Ecotoxicological impacts of landfill sites: Towards risk assessment, mitigation policies and the role of artificial intelligence

Waste disposal in landfills remains a global concern. Despite technological developments, landfill leachate poses a hazard to ecosystems and human health since it acts as a secondary reservoir for legacy and emerging pollutants. This study provides a systematic and scientometric review of the nature and toxicity of pollutants generated by landfills and means of assessing their potential risks. Regarding human health, unregulated waste disposal and pathogens in leachate are the leading causes of diseases reported in local populations. Both in vitro and in vivo approaches have been employed in the ecotoxicological risk assessment of landfill leachate, with model organisms ranging from bacteria to birds. These studies demonstrate a wide range of toxic effects that reflect the complex composition of leachate and geographical variations in climate, resource availability and management practices. Based on bioassay (and other) evidence, categories of persistent chemicals of most concern include brominated flame retardants, per- and polyfluorinated chemicals, pharmaceuticals and alkyl phenol ethoxylates. However, the emerging and more general literature on microplastic toxicity suggests that these particles might also be problematic in leachate. Various mitigation strategies have been identified, with most focussing on improving landfill design or leachate treatment, developing alternative disposal methods and reducing waste volume through recycling or using more sustainable materials. The success of these efforts will rely on policies and practices and their enforcement, which is seen as a particular challenge in developing nations and at the international (and transboundary) level. Artificial intelligence and machine learning afford a wide range of options for evaluating and reducing the risks associated with leachates and gaseous emissions from landfills, and various approaches tested or having potential are discussed. However, addressing the limitations in data collection, model accuracy, real-time monitoring and our understanding of environmental impacts will be critical for realising this potential.

Screening for 26 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in German drinking waters with support of residents

The occurrence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in water cycles poses a challenge to drinking water quality and safety. In order to counteract the large knowledge gap regarding PFAS in German drinking water, 89 drinking water samples from all over Germany were collected with the help of residents and were analyzed for 26 PFAS by high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS). The 20 PFAS recently regulated by sum concentration (PFAS∑20), as well as six other PFAS, were quantified by targeted analysis. In all drinking water samples, PFAS∑20 was below the limit of 0.1 μg/L, but the sum concentrations ranged widely from below the limit of quantification up to 80.2 ng/L. The sum concentrations (PFAS∑4) of perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), and perfluorononanoate of 20 ng/L were exceeded in two samples. The most frequently detected individual substances were PFOS (in 52% of the samples), perfluorobutanesulfonate (52%), perfluorohexanoate (PFHxA) (44%), perfluoropentanoate (43%) and PFHxS (35%). The highest single concentrations were 23.5 ng/L for PFHxS, 15.3 ng/L for PFOS, and 10.1 ng/L for PFHxA. No regionally elevated concentrations were identified, but some highly urbanized areas showed elevated levels. Concentrations of substitution PFAS, including 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-2-(heptafluoropropoxy)propanoate and 2,2,3-trifluor-3-[1,1,2,2,3,3-hexafluor-3-(trifluormethoxy)propoxy]-propanoate (anion of ADONA), were very low compared to regulated PFAS. The most frequently detected PFAS were examined for co-occurrences, but no definite correlations could be found.

Power and sample size analysis for longitudinal mixed models of health in populations exposed to environmental contaminants: a tutorial

BACKGROUND

When evaluating the impact of environmental exposures on human health, study designs often include a series of repeated measurements. The goal is to determine whether populations have different trajectories of the environmental exposure over time. Power analyses for longitudinal mixed models require multiple inputs, including clinically significant differences, standard deviations, and correlations of measurements. Further, methods for power analyses of longitudinal mixed models are complex and often challenging for the non-statistician. We discuss methods for extracting clinically relevant inputs from literature, and explain how to conduct a power analysis that appropriately accounts for longitudinal repeated measures. Finally, we provide careful recommendations for describing complex power analyses in a concise and clear manner.

METHODS

For longitudinal studies of health outcomes from environmental exposures, we show how to [1] conduct a power analysis that aligns with the planned mixed model data analysis, [2] gather the inputs required for the power analysis, and [3] conduct repeated measures power analysis with a highly-cited, validated, free, point-and-click, web-based, open source software platform which was developed specifically for scientists.

RESULTS

As an example, we describe the power analysis for a proposed study of repeated measures of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in human blood. We show how to align data analysis and power analysis plan to account for within-participant correlation across repeated measures. We illustrate how to perform a literature review to find inputs for the power analysis. We emphasize the need to examine the sensitivity of the power values by considering standard deviations and differences in means that are smaller and larger than the speculated, literature-based values. Finally, we provide an example power calculation and a summary checklist for describing power and sample size analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper provides a detailed roadmap for conducting and describing power analyses for longitudinal studies of environmental exposures. It provides a template and checklist for those seeking to write power analyses for grant applications.

PFAS use in electronic products and exposure risks during handling and processing of e-waste: A review

Poly- and perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) have been and are used in electronic products due to their unique properties that improve product quality and performance. Ubiquities and persistence of some PFAS detected in environmental samples (water, soil, air) have attracted much attention and regulatory actions in recent years. This review provides an overview of PFAS use in electronic components; trends in quantities of e-waste generation; PFAS exposure pathways during e-waste handling and processing; reported PFAS in environmental samples and samples of serum, blood, and hair collected from people living near and working at e-waste processing sites. Processes used for manufacturing electronic components (e.g., embedded processes, additive manufacturing) make recycling or materials recovery from discarded electronic units and components very difficult and unfeasible. Exposure during numerous processing steps for materials recovery and scavenging at disposal sites can result in PFAS intake through inhalation, ingestion, and dermal routes. Chemical risk assessment approaches have been continuously evolving to consider chemical-specific dosimetric and mechanistic information. While the metabolic fate of PFAS is not well understood, some PFAS bioaccumulate and bind to proteins (but not to lipids) in biota and humans due to their surface-active characteristics and very low solubility in water and fat. It is difficult to associate the adverse health effects due to exposure to e-waste directly to PFAS as there are other factors that could contribute to the observed adverse effects. However, PFAS have been detected in the samples collected from different environmental compartments (e.g., water, soil, leachate, blood sera, rainwater) at and near e-waste processing sites, landfills, and near electronics and optoelectronics industries indicating that e-waste collection, processing, and disposal sites are potential PFAS exposure locations. Better monitoring of e-waste handling sites and detailed epidemiological studies for at risk populations are needed for assessing potential health risks due to PFAS exposure at these sites.

Socio-economic analysis for the authorisation of chemicals under REACH: a case of very high concern?

Under the European chemicals' legislation, REACH, substances that are identified to be of "very high concern" will de facto be removed from the market unless the European Commission grants authorisations permitting specific uses. Companies who apply for an authorisation without demonstrating "adequate control" of the risks have to show by means of a socio-economic analysis (SEA) that positive impacts of use outweigh negative impacts for human health and ecosystems. This paper identifies core challenges where further in-depth guidance is urgently required in order to ensure that a SEA can deliver meaningful results and that it can effectively support decision-making on authorisation. In particular, we emphasise the need (i) to better guide the selection of tools for impact assessment, (ii) to explicitly account for stock pollution effects in impact assessments for persistent and very persistent chemicals, (iii) to define suitable impact indicators for PBT/vPvB chemicals given the lack of reliable information about safe concentration levels, (iv) to guide how impacts can be transformed into values for decision-making, and (v) to provide a well-balanced discussion of discounting of long-term impacts of chemicals.