Display options
Cite
Wallis SL, Emmett EA, Hardy R, et al. Challenging Global Waste Management - Bioremediation to Detoxify Asbestos. Front Environ Sci. 2020;8doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020.
Wallis, S. L., Emmett, E. A., Hardy, R., Casper, B. B., Blanchon, D. J., Testa, J. R., Menges, C. W., Gonneau, C., Jerolmack, D. J., Seiphoori, A., Steinhorn, G., & Berry, T. A. (2020). Challenging Global Waste Management - Bioremediation to Detoxify Asbestos. Frontiers in environmental science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020
Wallis, Shannon L, et al. "Challenging Global Waste Management - Bioremediation to Detoxify Asbestos." Frontiers in environmental science vol. 8 (2020). doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020
Wallis SL, Emmett EA, Hardy R, Casper BB, Blanchon DJ, Testa JR, Menges CW, Gonneau C, Jerolmack DJ, Seiphoori A, Steinhorn G, Berry TA. Challenging Global Waste Management - Bioremediation to Detoxify Asbestos. Front Environ Sci. 2020 Mar;8. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020. Epub 2020 Mar 04. PMID: 33269243; PMCID: PMC7707057.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Environ Sci. 2020 Mar;8. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020. Epub 2020 Mar 04.

Challenging Global Waste Management - Bioremediation to Detoxify Asbestos.

Frontiers in environmental science

Shannon L Wallis, Edward A Emmett, Robyn Hardy, Brenda B Casper, Dan J Blanchon, Joseph R Testa, Craig W Menges, Cédric Gonneau, Douglas J Jerolmack, Ali Seiphoori, Gregor Steinhorn, Terri-Ann Berry

Affiliations

  1. Engineering Pathway, Unitec Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
  2. Perelman School of Medicine, Superfund Research Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
  3. Faculty of Arts and Design, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  4. Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
  5. School of Environmental and Animal Sciences, Unitec Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
  6. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
  7. Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
  8. Research and Enterprise, Unitec Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.

PMID: 33269243 PMCID: PMC7707057 DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2020.00020

Abstract

As the 21st century uncovers ever-increasing volumes of asbestos and asbestos-contaminated waste, we need a new way to stop 'grandfather's problem' from becoming that of our future generations. The production of inexpensive, mechanically strong, heat resistant building materials containing asbestos has inevitably led to its use in many public and residential buildings globally. It is therefore not surprising that since the asbestos boom in the 1970s, some 30 years later, the true extent of this hidden danger was exposed. Yet, this severely toxic material continues to be produced and used in some countries, and in others the disposal options for historic uses - generally landfill - are at best unwieldy and at worst insecure. We illustrate the global scale of the asbestos problem via three case studies which describe various removal and/or end disposal issues. These case studies from both industrialised and island nations demonstrate the potential for the generation of massive amounts of asbestos contaminated soil. In each case, the final outcome of the project was influenced by factors such as cost and land availability, both increasing issues, worldwide. The reduction in the generation of asbestos containing materials will not absolve us from the necessity of handling and disposal of contaminated land. Waste treatment which relies on physico-chemical processes is expensive and does not contribute to a circular model economy ideal. Although asbestos is a mineral substance, there are naturally occurring biological-mediated processes capable of degradation (such as bioweathering). Therefore, low energy options, such as bioremediation, for the treatment for asbestos contaminated soils are worth exploring. We outline evidence pointing to the ability of microbe and plant communities to remove from asbestos the iron that contributes to its carcinogenicity. Finally, we describe the potential for a novel concept of creating ecosystems over asbestos landfills ('activated landfills') that utilize nature's chelating ability to degrade this toxic product effectively.

Keywords: asbestos; bioremediation; carcinogenicity; hazardous waste treatment; waste minimisation

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Environ Health Perspect. 1989 May;81:81-9 - PubMed
  2. Environ Health Perspect. 1997 Sep;105 Suppl 5:1021-30 - PubMed
  3. Environ Sci Technol. 2015 Apr 21;49(8):4773-80 - PubMed
  4. Carcinogenesis. 2016 Feb;37(2):177-87 - PubMed
  5. Carcinogenesis. 1981;2(3):229-36 - PubMed
  6. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2004 Apr;23(4):938-44 - PubMed
  7. J Hazard Mater. 2015 Nov 15;298:282-93 - PubMed
  8. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2016 May;9(5):406-414 - PubMed
  9. J Hazard Mater. 2018 Jan 5;341:290-296 - PubMed
  10. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Aug 16;108(33):13618-23 - PubMed
  11. Int J Phytoremediation. 2015;17(1-6):437-47 - PubMed
  12. Environ Health Perspect. 2015 Aug;123(8):A194-7 - PubMed
  13. J Environ Monit. 2005 Aug;7(8):764-6 - PubMed
  14. Ann Glob Health. 2014 Jul-Aug;80(4):257-62 - PubMed
  15. Environ Sci Technol. 2013 Aug 6;47(15):8391-8 - PubMed
  16. J Hazard Mater. 2016 May 5;308:321-7 - PubMed
  17. Med J Aust. 2011 Sep 5;195(5):271-4 - PubMed
  18. Environ Microbiol. 2010 Feb;12(2):293-303 - PubMed
  19. Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Jul;118(7):897-901 - PubMed
  20. Mycol Res. 2007 Apr;111(Pt 4):473-81 - PubMed
  21. Environ Pollut. 2010 Jun;158(6):2282-7 - PubMed
  22. J Hazard Mater. 2009 Mar 15;162(2-3):1300-8 - PubMed
  23. Environ Sci Technol. 2013 Mar 19;47(6):2612-20 - PubMed
  24. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010 Jul;76(14):4780-7 - PubMed
  25. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Feb 1;18(3):598-604 - PubMed
  26. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2014 Jan 08;11:2 - PubMed
  27. Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Jul;118(7):A298-303 - PubMed
  28. Chemistry. 2005 Sep 19;11(19):5611-8 - PubMed
  29. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2003 Sep;62(4):316-30 - PubMed
  30. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1996 Feb 1;326(1):152-7 - PubMed
  31. Respirology. 2015 May;20(4):548-55 - PubMed
  32. Environ Health Perspect. 2004 Mar;112(3):285-90 - PubMed
  33. J Environ Manage. 2017 Dec 15;204(Pt 1):82-91 - PubMed
  34. Environ Sci Technol. 2005 Oct 15;39(20):7853-9 - PubMed
  35. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2002;15(1):65-8 - PubMed
  36. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2010 Jan-Feb;1799(1-2):149-56 - PubMed
  37. Arch Environ Occup Health. 2010 Jul-Sep;65(3):121-6 - PubMed
  38. Environ Sci Technol. 2006 Sep 15;40(18):5793-8 - PubMed
  39. Med J Aust. 2011 Sep 5;195(5):247-8 - PubMed
  40. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2009 Jul;69(1):132-41 - PubMed
  41. J Hazard Mater. 2009 Aug 15;167(1-3):1080-8 - PubMed
  42. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1991 Dec 31;643:xv-xvi - PubMed
  43. Environ Sci Technol. 2015 Nov 17;49(22):13340-9 - PubMed
  44. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng. 2014;49(12):1445-52 - PubMed
  45. J Sch Health. 1989 Oct;59(8):362-3 - PubMed
  46. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2008 Aug;285(2):242-9 - PubMed
  47. Science. 2008 May 2;320(5876):674-7 - PubMed
  48. Langmuir. 2017 Jan 17;33(2):622-629 - PubMed
  49. Thorax. 2014 Sep;69(9):843-50 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support