No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Present technologies for wastewater treatment do not sufficiently address the increasing pollution situation of receiving water bodies, especially with the growing use of personal care products and pharmaceuticals (PPCP) in the private household and health sector. The relevance of addressing this problem of organic pollutants was taken into account by the Directive 2013/39/EU that introduced (i) the quality evaluation of aquatic compartments, (ii) the polluter pays principle, (iii) the need for innovative and affordable wastewater treatment technologies, and (iv) the identification of pollution causes including a list of principal compounds to be monitored. In addition, a watch list of 10 other substances was recently defined by Decision 2015/495 on March 20, 2015. This list contains, among several recalcitrant chemicals, the painkiller diclofenac and the hormones 17β-estradiol and 17α-ethinylestradiol. Although some modern approaches for their removal exist, such as advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), retrofitting most wastewater treatment plants with AOPs will not be acceptable as consistent investment at reasonable operational cost. Additionally, by-product and transformation product formation has to be considered. The same is true for membrane-based technologies (nanofiltration, reversed osmosis) despite of the incredible progress that has been made during recent years, because these systems lead to higher operation costs (mainly due to higher energy consumption) so that the majority of communities will not easily accept them. Advanced technologies in wastewater treatment like membrane bioreactors (MBR) that integrate biological degradation of organic matter with membrane filtration have proven a more complete elimination of emerging pollutants in a rather cost- and labor-intensive technology. Still, most of the presently applied methods are incapable of removing critical compounds completely. In this opinion paper, the state of the art of European WWTPs is reflected, and capacities of single methods are described. Furthermore, the need for analytical standards, risk assessment, and economic planning is stressed. The survey results in the conclusion that combinations of different conventional and advanced technologies including biological and plant-based strategies seem to be most promising to solve the burning problem of polluting our environment with hazardous emerging xenobiotics.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11356-016-6503-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Silver-based nanoparticles (Ag-b-NPs) emitted by wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are considered to be widely present in the natural environment. However, there is much that is unknown about the effect of WWTP effluent on the occurrence of Ag-b-NPs in surface waters. On the basis of field analysis of representative WWTPs in Germany, we demonstrate that more than 96.4% of Ag-b-NPs from wastewater influent are removed through WWTPs, even though influent contains Ag-b-NP concentrations of tens to hundreds ng L(-1), resulting in effluent Ag-b-NP concentrations of 0.7-11.1 ng L(-1) over the seasons. The estimated flux of Ag-b-NPs associated with WWTPs effluent discharge is ∼33 kg y(-1) in Germany. WWTPs effluent increases Ag-b-NP levels of the River Isar to 2.0-8.6 ng L(-1), while remarkable decreases are observed at sites ∼1.5 km downstream of each discharge point, and Ag-b-NP levels then keep stable (0.9-2.3 ng L(-1)) until the next discharge point, showing subtle differences in Ag-b-NP levels between the river and reference lakes without industrial sources and WWTPs effluent discharge. Our results demonstrate that WWTPs effluent can exert a clear influence on the occurrence of Ag-b-NPs in surface waters.