Occurrence and fate of pharmaceutical products and by-products, from resource to drinking water

Mompelat, Sophie; Bot, Barbara Le; Thomas, Olivier

doi:10.1016/j.envint.2008.10.008

Cited by 844 publications

(388 citation statements)

References 97 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

353

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These effects were attributed to the release of endocrine-active chemicals such as the synthetic estrogen 17α-ethinylestradiol (found in contraceptive pills), natural estrogens estrone and 17β-estradiol or nonylphenol. Furthermore, as lakes and rivers are used in many places for drinking water supply, pharmaceuticals and pesticides can therefore be found in tap water at very low concentrations, even after drinking water treatment (Huerta-Fontela et al, 2011;Mompelat et al, 2009;Stackelberg et al, 2007). Acute human health effects are not expected (Webb et al, 2003), but effects of long term exposure are unknown and, therefore, the release of these compounds into the environment should be avoided.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of micropollutants in municipal wastewater: Ozone or powdered activated carbon?

Margot

Kienle

Magnet³

et al. 2013

Science of The Total Environment

684

404

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights• Micropollutants are efficiently removed by both ozone and powdered activated carbon• Specific substances were removed more efficiently by ozone• Powdered activated carbon effectively removed a wider range of pollutants• Both treatments significantly reduced the toxicity of WWTP effluent AbstractMany organic micropollutants present in wastewater, such as pharmaceuticals and pesticides, are poorly removed in conventional wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). To reduce the release of these substances into the aquatic environment, advanced wastewater treatments are necessary. In this context, two large-scale pilot advanced treatments were tested in parallel over more than one year at the municipal WWTP of Lausanne, Switzerland. The treatments were: i) oxidation by ozone followed by sand filtration (SF) and ii) powdered activated carbon (PAC) adsorption followed by either ultrafiltration (UF) or sand filtration. More than 70 potentially problematic substances (pharmaceuticals, pesticides, endocrine disruptors, drugs metabolites and other common chemicals) were regularly measured at different stages of treatment. Additionally, several ecotoxicological tests such as the yeast estrogen screen, a combined algae bioassay and a fish early life stage test were performed to evaluate effluent toxicity. Both treatments significantly improved the effluent quality. Micropollutants were removed on average over 80% compared with raw wastewater, with an average ozone dose of 5.7 mg O 3 l -1 or a PAC dose between 10 and 20 mg l -1 . Depending on the chemical properties of the substances (presence of electron-rich moieties, charge and hydrophobicity), either ozone or PAC performed better. Both advanced treatments led to a clear reduction in toxicity of the effluents, with PAC-UF performing slightly better overall. As both treatments had, on average, relatively similar efficiency, further criteria relevant to their implementation were considered, including local constraints (e.g., safety, sludge disposal, disinfection), operational feasibility and cost. For sensitive receiving waters (drinking water resources or recreational waters), the PAC-UF treatment, despite its current higher cost, was considered to be the most suitable option, enabling good removal of most micropollutants and macropollutants without forming problematic by-products, the strongest decrease in toxicity and a total disinfection of the effluent.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of micropollutants in municipal wastewater: Ozone or powdered activated carbon?

Margot

Kienle

Magnet³

et al. 2013

Science of The Total Environment

684

404

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,3 Studies have reported their occurrence in surface water up to µg/L levels, 3,4 in groundwater up to 50 ng/L, 5 and in drinking water up to 20 ng/L. 6,7 Photochemical reactions are important transformation processes of xenobiotics in surface waters, particularly for compounds like CBZ that are refractory to biodegradation. 8 Photoinduced processes can be divided into direct photolysis and sensitized phototransformation, the latter involving transients produced by so-called photosensitizers under irradiation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photochemical Fate of Carbamazepine in Surface Freshwaters: Laboratory Measures and Modeling

Laurentiis

Chirón

Kouras-Hadef

et al. 2012

Environ. Sci. Technol.

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is shown here that carbamazepine (CBZ) would undergo direct photolysis and reaction with • OH as main phototransformation pathways in surface waters. Environmental lifetimes are expected to vary from a few weeks to several months, and predictions are in good agreement with the available field data. Acridine (I) and 10,11-dihydro-10,11-trans-dihydroxy-CBZ (V) are the main quantified phototransformation intermediates upon direct photolysis and • OH reaction, respectively. The photochemical yield of mutagenic I from CBZ is in the 3-3.5% range and, being similar for both direct photolysis and • OH reaction, it would undergo limited variation with environmental conditions. In contrast, the yield of V would vary in the 4-8.5% range depending on the conditions, because V is formed from CBZ by • OH (9.0% yield) more effectively than upon direct photolysis (1.4% yield). Other important photointermediates, mostly formed from CBZ upon • OH reaction are an aromatic-ring-dihydroxylated CBZ (VI) and N,N-di(2-carboxyphenyl)urea (VII). Compounds VI and VII are formed by photochemistry and are not reported as human metabolites, thus they could be used as tracers of CBZ phototransformation in surface waters. Interestingly, VI has recently been detected in river water.

show abstract

“…First, their detection appears to be strongly influenced by the available analytical techniques, rarely capable of detecting traces of chemicals (Lundstrom et al 2010, Mompelat et al 2009, Snyder et al 2003, Touraud et al 2011. In 2001, EPA pointed out the lack of sensible and standardized methods for EDCs detection and, at the moment, a dedicated institution, the Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Subcommittee, is working to fill this void (Snyder et al 2003).…”

Section: Toxicity Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A clear example is given by a combined O 3 /UV treatment of ketoprofen: the transformation products were much more toxic than 6 ketoprofen itself and this parameter could be reduced only by increasing the operational time, with consequent repercussion of the economic sustainability of the process (Illés et al 2014). Due to the limited effectiveness of WTPs towards a complex mixture of EDCs, micropollutants can re-enter the water cycle accumulating even into drinking waters (Benotti et al 2009, Lundstrom et al 2010, Mompelat et al 2009, Touraud et al 2011, Vulliet et al 2011). Sun and collaborators (2013) collected data worldwide, associating the major long-term ecological risk of municipal effluents and reclaimed waters to the presence of steroid estrogens and phenolic compounds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fungal Bioremediation of Emerging Micropollutants in Municipal Wastewaters

Spina

Varese

2016

Fungal Applications in Sustainable Environmental Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Occurrence and fate of pharmaceutical products and by-products, from resource to drinking water

Cited by 844 publications

References 97 publications

Treatment of micropollutants in municipal wastewater: Ozone or powdered activated carbon?

Treatment of micropollutants in municipal wastewater: Ozone or powdered activated carbon?

Photochemical Fate of Carbamazepine in Surface Freshwaters: Laboratory Measures and Modeling

Fungal Bioremediation of Emerging Micropollutants in Municipal Wastewaters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About