biouptake, and organism response. To compare and interpret experimental data, it is essential that sufficient context be provided for describing the physical and chemical characteristics of the setting in which a nanomaterial may be present. While the nanomaterial environmental, health and safety (NanoEHS) field has begun harmonization to allow data comparison and re-use (e.g. using standardized materials, defining a minimum set of required material characterizations), there is limited guidance for standardizing test media. Since most of the NM properties driving environmental behaviour and toxicity are medium-dependent, harmonization of media is critical. A workshop in March 2016 at Duke University identified five categories of test media: aquatic testing media, soil and sediment testing media, biological testing media, engineered systems testing media and product matrix testing media. For each category of test media, a minimum set of medium characteristics to report in all NM tests is recommended. Definitions and detail level of the recommendations for specific standardized media vary across these media categories. This reflects the variation in the maturity of their use as a test medium and associated measurement techniques, variation in utility and relevance of standardizing medium properties, ability to simplify standardizing reporting requirements, and in the availability of established standard reference media. Adoption of these media harmonization recommendations will facilitate the generation of integrated comparable datasets on NM fate and effects. This will in turn allow testing of the predictive utility of functional assay measurements on NMs in relevant media, support investigation of first principles approaches to understand behavioral mechanisms, and support categorization strategies to guide research, commercial development, and policy.