Proposal for a “Harmonized” strategy for the assessment of the HP 14 property

Pandard, Pascal; Römbke, Jörg

doi:10.1002/ieam.1447

Cited by 42 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different positions exist regarding fish tests used in waste and LLs toxicity testing. Fish tests were not included into 2013 recommendations (ethical considerations) from a 2007 EU ring test of solid waste (including waste leachate) classification, identification and basic characterization because of "animal protection reasons and the large quantity of eluate needed" (Pandard, Römbke 2013). Contrary to this position, the review on species used in the period 1983-2003 showed that fish tests were applied for evaluation of waste LLs (Férard, Ferrari 2005).…”

Section: Use Of Fish Test For Ww and Ll Toxicity Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, from an initial examination, it appears that the same biotesting principles are valid for wastes as for chemical substances (Thomas et al 2009). Two types of acute toxicity test batteries (aquatic and soil) are proposed for solid waste and LL in Germany after 2005Germany after -2007 European inter-laboratory comparison ring test (Wilke et al 2008;Moser et al 2011;Pandard, Römbke 2013). Despite the requirement to cover the traditional three trophic levels with biotest species, the aquatic tests battery for waste testing and hazard classification does not include fish (bioluminescent bacteria, algae and crustacean tests are proposed).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wastewater and Landfill Leachate Testing: Acute Toxicity Biotest Results Evaluation

Cetkauskaite

Vosylienė

Kazlauskienė

et al. 2016

Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This diverse review discusses biotest species and results scoring systems, which were applied to aquatic toxicity assessment of effluents/wastewater (WW) and landfill leachate (LL). European and American aquatic toxicity testing is reviewed. An example of Lithuanian research data on LL biotesting with aquatic organisms of different phylogenetic and ontogenetic levels is presented. Acute toxicity WW and LL is assessed on the basis of (L(E)C50, acute Toxic Units (tua), pt values, and, by applying different simple result scoring systems or toxicity thresholds. The differences in legislation and recommendations for biotest application in WW and LL aquatic toxicity testing are compared. It is concluded that WW and LL lowest acute toxicity data (tua value 0.3) should be considered equally as risk to aquatic environment, and technical management decisions should be made. The universal features of toxicity scoring systems, the problems of inventory of old small landfills and cost effective approach are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Use Of Fish Test For Ww and Ll Toxicity Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wastewater and Landfill Leachate Testing: Acute Toxicity Biotest Results Evaluation

Cetkauskaite

Vosylienė

Kazlauskienė

et al. 2016

Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the tiered approach proposed by Pandard and Römbke (2013), the results of the aquatic tests are considered first. Out of the 23 wastes tested 13 breached the LID of 4.…”

Section: Summary: Classification Of All Test Results (Aquatic and Termentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The terrestrial test methods used in this study are briefly described in Tables 5-7. FIGURE 1: Flowchart for the assessment of the HP 14 property (Pandard and Römbke, 2013).…”

Section: Terrestrial Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Evaluation of the suitability (i.e. practicability, sensitivity, reliability and robustness) of six standardized test methods when used for the hazard classification of 24 waste samples which differ strongly in their physico-chemical and toxicological properties; • Comparison of different assessment options using the whole data set from this exercise (including recommendations for a specific option); • Comparison of the results of these tests with those tests proposed by Pandard and Römbke (2013); note that they recommend the luminescent bacteria test (ISO 11348-3 (2007)) but in this contribution a genotoxicity test was used instead of the bacterial luminescent test (see also Figure 1 and Chapter 4.2). This proposal is based on discussions in Workgroup 7 of CEN/TC 292/WG 7 "Characterization of waste -Ecotoxicological properties".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing of 24 Potentially Hazardous Wastes Using 6 Ecotoxicological Tests

Römbke

2018

Detritus

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ecotoxicological characterization of wastes according to the European Waste List (EWL) is part of their assessment as hazardous or non-hazardous. Despite inclusion in national laws no methodological details have been fixed concerning the hazard property HP 14 ("ecotoxic").This paper intends to discuss the classification of wastes by ecotoxicological testing, using 24 representative samples of solid wastes (identified by their EWL number) with different properties. They were sampled according to standard methods, and, with one exception (galvanic sludge), ecotoxicologically tested. No chemical investigation of the samples was performed but they were characterized according to their properties in the ABANDA data base. Nearly all of these wastes were "mirror entries" in the EWL (i.e., they can be hazardous or not depending on the concentration of hazardous substances). For the ecotoxicological characterization three aquatic tests with eluates (genotoxicity, Algae, Daphnia) as well as three terrestrial tests with solid wastes (bacteria, plants, earthworms) were conducted. All investigations were performed as limit tests with three dilution steps. Algae, plants and terrestrial bacteria were the most sensitive organisms. Since no waste eluate showed any indication of genotoxicity, the genotoxicity test should be replaced by the luminescent bacteria test (ISO 11348-3). Proposals for toxicity criteria as well as hazard classifications were taken from the literature but they were modified according to own experiences. Using these concentration limits for the classification whether these wastes are ecotoxic or not, and using different versions of the hazard classification approach, 15-19 waste samples out of 23 waste samples were classified as ecotoxic (64-83%). It is proposed to perform a plausibility check of the respective HP 14-classification. The procedure used in this contribution (i.e. sampling of the wastes, their ecotoxicological testing as well as their hazard classification) could form the basis of a standardized hazard classification approach as proposed recently in the literature. In summary, this works confirms that ecotoxicological tests are practical and sensitive in order to be used for the ecotoxicological hazard classification of very different wastes.

show abstract

Ecotoxicological Assessment of Immersion Samples from Facade Render Containing Free or Encapsulated Biocides

Campiche

Dietschweiler

Werner

et al. 2018

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To protect house facades from fouling by microorganisms, biocides can be added to a render or paint before it is applied. During driving rain events, these biocides gradually leach out and have the potential to pollute soil or aquatic ecosystems. We studied the leaching behavior of biocides and toxicity of leachates from renders with either free or encapsulated biocides. Both render types contained equal amounts of terbutryn, 2-octyl-3(2H)-isothiazolinone (OIT), and 4,5-dichloro-2-n-octyl-4-isothiazolino-3-one (DCOIT). Nine leachate samples were generated over 9 immersion cycles according to a European standard, and biocides were quantified. The first and ninth leachate samples were tested using bioassays with algae, bacteria, and water fleas, the first sample was also tested with earthworms and springtails. Encapsulation reduced leaching of terbutryn, OIT, and DCOIT by 4-, 17-, and 27-fold. For aquatic organisms, the toxicity of water from render containing encapsulated biocides was always lower than that of render with free biocides. Furthermore, toxicity decreased by 4- to 5-fold over the 9 immersion cycles. Inhibition of photosynthesis was the most sensitive endpoint, followed by algal growth rate, bacterial bioluminescence, and water flea reproduction. Toxicity to algae was due to terbutryn and toxicity to bacteria was due to OIT. None of the samples affected soil organisms. Results demonstrate that combining standardized leaching tests with standardized bioassays is a promising approach to evaluate the ecotoxicity of biocides that leach from facade renders. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:2246-2256. © 2018 SETAC.

show abstract

Proposal for a “Harmonized” strategy for the assessment of the HP 14 property

Cited by 42 publications

References 13 publications

Wastewater and Landfill Leachate Testing: Acute Toxicity Biotest Results Evaluation

Wastewater and Landfill Leachate Testing: Acute Toxicity Biotest Results Evaluation

Testing of 24 Potentially Hazardous Wastes Using 6 Ecotoxicological Tests

Ecotoxicological Assessment of Immersion Samples from Facade Render Containing Free or Encapsulated Biocides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About