4.8 Article

Artificial Sweetener Sucralose in U.S. Drinking Water Systems

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 20, Pages 8716-8722

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es202404c

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Water Research Foundation [3085]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [EAR 087683]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The artificial sweetener sucralose has recently been shown to be a widespread of contaminant of wastewater, surface water, and groundwater. In order to understand its occurrence in drinking water systems, water samples from 19 United States (U.S.) drinking water treatment plants (DWTPs) serving more than 28 million people were analyzed for sucralose using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Sucralose was found to be present in source water of 15 out of 19 DWTPs (47-2900 ng/L), finished water of 13 out of 17 DWTPs (49-2400 ng/L) and distribution system water of 8 out Of the 12 DWTPs (48-2400 ng/L) tested. Sucralose was only found to be present in source waters with known wastewater influence and/or recreational usage, and displayed low removal (12% average) in the DWTPs where finished water was sampled. Further, in the subset of DWTPs with distribution system water sampled, the compound was found to persist regardless of the presence of residual chlorine or chloramines. In order to understand intra-DWTP consistency, sucralose was monitored at one drinking water treatment plant over an 11 month period from March 2010 through January 2011, and averaged 440 ng/L in the source water and 350 ng/L in the finished water. The results of this study confirm that sucralose will function well as an indicator compound for anthropogenic influence on source, finished drinking and distribution system (i.e., tap) water, as well as an indicator compound for the presence of other recalcitrant compounds in finished drinking water in the U.S.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available