As carbon-based nanocomposite materials (CBNCMs) become increasingly integrated into wide range of technological sectors, including energy storage, electronics, biomedicine, and structural engineering, concerns about their environmental, health, and sustainability implications are gaining prominence. This study explores key aspects influencing the sustainable development of CBNCMs, including familiarity with existing policies and risk prevention measures, environmental and health risk assessments, life cycle emissions and exposure risks, end-of-life solutions, and the integration of circular economy principles. The role of standardization and harmonization is also examined as a crucial factor in ensuring consistent and safe practices across the CBNCMs lifecycle. Insights from expert opinions, including findings from a questionnaire survey conducted within the framework of the COST Action CA19118 (EsSENce), are used to support the analysis. The study highlights existing gaps and opportunities for improving risk governance, promoting safe-by-design approaches, and advancing sustainable lifecycle management of CBNCMs.
RajeshkumarLRameshMBhuvaneswariV, et al.Carbon nano-materials (CNMs) derived from biomass for energy storage applications: a review. Carbon Lett2023; 33: 661–690.
2.
SanjinésRAbadMDVâjuCR, et al.Electrical properties and applications of carbon based nanocomposite materials: an overview. Surf Coat Technol2011; 206: 727–733.
3.
Rivas-SanchezACruz-CruzAGallareta-OlivaresG, et al.Carbon-based nanocomposite materials with multifunctional attributes for environmental remediation of emerging pollutants. Chemosphere2022; 303: 135054.
4.
Díez-PascualAM. Carbon-based polymer nanocomposites for high-performance applications. Polymers2020; 12: 872.
5.
MallikMSahaM. Carbon-based nanocomposites: processing, electronic properties and applications. In: HazraAGoswamiR (eds). Carbon Nanomaterial Electronics: Devices and Applications. Springer, 2021, pp. 97–122.
6.
ShinMLimJParkY, et al.Carbon-based nanocomposites for biomedical applications. RSC Adv2024; 14: 7142–7156.
7.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGKrummeA, et al.Biodegradable polyurethane/graphene oxide scaffolds for soft tissue engineering: in vivo behavior assessment. Int J Polym Mater Polym Biomater2020; 69: 1101–1111.
8.
Ivanoska-DacikjAMakreskiPBogoeva-GacevaG. Fabrication of biodegradable polyurethane electrospun webs of fibers modified with biocompatible graphene oxide nanofiller. J Ind Text2022; 51: 4041S–4065S.
9.
BirchMERuda-EberenzTAChaiM, et al.Properties that influence the specific surface areas of carbon nanotubes and nanofibers. Ann Occup Hyg2013; 57: 1148–1166.
10.
EletskiiAV. Mechanical properties of carbon nanostructures and related materials. Phys-Usp2007; 50: 225.
SperanzaG. The role of functionalization in the applications of carbon materials: an overview. C2019; 5: 84.
13.
TessonnierJ-PRosenthalDHansenTW, et al.Analysis of the structure and chemical properties of some commercial carbon nanostructures. Carbon2009; 47: 1779–1798.
14.
ZhaiYZhuZDongS. Carbon-based nanostructures for advanced catalysis. ChemCatChem2015; 7: 2806–2815.
15.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGRoojS, et al.Fine tuning of the dynamic mechanical properties of natural rubber/carbon nanotube nanocomposites by organically modified montmorillonite: a first step in obtaining high-performance damping material suitable for seismic application. Appl Clay Sci2015; 118: 99–106.
16.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGValićS, et al.Benefits of hybrid nano-filler networking between organically modified montmorillonite and carbon nanotubes in natural rubber: experiments and theoretical interpretations. Appl Clay Sci2017; 136: 192–198.
17.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGValićS. Electron spin resonance on hybrid nanocomposites based on natural rubber. Contributions Sec Nat Math Biotech Sci2018; 39: 23–30.
18.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGValićS. ESR spectroscopy as a new method to analyze the synergy between two different nanofillers dispersed in an elastomer matrix. Polym Test2019; 73: 293–299.
19.
BocharovGSEletskiiAV. Percolation conduction of carbon nanocomposites. Int J Mol Sci2020; 21: 7634.
20.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGJurkR, et al.Assessment of the dynamic behavior of a new generation of complex natural rubber-based systems intended for seismic base isolation. J Elastomers Plast2017; 49: 595–608.
21.
Ivanoska-DacikjABogoeva-GacevaGWießnerS, et al.Rheometric and dynamic mechanical analysis of complex natural rubber based composites. Contributions Sec Nat Math Biotech Sci2016; 37: 5–14.
22.
GeorgakilasVPermanJATucekJ, et al.Broad family of carbon nanoallotropes: classification, chemistry, and applications of fullerenes, carbon dots, nanotubes, graphene, nanodiamonds, and combined superstructures. Chem Rev2015; 115: 4744–4822.
23.
KöhlerARSomCHellandA, et al.Studying the potential release of carbon nanotubes throughout the application life cycle. J Clean Prod2008; 16: 927–937.
24.
Guseva CanuIBatesonTFBouvardV, et al.Human exposure to carbon-based fibrous nanomaterials: a review. Int J Hyg Environ Health2016; 219: 166–175.
25.
FadeelBBussyCMerinoS, et al.Safety assessment of graphene-based materials: focus on human health and the environment. ACS Nano2018; 12: 10582–10620.
26.
AkturkO. Biocompatibility, toxicity, and immunological effects of functionalized carbon nanostructures. In: Handbook of Functionalized Carbon Nanostructures. Springer, 2024, pp. 2657–2699.
27.
Ivanoska-DacikjAMakreskiPGeskovskiN, et al.Electrospun PEO/rGO scaffolds: the influence of the concentration of rGO on overall properties and cytotoxicity. Int J Mol Sci2022; 23: 988.
28.
LiuYZhaoYSunB, et al.Understanding the toxicity of carbon nanotubes. Acc Chem Res2013; 46: 702–713.
29.
HischierRWalserT. Life cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials: state of the art and strategies to overcome existing gaps. Sci Total Environ2012; 425: 271–282.
30.
PourchezJChivas-JolyCLonguetC, et al.End-of-life incineration of nanocomposites: new insights into nanofiller partitioning into by-products and biological outcomes of airborne emission and residual ash. Environ Sci Nano2018; 5: 1951–1964.
31.
PitaroFSeegerSNowackB. The safe and sustainable by design framework applied to graphene-based materials. Environ Int2025; 197: 109345.
32.
ChatzipanagiotouK-RPetrakliFSteckJ, et al.Towards safe and sustainable by design nanomaterials: risk and sustainability assessment on two nanomaterial case studies at early stages of development. Sustain Futur2025; 9: 100511.
33.
KostapanouAChatzipanagiotouK-RDamilosS, et al.Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design framework: (Re-)Designing the advanced materials lifecycle. Sustainability2024; 16: 10439.
34.
KimMGoerzenDJenaPV, et al.Human and environmental safety of carbon nanotubes across their life cycle. Nat Rev Mater2024; 9: 63–81.
GolinCBBougherTLMallowA, et al.Toward a comprehensive framework for nanomaterials: an interdisciplinary assessment of the current environmental health and safety regulation regarding the handling of carbon nanotubes. J Chem Health Saf2013; 20: 9–24.
39.
BhattacharyaKMukherjeeSPGalludA, et al.Biological interactions of carbon-based nanomaterials: from coronation to degradation. Nanomedicine2016; 12: 333–351.
40.
YuanXZhangXSunL, et al.Cellular toxicity and immunological effects of carbon-based nanomaterials. Part Fibre Toxicol2019; 16: 18.
41.
MadannejadRShoaieNJahanpeymaF, et al.Toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials: reviewing recent reports in medical and biological systems. Chem Biol Interact2019; 307: 206–222.
42.
MagrezAKasasSSalicioV, et al.Cellular toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials. Nano Lett2006; 6: 1121–1125.
43.
SharmaMMMKapoorDLoyalA, et al.Environmental toxicity of engineered carbon nanoparticles. In: BachhetiABachhetiRKHusenA (eds). Carbon-Based Nanomaterials: Synthesis, Agricultural, Biomedical, and Environmental Interventions. Springer Nature, 2024, pp. 337–353.
44.
NowackBRanvilleJFDiamondS, et al.Potential scenarios for nanomaterial release and subsequent alteration in the environment. Environ Toxicol Chem2012; 31: 50–59.
45.
GottschalkFSunTNowackB. Environmental concentrations of engineered nanomaterials: review of modeling and analytical studies. Environ Pollut2013; 181: 287–300.
46.
UpretiGDhingraRNaiduS, et al.Life cycle assessment of nanomaterials. In: BasiukVABasiukEV (eds). Green Processes for Nanotechnology: From Inorganic to Bioinspired Nanomaterials. Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 393–408.
47.
SalieriBTurnerDANowackB, et al.Life cycle assessment of manufactured nanomaterials: where are we?NanoImpact2018; 10: 108–120.
48.
BerkhoutFHowesR. The adoption of life-cycle approaches by industry: patterns and impacts. Resour Conserv Recycl1997; 20: 71–94.
49.
NizamNUMHanafiahMMWoonKS. A content review of life cycle assessment of nanomaterials: current practices, challenges, and future prospects. Nanomaterials2021; 11: 3324.
50.
NahinAMAsrafuzzamanAKF. 7 - life-cycle assessment of polymer nanocomposites. In: HoqueMERamarKSharifA (eds). Advanced polymer nanocomposites. Woodhead Publishing, 2022, pp. 145–167.
51.
CossuttaMVretenarVCentenoTA, et al.A comparative life cycle assessment of graphene and activated carbon in a supercapacitor application. J Clean Prod2020; 242: 118468.
52.
ReinsLWijnsJ. The “Safe and Sustainable by Design” concept – a regulatory approach for a more sustainable circular economy in the European Union?Eur J Risk Regul2025; 16: 96–113.
53.
MaynardADAitkenRJButzT, et al.Safe handling of nanotechnology. Nature2006; 444: 267–269.
54.
AbramS-LTavernaroIJohnstonLJ, et al.Nanoscale reference and test materials for the validation of characterization methods for engineered nanomaterials — current state, limitations, and needs. Anal Bioanal Chem2025. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-024-05719-6, Epub ahead of print 4.
55.
CaputoFFavreGBorchardG, et al.Toward an international standardisation roadmap for nanomedicine. Drug Deliv Transl Res2024; 14: 2578–2588.
56.
BleekerEAJSwartEBraakhuisH, et al.Towards harmonisation of testing of nanomaterials for EU regulatory requirements on chemical safety – a proposal for further actions. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol2023; 139: 105360.
57.
BurelloE. Review of (Q)SAR models for regulatory assessment of nanomaterials risks. NanoImpact2017; 8: 48–58.
RasmussenKRauscherHKearnsP, et al.Developing OECD test guidelines for regulatory testing of nanomaterials to ensure mutual acceptance of test data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol2019; 104: 74–83.
60.
ApelCKümmererKSudheshwarA, et al.Safe-and-sustainable-by-design: state of the art approaches and lessons learned from value chain perspectives. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem2024; 45: 100876.
61.
Beloin-Saint-PierreDHischierR. Towards a more environmentally sustainable production of graphene-based materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess2021; 26: 327–343.
62.
RahmanMMSikderSTohaM, et al.Trends and perspectives in waste-derived carbon nanomaterials and circular economy. Waste Derived Carbon Nanomaterials. American Chemical Society, 2025, vol 1, pp. 331–356.
63.
KaraSHauschildMSutherlandJ, et al.Closed-loop systems to circular economy: a pathway to environmental sustainability?CIRP Ann2022; 71: 505–528.
64.
FurxhiICostaAVázquez-CamposS, et al.Status, implications and challenges of European safe and sustainable by design paradigms applicable to nanomaterials and advanced materials. RSC Sustain2023; 1: 234–250.
65.
BaruchYHoltomBC. Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Hum Relat2008; 61: 1139–1160.
66.
Filling the knowledge gaps for safe nanotechnology in the workplace: a progress report from the NIOSH. Nanotechnology Research Center, 2004-2011. National Technical Reports Library, 2012, p. 435.
67.
CharitidisCAGeorgiouPKokliotiMA, et al.Manufacturing nanomaterials: from research to industry. Manuf Rev2014; 1: 11.
68.
KrouwelSJCDierickxERHeesterbeekS, et al. Adopting Safe-by-Design in Science and Engineering Academia: The Soil May Need Tilling. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19: 2075.
69.
Ivanoska-DacikjAWalterLEufingerK, et al.Smart textiles: paving the way to sustainability. Maced J Chem Chem Eng2024; 43: 149–164.
70.
WangWSedykhASunH, et al.Predicting nano–bio interactions by integrating nanoparticle libraries and quantitative nanostructure activity relationship modeling. ACS Nano2017; 11: 12641–12649.
71.
Graphene research, innovation and collaboration. Graphene Flagship. https://graphene-flagship.eu/ (accessed 11 April 2025).
72.
NelAEMädlerLVelegolD, et al.Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano–bio interface. Nat Mater2009; 8: 543–557.
73.
KrugHFNauK. Editorial: methods and protocols in nanotoxicology. Front Toxicol2022; 4: 1093765.
74.
SajidM. Nanomaterials: types, properties, recent advances, and toxicity concerns. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health2022; 25: 100319.
75.
WinklerDA. Role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in nanosafety. Small2020; 16: 2001883.
76.
Marchese RobinsonRLLynchIPeijnenburgW, et al.How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated?Nanoscale2016; 8: 9919–9943.
CatitaJAM. Challenges in nanomaterial characterization – from definition to analysis. In: LouroHSilvaMJ (eds). Nanotoxicology in safety assessment of nanomaterials. Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 3–17.
MinistryFE. BMUKN: OECD WPMN. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Climate Action, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. https://www.bundesumweltministerium.de/WS3665-1 (accessed 27 July 2025).
