It’s Time to Replace the Term “Heavy Metals” with “Potentially Toxic Elements” When Reporting Environmental Research

Olivier Pourret and Andrew Hursthouse
Additional contact information
Olivier Pourret: UniLaSalle, AGHYLE, 19 rue Pierre Waguet, 60000 Beauvais, France
Andrew Hursthouse: School of Computing, Engineering & Physical Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley PA1 2BE, UK

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 22, 1-6

Abstract: Even if the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements is relatively well defined, some controversial terms are still in use. Indeed, the term “heavy metal” is a common term used for decades in the natural sciences, and even more in environmental sciences, particularly in studies of pollution impacts. As the use of the term appears to have increased, we highlight the relevance of the use of the term “Potentially Toxic Element(s)”, which needs more explicit endorsement, and we illustrate the chemical elements that need to be considered.

Keywords: heavy metals; contaminants; elements; toxic (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/22/4446/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/22/4446/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:22:p:4446-:d:286278

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().