The Sustainable Approach to Chemical Risk Assessments

By Jack Shaw, senior writer and editor at Modded

Chemical risk assessments are integral because they protect humans from dangerous exposure and support public health. Government agencies use these examinations to determine the risk of specific chemicals and remove associated products from store shelves. However, experts sometimes downplay the risk and allow goods to remain available for sale. Here’s a guide on chemical risk assessments, their controversies and future guidance for sustainability.

What Do Chemical Risk Assessments Include?

Every part of a chemical risk assessment is critical to public safety, so scientists must be meticulous in their examinations. Here are the steps you may see in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) chemical risk assessment.

Creating the Scope

The Frank Lautenberg Act requires the EPA to have 20 ongoing chemical risk evaluations for high-priority substances. Before the agency can begin an assessment, it must determine the scope and stay within it. If they go outside the purview, experts risk exceeding their budget, straining resources and missing deadlines. You also risk compromising the effectiveness of the assessment by straying.

Outlining the scope includes assessing the chemical’s exposures and hazards and creating a draft for the Federal Register. Once complete, the agency must use a 45-day public comment period before publishing a final scope within six months of the risk evaluation.

Assessing the Hazard

Next, the EPA must assess the hazard and identify how the chemical affects human and environmental health. This comprehensive process entails determining the toxicity and its potential to cause cancer and other diseases. For instance, experts have established asbestos as a known carcinogen, so a hazard assessment would include its impact on building occupant health.

The hazard assessment phase also examines how the chemical can cause mutations and other bodily issues. Chemical mutagens are prominent and must receive scrutiny to be transparent about public health. Benzene — another known carcinogen — is common in cigarette smoke and can cause genetic mutations. A 2023 Frontiers in Public Health study found benzene damaged DNA structures when exposed to workers.

Determining Exposure

The third step in chemical risk assessment is determining where the chemical exposure occurs and how intense it is. This phase also investigates the populations exposed to the chemicals and the risks they see.

Exposure assessments help the EPA experts determine the chemical’s source and discover the nature of the incident. The event could include biological agents, radiation and other hazards. Assessments are critical because they highlight the chemical risks in industrial-heavy locations.

For instance, such an examination in Louisiana would determine what chemicals affect the 85-mile stretch the locals call Cancer Alley. Long-term hazardous exposure has led to increased miscarriages, infertility, cancer and other illnesses. The 2024 Human Rights Watch report says air pollution has led to preterm births well above the national average.

Characterizing and Finalizing the Risk

The final steps for chemical risk assessments include characterizing and finalizing the risks. Characterization assesses the available information on the chemical hazard and its exposure, accounting for data quality and expert interpretations.

The EPA uses quantitative and qualitative estimations to determine the chemical’s safety and toxicity levels. This step also outlines the gaps and acknowledges the estimate’s limitations.

The last phase involves a finalized risk assessment where the EPA determines whether the questioned chemical poses an unjustifiable health and environmental risk. Officials use the scope to decide dangers, so the final report may contrast with other scientific research or advocacy groups. This disparity has led to controversial health and environmental research outcomes, as the agency has yet to ban dangerous chemicals.

What Issues Have Arisen in Chemical Risk Assessments?

While they can be productive, chemical risk assessments have introduced controversies in the 21^st century. Here are a few examples of disputed chemicals that have remained in U.S. markets despite chemical risk assessments and bans in other countries.

Paraquat-Based Herbicides

Eliminating weeds is a standard practice in agriculture, so farmers use herbicides to clean their croplands. Some agricultural professionals use paraquat-based products to mitigate the problem, but these herbicides have been controversial because of their health defects. Environmental groups have petitioned the EPA to ban the substance, but efforts have failed and raised questions about its chemical risk assessment.

Scientists say the chemical causes Parkinson’s disease, alters dopamine production and increases the risk of kidney disease. The EPA said it has regulations for applying paraquat, such as wearing personal protective equipment and requiring certification. However, the report did not include the risk of Parkinson’s Disease.

Glyphosate

Glyphosate is another controversial chemical substance used in agriculture that the U.S. has yet to remove. While its bans are not widespread, countries such as France and Belgium have banned the chemical from household use after extensive research. The United States has considered outlawing glyphosate-based products after controversies with herbicide products like Roundup, but a ban has yet to begin.

In early 2020, the EPA said it found ecological risks with glyphosate but no human health dangers from exposure. By September 2022, the agency withdrew its interim registration review and allowed glyphosate products to remain on the market despite the environmental risks. The EPA said it would further research glyphosate to evaluate its carcinogenic properties and address the ecological concerns.

Bisphenol A

Manufacturers use Bisphenol A (BPA) to produce plastics and resins in everyday products like baby bottles and food containers. The European Commission — a branch of the European Union — has proposed a bisphenol A ban because of its health concerns. Their risk assessments have shown prolonged exposure leads to reproductive, hormonal and cognitive issues.

U.S. government agencies have not limited BPA use nationwide, although some states have implemented bans. The Food and Drug Administration has considered petitions against this chemical but has not decided whether to remove it from American products. In the meantime, its current stance says BPA is safe inside food. You may find trace amounts in metal cans and plastic bottles.

Phthalates

Phthalates are another chemical used to create plastics. These plasticizers are in food packaging and other products requiring flexible plastic but have produced controversy from health advocates. Experts say phthalates can decrease testosterone and negatively impact the male and female reproductive systems. Exposure may stem from food preparation gloves, vinyl plastics and other household items.

Despite the warnings, the FDA has denied citizen petitions and concluded reconsideration is unnecessary for its phthalates decision. In 2023, the agency said it had sufficiently reviewed the information and viewpoints but did not find justification for banning the chemical. This stance differs from what you may see in the EU, as Europe’s governing body has limited or banned phthalate use in toys, clothing and other products.

How Chemical Risk Assessments Can Be More Sustainable

Despite the controversies, there are ways to improve these tests and make them more ethical. Here are four ways to improve sustainability and reduce liabilities from chemical risk assessments.

Limiting Animal Use

Chemical risk assessments have long used animal testing. Scientists use animals to increase their control in examinations because they easily select diets and environments. However, the practice is becoming less prevalent due to concerns about animal welfare and the need for better technologies. Researchers are also concerned with using this resource in chemical risk assessments and the necessary infrastructure.

Instead, modern assessments are gravitating toward new technologies to replace animal testing. A 2024 Alternatives to Animal Experimentation report says organs-on-chips are more cost-effective than standard animal testing and are critical for the future. This technology emulates the human body and controls cellular microenvironments, giving researchers better insight into chemical responses.

Leveraging Artificial Intelligence

Advanced technologies are critical for chemical risk assessments as scientists use modern innovations. Artificial intelligence (AI) is another example because its algorithms, machine learning and other fields can significantly aid the process. Its impact is evident from start to finish and begins with the administrative tasks. For instance, the researchers can use automated features to streamline their workflow and automate report generation.

AI’s potential in chemical risk assessments is significant when considering exposure determinations and other vital factors. Researchers can create algorithms to predict the amount of human and environmental exposure, thus gaining better awareness of a chemical’s impact. AI is also beneficial when it has a deep understanding of molecular structures. With the proper knowledge, the algorithms can assess the toxicities of particular chemicals before testing.

Examining Lifetime Impacts

Another way to increase sustainability is to examine a chemical’s long-term impact. Life cycle assessments (LCAs) would improve familiarity with chemical risks and provide comprehensive viewpoints on health impacts. These investigations would go a long way in protecting public health, especially considering the risk of intentional incidents. The Department of Homeland Security has 300 hazardous chemicals of interest, so knowledge is critical.

LCAs would enhance chemical risk assessments by accounting for material extraction, disposal and the necessary places for improvement. With this information, researchers can better understand the environmental impact and make the results of their assessments clearer. Leveraging an LCA also aids the global supply chain by helping companies understand their environmental impact when producing chemical-based products.

Reviewing Renewable Energies

Renewable energies are critical for sustainability regardless of your industry or field. Solar, wind and other resources benefit scientific processes but necessitate chemical risk assessments. Leveraging these tests is essential to determine the impact of new energy technologies because they can still negatively impact the environment. For example, electric vehicles (EVs) rely on chemistry through battery-electric devices.

EVs are popular because they release zero emissions and are more environmentally friendly than their internal combustion counterparts. However, chemical risk assessments are necessary to understand the impact of their batteries because these devices require mined materials. Cobalt, nickel and lithium are only some metals essential to building batteries, thus necessitating further examination to see the long-term effects.

Increasing Sustainability and Accountability in Chemical Risk Assessments

While chemical risk assessments are essential, they carry risks when assessing human and environmental health issues. Government agencies like the EPA have comprehensive processes to understand the effects of chemicals, but they don’t always lead to bans and sustainable results. Critics have petitioned the EPA, FDA and other entities to remove particular substances from the markets, but the agencies maintain their results from chemical risk assessments.