Pharmaceutically active compounds: Their removal during slow sand filtration and their impact on slow sand filtration bacterial removal

D’Alessio, Matteo; Yoneyama, Bunnie; Kirs, Marek; Kisand, Veljo; Ray, Chittaranjan

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.014

Cited by 60 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Batt et al (2007) concluded that the removal of caffeine, among other organic micropollutants in wastewater, is dependent on a combination of biological and physicochemical treatment [34]. An efficient removal of caffeine, as that observed in the present study, has also been reported using other biological treatment systems such as slow sand filters [35].…”

Section: Removal Efficiency Of Ppcps In Wwtpsupporting

confidence: 79%

Removal of Selected Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Wastewater Treatment Plant in Jordan

Al‐Mashaqbeh

Alsafadi

Dalahmeh

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The largest wastewater treatment plant in Jordan was monitored in the summer to determine the removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). Grab samples were collected from the influent and effluent of As-Samra Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) were utilized to determine the concentrations of 18 compounds of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). The results showed that 14 compounds were detected in the collected samples from the influent and effluent of As-Samra WWTP. These compounds are 1,7-dimethylxanthine, amphetamine, acetaminophen, caffeine, carbamazepine, cimetidine, cotinine, diphenhydramine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), morphine, phenazone, sulfamethazine, sulfamethoxazole, thiabendazole, and trimethoprim. However, four compounds were below the detection limit (<0.005 µg/L), namely cimetidine, methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), methamphetamine, and sulfachloropyridazine. Among PPCPs, the highest estimated average concentrations in raw wastewater were caffeine, acetaminophen, 1,7-dimethylxanthine, cotinine, and carbamazepine sampled during the summer, at an estimated concentration of 155.6 µg/L, 36.7 µg/L, 10.49 µg/L, and 1.104 µg/L, respectively. However, the highest estimated average concentrations in treated wastewater were for carbamazepine, sulfamethoxazole, caffeine, cotinine, and acetaminophen, at 0.856 µg/L, 0.096 µg/L, 0.086 µg/L, 0.078 µg/L, and 0.041 µg/L, respectively. In general, the results showed that some compounds in the collected samples of wastewater in Jordan have concentrations exceeding the values reported in the literature. The removal efficiency rates of 1,7-dimethylxanthine, acetaminophen, caffeine, cotinine, morphine, and trimethoprim were higher than 95%, while those of carbamazepine, sulfamethazine, and sulfamethoxazole were lower than 22.5%. Moreover, diphenhydramine and thiabendazole had negative removal efficiency rates. The removal efficiency rates of the PPCPs in As-Samra WWTP were generally consistent with those of indicator compounds reported in the literature for conventional WWTPs.

show abstract

Section: Removal Efficiency Of Ppcps In Wwtpsupporting

confidence: 79%

Removal of Selected Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Wastewater Treatment Plant in Jordan

Al‐Mashaqbeh

Alsafadi

Dalahmeh

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analysis of the water quality parameters and overall water quality performance showed that the augmented and nonaugmented SSFs produced water of a very similar quality to the full-scale municipally operated SSFs. 27 However, significant differences were found between augmented and nonaugmented SSFs (Wilcoxon, p < 0.05), which are solely attributed to differences in coliform removal capabilities ( Sup. 3 , 4 , and 5 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“… 17 , 21 − 25 Unlike other water treatment methods, slow sand filtration (SSF) requires little energy input. 26 This, alongside the recent finding that SSFs can partially remove a range of pharmaceuticals, including E2, 27 underscores the catabolic potential of this technology. SSF may be an attractive candidate for bioaugmentation with EDC-degraders, potentially providing effective and economical EDC removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Bioaugmentation Mitigates the Impact of Estrogen on Coliform-Grazing Protozoa in Slow Sand Filters

Haig

Gauchotte-Lindsay

Collins

et al. 2016

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), such as estrogens, is a growing issue for human and animal health as they have been shown to cause reproductive and developmental abnormalities in wildlife and plants and have been linked to male infertility disorders in humans. Intensive farming and weather events, such as storms, flash flooding, and landslides, contribute estrogen to waterways used to supply drinking water. This paper explores the impact of estrogen exposure on the performance of slow sand filters (SSFs) used for water treatment. The feasibility and efficacy of SSF bioaugmentation with estrogen-degrading bacteria was also investigated, to determine whether removal of natural estrogens (estrone, estradiol, and estriol) and overall SSF performance for drinking water treatment could be improved. Strains for SSF augmentation were isolated from full-scale, municipal SSFs so as to optimize survival in the laboratory-scale SSFs used. Concentrations of the natural estrogens, determined by gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS), revealed augmented SSFs reduced the overall estrogenic potency of the supplied water by 25% on average and removed significantly more estrone and estradiol than nonaugmented filters. A negative correlation was found between coliform removal and estrogen concentration in nonaugmented filters. This was due to the toxic inhibition of protozoa, indicating that high estrogen concentrations can have functional implications for SSFs (such as impairing coliform removal). Consequently, we suggest that high estrogen concentrations could impact significantly on water quality production and, in particular, on pathogen removal in biological water filters.

show abstract

“…Natural filtration, a technology that has been used for communities of various sizes to fully treat or pretreat surface water before supply, can represent a valuable solution [16,17]. Natural filtration includes two primary technologies: Riverbank filtration (RBF) and slow sand filtration (SSF) [18,19]. Both of these types of technologies have been shown to produce water of consistent quality and remove a significant amount of organic carbon and microorganisms present in surface water.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both of these types of technologies have been shown to produce water of consistent quality and remove a significant amount of organic carbon and microorganisms present in surface water. Additionally, natural filtration is resistant to rapid contamination [18][19][20][21][22][23]. Particularly, RBF is potentially ideal for small communities that are located on riverbanks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Riverbank Filtration Impacts on Post Disinfection Water Quality in Small Systems—A Case Study from Auburn and Nebraska City, Nebraska

D’Alessio

Dvorak

Ray

2018

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small water systems can experience a fluctuating quality of water in the distribution system after disinfection. As chlorine is the most common disinfectant for small systems, the occurrence of disinfection byproducts (DBPs) represents a common problem for these systems. Riverbank filtration (RBF) can be a valuable solution for small communities located on riverbanks. The objectives of this study were to evaluate (i) the improvements in water quality at two selected RBF systems, and (ii) the potential lower concentrations of DBPs, in particular, trihalomethanes (THMs), in small systems that use RBF. Two small communities in Nebraska, Auburn and Nebraska City, using RBF were selected. Results from this study highlight the ability of RBF systems to consistently improve the quality of the source water and reduce the occurrence of THMs in the distribution water. However, the relative removal of THMs was directly impacted by the dissolved organic carbon (DOC) removal. Different THM concentrations and different DOC removals were observed at the two RBF sites due to the different travel distances between the river and the extractions wells.

show abstract

Pharmaceutically active compounds: Their removal during slow sand filtration and their impact on slow sand filtration bacterial removal

Cited by 60 publications

References 57 publications

Removal of Selected Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Wastewater Treatment Plant in Jordan

Removal of Selected Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Wastewater Treatment Plant in Jordan

Bioaugmentation Mitigates the Impact of Estrogen on Coliform-Grazing Protozoa in Slow Sand Filters

Riverbank Filtration Impacts on Post Disinfection Water Quality in Small Systems—A Case Study from Auburn and Nebraska City, Nebraska

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About