Battery-powered electric cars (BEVs) play a key role in future mobility scenarios. However, little is known about the environmental impacts of the production, use and disposal of the lithium ion (Li-ion) battery. This makes it difficult to compare the environmental impacts of BEVs with those of internal combustion engine cars (ICEVs). Consequently, a detailed lifecycle inventory of a Li-ion battery and a rough LCA of BEV based mobility were compiled. The study shows that the environmental burdens of mobility are dominated by the operation phase regardless of whether a gasoline-fueled ICEV or a European electricity fueled BEV is used. The share of the total environmental impact of E-mobility caused by the battery (measured in Ecoindicator 99 points) is 15%. The impact caused by the extraction of lithium for the components of the Li-ion battery is less than 2.3% (Ecoindicator 99 points). The major contributor to the environmental burden caused by the battery is the supply of copper and aluminum for the production of the anode and the cathode, plus the required cables or the battery management system. This study provides a sound basis for more detailed environmental assessments of battery based E-mobility.

Electric vehicle production and disposalA typical middle-class passenger car from ecoinvent v2.0, represented by a Golf A4 (petrol, 55kW) is used as a base for the LCI [1]. This dataset originates on data from "Life Cycle Inventory for the Golf A4", a "Volkswagen" report from the year 2000 [2]. All sub-components constituting the ICE drive train were subtracted from the ecoinvent dataset, leaving the LCI of a motor less vehicle glider. Thus, two new LCI datasets for a Glider and an ICE drive train were generated which combined match the Golf A4 (Table S1 to S3). A new LCI dataset for an electric drive train was generated using data from. The components to build an LCI for an electric drive train are selected in such a way, that the same maximal permanent power of 55 kW followed from the ICE drive train. The LCI for the entire BEV finally consists of the LCI of the glider, the electric drive train and the Li-ion battery.Scheme S1. The model of an internal combustion vehicle (ICE Vehicle) and a battery vehicle.

The environmental risks of five engineered nanomaterials (nano-TiO2, nano-Ag, nano-ZnO, CNT, and fullerenes) were quantified in water, soils, and sediments using probabilistic Species Sensitivity Distributions (pSSDs) and probabilistic predicted environmental concentrations (PECs). For water and soil, enough ecotoxicological endpoints were found for a full risk characterization (between 17 and 73 data points per nanomaterial for water and between 4 and 20 for soil) whereas for sediments, the data availability was not sufficient. Predicted No Effect Concentrations (PNECs) were obtained from the pSSD and used to calculate risk characterization ratios (PEC/PNEC). For most materials and environmental compartments, exposure and effect concentrations were separated by several orders of magnitude. Nano-ZnO in freshwaters and nano-TiO2 in soils were the combinations where the risk characterization ratio was closest to one, meaning that these are compartment/ENM combinations to be studied in more depth with the highest priority. The probabilistic risk quantification allows us to consider the large variability of observed effects in different ecotoxicological studies and the uncertainty in modeled exposure concentrations. The risk characterization results presented in this work allows for a more focused investigation of environmental risks of nanomaterials by consideration of material/compartment combinations where the highest probability for effects with predicted environmental concentrations is likely.

Recently, much has been written about the extreme urgency of elaborating the regulations for engineered nanomaterials. Such regulations are needed both from lawmakers, to protect people from potentially adverse effects, and from industry representatives, to prove that nanoproducts are produced carefully and with caution to avoid possible lawsuits. However, developing regulations has proven to be a difficult task, and an ambiguous topic where errors can easily occur. In the present study, the authors present a meta-analysis of 3 different nanomaterials (nano-Ag, nano-ZnO, and nano-CuO) in which data from ecotoxicity studies and published half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) values are compared for both the nano form and the corresponding dissolved metal. A ratio equal to 1 means that the particle is as toxic as the dissolved metal ion, whereas a lower ratio signifies that the nano form is less toxic than the dissolved metal based on total metal concentrations. The results show that for 93.8% (Ag), 100% (Cu), and 81% (Zn) of the ratios considered, the nano form is less toxic than the dissolved metal in terms of total metal concentration. Very few of the studies surveyed found a ratio of EC50 values for (dissolved/nano) that was larger than 2 (Ag: 1.1%; Cu: 0%; Zn: 2.8%). Hence, a reduction in existing metal concentration thresholds by a factor of 2 in current freshwater and soil regulations for ecotoxicity may be sufficient to protect organisms and compartments from the nano form of these metals as well.

No abstract