Modeling Pharmaceutical Emissions And Their Toxicity-Related Effects In Life Cycle Assessment (Lca): A Review

Over the last few decades, worldwide detection of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) in aquatic environments and the associated toxicological effects on wildlife and human health have become a matter of public and scientific debate. While life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) models are increasingly used to assess the potential eco- and human-toxicological effects of chemical emissions, few studies have looked into the issue of modeling pharmaceutical emissions specifically and their toxicity-related effects in an LCA context. This paper reviews the state of the art to inventory and characterize API emissions in LCA with the goal to identify relevant gaps and challenges. A search for 208 environmentally relevant APIs in 2 life cycle inventory (LCI) databases revealed a meager representation of this group of chemicals. Similarly, the LCIA model USEtox was found to include characterization factors (CFs) for less than 60 APIs. First approaches to model API emissions in LCA were identified on the basis of an examination of 40 LCA case studies in the pharmaceutical sector and in the field of wastewater treatment. Moreover, CFs for 79 additional APIs, expressing their ecotoxicity and/or human toxicity potential, were gathered from literature. An analysis of the variability of API-CFs in different LCIA models showed a variation of about 2-3 orders of magnitude. Based on the review results, 3 main gaps in the modeling and characterization of API emissions in an LCA context were identified: (1) incomplete modeling of API flows and API emissions along the life cycle of human pharmaceuticals, especially during their use and end-of-life phase, (2) limited API coverage in existing LCIA toxicity models, and (3) missing pharma-specific impact pathways (e.g., endocrine disruption and antibiotic resistance) in existing LCIA models. Recommendations to tackle these gaps are provided, and priority action steps are discussed. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:6-18. (c) 2018 SETAC