An improved method for assessing environmental impacts caused by chemical pollutants: A case study in textiles production

Abstract

The use of chemicals in the textile industry has been widely investigated. This study used an improved method with the USEtox model to assess the environmental impacts of chemical pollutants discharged by the textile industry. The environmental impacts attributed to the discharged chemical pollutants were ranked using a quantity analysis method and a toxicity analysis method. The rankings of the two methods were compared by calculating Spearman’s correlation coefficients and outliers. The results showed that the human health and ecological hazards potential were mainly caused by heavy metals. The rankings of the environmental impacts calculated with the quantity analysis method were different from those calculated with the toxicity analysis method. Cadmium, hexachlorobenzene and mercury caused severe human and ecological hazards with a small volume of emissions. Zinc and hexavalent chromium were highly toxic chemical pollutants, which could cause severe human health and ecological hazards potential. These five kinds of chemical pollutants should be preferentially controlled to mitigate the environmental impacts caused by chemical pollutants discharged from the textile industry.

Advances, Norms, and Perspectives in Product Chemical Footprint Research

“…Chemical footprints characterized based on space occupancy and mass expressions are compared by quantitative analysis. The quantity-based indicators of chemical pollutants are widely used mainly because data for comparing decision-making units are easily available [ 26 ]. However, mass-based indicators should not be considered a substitute for (ecological) toxicity impact potential, as they do not consider the fate, exposure, and impact of substances; moreover, in the driver-pressure-state-impact-response framework, the mass-based indicators of chemical pollution are stress indicators [ 28 ].…”

“…The key to solving environmental pollution problems is to identify hazards and trace the sources of priority pollutants [ 26 ]. The types of methods for evaluating the chemical footprint of a product can be divided into three categories, namely, process evaluation [ 16 , 17 , 18 ], end evaluation [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ], and source evaluation [ 23 ].…”

“…As an environmental footprint, the chemical footprint (ChF), which inherits the characteristics of the footprint approach [ 14 ], can be used in evaluating the impact of chemical contamination from human activities on environmental sustainability, facilitates the identification of situations that could enable us to prevent “chemical overshoot” beyond the Earth’s safe operating space [ 15 ], and is one of the most commonly used quantitative methods for assessing toxicological pressure on human and ecological chemicals. It has been applied at different levels, particularly at the product [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ], industry [ 24 ], enterprise [ 25 ], and country [ 26 , 27 , 28 ] levels. This paper reviews the progress of research on chemical footprints worldwide, finds that there is a lack of guiding norms and processes for product chemical footprint calculation and evaluation.…”

Innovative Textiles Used in Face Masks: Filtration Efficiency and Self-Disinfecting Properties against Coronaviruses

“…This allows high flexibility and fast reactions to arising needs. When selecting the finishes, substances based on heavy metals were excluded since discussion of their effects on health and the environment has, so far, been met with controversy [ 22 ].…”