Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

Reference Dose (RfD). The average exposure to PFOS via water consumption foradults ranged from 0.16 to 220.15 ng/kg-bw/day and for children 0.13 to 354.3 ng/kg-bw/day. The average exposure to PFOA for adults varied from 0.43 to 12.5 andfor children 0.35 to 20.17 ng/kg-bw/day. The average exposure to PFDA for adultsranged from 0.43 to 2.36 ng/kg-bw/day and for children 0.35 to 3.79 ng/kg-bw/day.Probabilistic values of hazard indexes (HIs) due to exposure to the contaminantsand their combination from water consumption for all age groups only reside nearto Keya River exceeded the threshold value 2.4 to 4.8 times, corresponding mainly toPFOS with a percentage of 97%. In conclusions, children aged 1 to 3 years old andthe residents reside near to Keya River are at the highest risk of exposure to PFCs viawater consumption.M4-B.4 Dana GV; gvdana@gmail.comDana & Sharpe Risk AssociatesCOMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF SYNTHET-IC BIOLOGY APPLICATIONSThe Woodrow Wilson Center’s Synthetic Biology Project is piloting a ComprehensiveEnvironmental Assessment (CEA) tool to test its ability to identify keyresearch areas needed to support ecological risk assessments of synthetic biology applications.This could be an organism containing novel genetic material or a productcontaining the organism. CEA combines a life-cycle analysis approach with a riskassessment framework and is one tool used by the US EPA to evaluate nanomaterialrisks and identify research directions; it is also applicable to synthetic biology applicationsat early stages of research and development. We report on the first pilot exerciseof CEA (held in July 2011), where engineers and ecologists used the CEA frameworkto consider how a cyanobacterium engineered for use as a biofuel feedstock may enter,travel through and impact the environment at different life-cycle stages. Participantsworked through the steps necessary for the cyanobacterium to enter the environment(e.g., discharges from open pond systems), what it might come in contact with (e.g.,animals, plants, microorganisms), what the potential impacts may be (e.g., gene flow,disruption of ecological processes), and what factors influence these actions (e.g., pH,species behavior, biosafety protocols). We report on the CEA’s ability to systematicallyidentify areas of research to support future ecological risk assessments, as well as opportunitiesfor improving existing (or design new) biosafety measures.M4-G.5 David RM; raymond.david@basf.comBASF CorporationMANAGING RISKS OF CNTS IN A LARGE COMPANYManaging risk for substances for which the hazards are not completely understoodtypically default to the most protective measures. BASF has developed a matrixthat helps drive decisions on risk management by illustrating the need for eithergreater hazard information or exposure reduction. The company has also developedshort-term screening tests for substances such as CNTs that can provide insight intothe long-term systemic and pulmonary effects. These tools as they have been appliedto products that contain CNTs will be presented.W4-I.2 DeAngelo BJ, Gilmore EA, Sarofim MC, Waldhoff ST, Martinich J, CardamoneK, Ohrel S, Ragnauth S, Birnbaum R; deangelo.ben@epa.govUS Environmental Protection AgencyQUANTIFYING AND COMMUNICATING BENEFITS AND RISKS OFGHG EMISSION SCENARIOSThe Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Change Division (CCD) isdeveloping a methodology that will provide policy-relevant analysis about the USdomestic benefits and risks from different climate change scenarios. The methodologyconsists of four main components: 1) Establishing a consistent set of socio-economicand climate scenarios that can be applied across models of differing temporaland spatial resolution; 2) Coordinating and integrating general and partial equilibriumand sectoral models; 3) Describing and quantifying uncertainty; and, 4) Presentingand communicating a range of impacts and risks through multiple metrics and indicators.Here, we describe our progress and planned future work on developing andimplementing this methodology for a benefits analysis that articulates the benefits ofalternate GHG mitigation targets. We start with developing scenarios of some of thefundamental drivers of GHG emissions: population, economic growth and technologyassumptions. These scenarios are run through integrated assessment (IA) modelsthat produce estimates of future temperature and sea level rise. We identify approachesto produce consistent input data across modeled impacts, including downscalingtools and adapting more detailed inputs to our scenarios. Recognizing that no onemodel will provide answers to all questions and that multiple modeling approacheswill often provide different insights, we describe the coordination of several modelsthrough these scenarios and how we maintain consistency and avoid double counting.Finally, we present the structure for communication of results for a range of impactsand risks for different audiences, including descriptions of uncertainty. We concludeby presenting a preliminary description of the benefits and risks of climate scenariosand the long-term vision for this framework.P.100 de Marcellis-Warin N, Peignier I; nathalie.demarcellis-warin@polymtl.caCirano - Ecole PolytechniqueRISK PERCEPTION, PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ACCEPTABILITYOF PUBLIC DECISIONS IN QUEBEC (CANADA)Public risk perception can disrupt the completion of major government projects.Projects such as regulating the shale gas industry, reopening a nuclear powerplant, or implementing a vaccination program may create public concern, thus resultingin resistance or even rejection. Risk perception depends on many factors, makingit important to identify those that are most likely to incite resistance and thus inhibit85