Using Multi Criteria Decision Analysis to Weigh the

Societal Benefits and Costs of Nanotechnology

Andrea L. Hicks, PhD

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Products of the Future:What are we talking about?

Textile: X-StaticBrand: Lululemon“Stink-free gear”

Textile: PolygieneBrand: Patagonia

“Odor control”

What does the future look like?

(Hicks et al., 2015, ES&T)

(Hicks et al., 2015, ES&T)

(Xiu et al., 2012, NanoLetters)

Methods/Assumptions

Raw Materials Acquisition

End of Life

Manufacturing

Use

Three Textiles with different concentrations of silver A: 22.8 μg/g, B: 4,030 μg/g, and C: 16.4 μg/gPolyester shirts: 145 g

Different silver attachments:A: Tethered B: Ag0 coatedC: Salt coated

Varying nAg loss ratesLifetime: 100 launderingsRegular and high efficiency laundering scenariosconsidered

5% of nAg to WWTP is released as Ag+ to freshwaterLandfill disposal of textile

(Hicks et al., 2015, ES&T)

(Reed et al., 2016, ES&T)

Textile B Textile A Textile C Textile B Textile A Textile C

0.00E+00

1.00E-08

2.00E-08

3.00E-08

4.00E-08

5.00E-08

6.00E-08

7.00E-08

8.00E-08

9.00E-08

A_RE/RE B_RE/RE C_RE/RE A_HE/LN B_HE/LN C_HE/LN

KgCFC-11eq/Textile

Ozone

Silver Textile Laundering SilverLosses Landfill

(Hicks and Theis, 2016, IJLCA)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

A_RE/RE B_RE/RE C_RE/RE A_HE/LN B_HE/LN C_HE/LN

kgCO2eq/Textile

GlobalWarming

Silver Textile Laundering SilverLosses Landfill

(Hicks and Theis, 2016, IJLCA)

Normalizing the Data

𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑛𝑥 =

𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑥 − 𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑥

𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑥 − 𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑥

(Tsang et al., 2015, ES&T)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91

A_RE/RE B_RE/RE C_RE/RE X_RE/RE

A_HE/LN B_HE/LN C_HE/LN X_HE/LN

Environmental Costs

Societal Benefits

(Reed et al., 2016, ES&T)

𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑖𝑝=

𝑥

𝑤𝑥𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑛𝑥

Weighting

Weighting

Equal Environmental Pro Nano Antimicrobial 0.100 0.050 0.200

Ozone Depletion 0.100 0.106 0.089

Global Warming 0.100 0.106 0.089Smog 0.100 0.106 0.089

Acidification 0.100 0.106 0.089

Eutrophication 0.100 0.106 0.089Carcinogenics 0.100 0.106 0.089

Non Carcinogenics 0.100 0.106 0.089

Respiratory Effects 0.100 0.106 0.089Eco Toxicity 0.100 0.106 0.089

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 1 2 3 4 5

Benefits

Costs

RE/RE HE/LN

B(RE/RE&HE/LN)

A,C

X X

Conclusions

• MCDA is an applicable tool for evaluating the societal costs and benefits of nAg

• Weighting is necessary to determine the relative value of the costs and benefits to society

Acknowledgements

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Assistance AgreementNo. RD83558001-0 that funded this research

Questions?

www.zazzle.com