The drinking water for more than 28 million people was screened for a diverse group of pharmaceuticals, potential endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs), and other unregulated organic contaminants. Source water, finished drinking water, and distribution system (tap) water from 19 U.S. water utilities was analyzed for 51 compounds between 2006 and 2007. The 11 most frequently detected compounds were atenolol, atrazine, carbamazepine, estrone, gemfibrozil, meprobamate, naproxen, phenytoin, sulfamethoxazole, TCEP, and trimethoprim. Median concentrations of these compounds were less than 10 ng/L, except for sulfamethoxazole in source water (12 ng/ L), TCEP in source water (120 ng/L), and atrazine in source, finished, and distribution system water (32, 49, and 49 ng/L). Atrazine was detected in source waters far removed from agricultural application where wastewater was the only known source of organic contaminants. The occurrence of compounds in finished drinking water was controlled by the type of chemical oxidation (ozone or chlorine) used at each plant. At one drinking water treatment plant, summed monthly concentrations of the detected analytes in source and finished water are reported. Atenolol, atrazine, DEET, estrone, meprobamate, and trimethoprim can serve as indicator compounds representing potential contamination from other pharmaceuticals and EDCs and can gauge the efficacy of treatment processes.

The potential occurrence of endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) as well as pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in drinking water supplies raises concern over the removal of these compounds by common drinking water treatment processes. Three drinking water supplies were spiked with 10 to 250 ng/L of 62 different EDC/ PPCPs; one model water containing an NOM isolate was spiked with 49 different EDC/PPCPs. Compounds were detected by LC/MS/MS or GC/MS/MS. These test waters were subjected to bench-scale experimentation to simulate individual treatment processes in a water treatment plant (WTP). Aluminum sulfate and ferric chloride coagulants or chemical lime softening removed some polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) but removed <25% of most other EDC/ PPCPs. Addition of 5 mg/L of powder activated carbon (PAC) with a 4-h contact time removed 50% to >98% of GC/ MS/MS compounds (more volatile) and 10% to >95% of LC/ MS/MS compounds (more polar); higher PAC dosages improved EDC/PPCP removal. EDC/PPCP percentage removal was independent of the initial compound concentration. Octanol-water partition coefficients served as a reasonable indicator of compound removal under controlled PAC test conditions, except for EDC/PPCPs that were protonated or deprotonated at the test pH and some that contained heterocyclic or aromatic nitrogen. Separate chlorine or ozone experiments decreased the EDC/PPCP initial concentration by <10% to >90%; EDC/PPCPs were likely transformed to oxidation byproducts. Ozone oxidized steroids containing phenolic moieties (estradiol, ethynylestradiol, or estrone) more efficiently than those without aromatic or phenolic moieties (androstenedione, progesterone, and testosterone). EDC/PPCP reactivity with oxidants were separated into three general groups: (1) compounds easily oxidized (>80% reacted) by chlorine are always oxidized at least as efficiently by ozone; (2) 6 of the -60 compounds (TCEP, BHC, chlordane, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide, musk ketone) were poorly oxidized (<20% reacted) by chlorine or ozone; (3) compounds (24 of 60) reacting preferentially (higher removals) with ozone rather than chlorine. Conventional treatment (coagulation plus chlorination) would have low removal of many EDC/PPCPs, while addition of PAC and/or ozone could substantially improve their removals. Existing strategies that predict relative removals of herbicides, pesticides, and other organic pollutants by activated carbon or oxidation can be directly applied for the removal of many EDC/PPCPs, but these strategies need to be modified to account for charged (protonated bases or deprotonated acids) and aliphatic species. Some compounds (e.g., DEET, ibuprofen, gemfibrozil) had low removals unless ozonation was used. Other compounds had low removals by all the WTP processes considered (atrazine, iopromide, meprobamate, TCEP), and removal processes capable of removing these types of compounds should be investigated.

No abstract

No abstract

Cyanobacteria are ubiquitous microorganisms considered as important contributors to the formation of Earth's atmosphere and nitrogen fixation. However, they are also frequently associated with toxic blooms. Indeed, the wide range of hepatotoxins, neurotoxins and dermatotoxins synthesized by these bacteria is a growing environmental and public health concern. This paper provides a state of the art on the occurrence and management of harmful cyanobacterial blooms in surface and drinking water, including economic impacts and research needs. Cyanobacterial blooms usually occur according to a combination of environmental factors e.g., nutrient concentration, water temperature, light intensity, salinity, water movement, stagnation and residence time, as well as several other variables. These environmental variables, in turn, have promoted the evolution and biosynthesis of strain-specific, gene-controlled metabolites (cyanotoxins) that are often harmful to aquatic and terrestrial life, including humans. Cyanotoxins are primarily produced intracellularly during the exponential growth phase. Release of toxins into water can occur during cell death or senescence but can also be due to evolutionary-derived or environmentally-mediated circumstances such as allelopathy or relatively sudden nutrient limitation. Consequently, when cyanobacterial blooms occur in drinking water resources, treatment has to remove both cyanobacteria (avoiding cell lysis and subsequent toxin release) and aqueous cyanotoxins previously released. Cells are usually removed with limited lysis by physical processes such as clarification or membrane filtration. However, aqueous toxins are usually removed by both physical retention, through adsorption on activated carbon or reverse osmosis, and chemical oxidation, through ozonation or chlorination. While the efficient oxidation of the more common cyanotoxins (microcystin, cylindrospermopsin, anatoxin and saxitoxin) has been extensively reported, the chemical and toxicological characterization of their by-products requires further investigation. In addition, future research should also investigate the removal of poorly considered cyanotoxins (β-methylamino-alanine, lyngbyatoxin or aplysiatoxin) as well as the economic impact of blooms.