Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Assessment of human exposure to environmental sources of lead arising from the lead battery manufacturing and recycling sector in Europe: demonstration of a tiered approach in a case study

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 32, pages 418–426 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Standard approaches for the assessment of Man via the Environment exposure are designed to be conservative. However, propagating these exposures into health impact assessment might lead to questionable socio-economic costs.

Objective

The objective of this study was to develop a novel tiered modelling approach to assess human exposure to lead (Pb) via the environment.

Method

The approach starts in Tier 1 from EUSES modelling approach, modified with metal specific transfer factors. The generic Tier 2 approach uses the higher tier model GPM for air quality, and dietary exposure modelling based on EFSA’s Comprehensive Food Database, in combination with crop specific transfer factors. Tier 3 considers additional site-specific information such as proximity of inhabitants and agricultural activities in relation to industrial sites.

Results

This tiered modelling approach was applied to a case study of 50 lead battery manufacturing and recycling sites across Europe. Data sets from general population human biomonitoring studies were used to compare the predicted additional bioburden of Pb resulting from lead battery manufacturing and recycling. The higher tier assessments were able to demonstrate a >20-fold reduction in modelled Pb exposure compared to default assumptions made in Tier 1.

Significance

Leading to better estimates for socio-economic costs in health impact assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2: Predicted additional total daily Pb intake for human  arising from industrial activities near industrial facilities according to differnt tiered levels.
Fig. 3: Relative contribution of exposure routes to median internal Pb levels.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vermeire TG, Jager DT, Bussian B, Devillers J, Den Haan K, Hansen B, et al. European Union System for the Evaluation of Substances (EUSES). Principles and structure. Chemosphere. 1997;34:1823–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. ECHA. Guidance on information requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment Chapter R.16: Environmental exposure assessment. Version 3.0 February 2016. https://www.echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/information_requirements_r16_en.pdf/b9f0f406-ff5f-4315-908e-e5f83115d6af

  3. Fierens T, Van Holderbeke M, Standaert A, Cornelis C, Brochot C, Ciffroy P, et al. Multimedia & PBPK modelling with MERLIN-Expo versus biomonitoring for assessing Pb exposure of pre-school children in a residential setting. Sci Total Environ. 2016;568:785–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Buekers J, De Brouwere K, Lefebvre W, Willems H, Vandenbroele M, Van Sprang P, et al. Assessment of human exposure to environmental sources of nickel in Europe: Inhalation exposure. Sci Total Environ. 2015;521-2:359–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. MacLachlan DJ. Estimating the transfer of contaminants in animal feedstuffs to livestock tissues, milk and eggs: a review. Anim Prod Sci. 2011;51:1067.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schreck E, Foucault Y, Sarret G, Sobanska S, Cécillon L, Castrec-Rouelle M, et al. Metal and metalloid foliar uptake by various plant species exposed to atmospheric industrial fallout: Mechanisms involved for lead. Sci Total Environ. 2012;427-8:253–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shahid M, Dumat C, Khalid S, Schreck E, Xiong T, Niazi NK. Foliar heavy metal uptake, toxicity and detoxification in plants: A comparison of foliar and root metal uptake. J Hazard Mater 2017;325:36–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. US EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5305W). Human health risk assessment protocol for hazardous waste combustion facilities; 2005. EPA 530/R/05/006. Final Report. 2005. www.epa.gov/osw

  9. De Brouwere K, Buekers J, Cornelis C, Schlekat CE, Oller AR. Assessment of indirect human exposure to environmental sources of nickel: Oral exposure and risk characterization for systemic effects. Sci Total Environ. 2012;419:25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Oliva SR, Raitio H. Review of cleaning techniques and their effects on the chemical composition of foliar samples. Boreal Environ Res. 2003;8:263–72.

  11. Talard R, Piasecka A, Navis S, Geerts, L De Brouwere K, Verdonck F. Derivation of lead transfer factors and bioaccumulation factors for Man Via environment exposure assessment. Technical report. Arche Consulting, Gent, Belgium. 2019.

  12. ILA. International Lead Association. Lead Metal. EU Reach Registration Chemical Safety Report. 2020.

  13. ECETOC. Technical Report No 58. Assessment of Non-occupational Exposure to Chemicals. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals ISSN-0773-8072-58. 1994.

  14. ECHA. European Chemicals Agency. Annex xv restriction report proposal for a restriction substance name: lead iupac name: Not applicable CAS NUMBER: 7439-92-1. 2017; 0–84.

  15. Carlisle JC, Wade MJ. Predicting blood lead concentrations from environmental concentrations. Regul Toxicol Pharm. 1992;16:280–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. WHO. World Health Organization. Air Quality Guidelines for Europe—second Edition World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. 2000.

  17. Beaugelin-Seiller K, Cessac B, Marot F, Chartier C, Deportes I, Metivier J-M et al. La banque de données CIBLEX, une compilation de paramètres d’exposition de la population française au voisinage d’un site pollué. Déchets, Rev Francoph D’ÉCOLOGIE Ind 2004. https://doi.org/10.4267/dechets-sciences-techniques.2125.

  18. DEFRA. Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The contaminated land exposure assessment (CLEA) model. Technical basis and algorithms (report)

  19. EFSA. Scientific Opinion on Lead in Food. EFSA J. 2010;8:1–151.

  20. Rudnai P. Human biomonitoring for Europe. HBM4EU Science and policy for a healthy future. SCOPING DOCUMENT (2 nd round of prioritization) prioritized substance group: Lead. Horizon 2020 programme Contract No 733032. 2019. Available on https://www.hbm4eu.eu

  21. Clune A, Falk H, Riederer A. Mapping Global Environmental Lead Poisoning in Children. Blacksm Inst J Heal Pollut. 2011;1. https://doi.org/10.5696/jhp.v2i2.26.

  22. Fryer M, Collins CD, Ferrier H, Colvile RN, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. Human exposure modelling for chemical risk assessment: a review of current approaches and research and policy implications. Environ Sci Policy. 2006;9:261–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Lead REACH Consortium.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Boeretang 200, 2400, Mol, Belgium

    Katleen De Brouwere & Lieve Geerts

  2. ARCHE Consulting, Liefkensstraat 35D, 9032, Gent, Belgium

    Frederik Verdonck, Sabine Navis & Matthias Vanhamel

Authors
  1. Katleen De Brouwere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frederik Verdonck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lieve Geerts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sabine Navis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matthias Vanhamel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KDB and FV developed together the tiered approach framework. KDB performed tier 2 and 3 calculations for the local scale regarding dietary exposure and integrated exposure, and verified the predictions using human biomonitoring data. FV developed the Tier 1 concept, and performed tier 1 calculations for the local scale. LG calculated conversion factors from external to internal exposure. SN derived transfer factors for Tier 1 and Tier 2 dietary exposure calculations. MV performed Tier 2 calculations (GPM modelling) for the inhalation pathway.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katleen De Brouwere.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Besides the financing of the work by the Lead REACH Consortium, we have no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Brouwere, K., Verdonck, F., Geerts, L. et al. Assessment of human exposure to environmental sources of lead arising from the lead battery manufacturing and recycling sector in Europe: demonstration of a tiered approach in a case study. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 32, 418–426 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-021-00395-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-021-00395-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links