4.5 Article

Assessing pharmaceutical removal and reduction in toxicity provided by advanced wastewater treatment systems

期刊

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c9ew00559e

关键词

-

资金

  1. New York Sea Grant Project [1139881, 1130883, R/CTP-54]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) have been considered as hotspots for pharmaceutical residues, such as antidepressants, antimicrobials and active ingredients of over-the-counter drugs. Despite evidence of ecotoxicological effects of these microcontaminants on exposed fish in the aquatic systems, there is currently no regulation in terms of the levels of pharmaceutical residues allowable for release into the environment. Depending on the extent of treatment employed in WWTPs removal of pharmaceutical residues are highly variable. This study compares the removal efficiencies for several antimicrobials, antidepressants, and other pharmaceuticals at different stages of the wastewater treatment process of seven WWTPs that employ varying treatment technologies including biological, physical, advanced chemical oxidation, and a combination of two or more of these technologies. The concentrations of the pharmaceuticals were measured by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry at multiple points during the course of treatment. Additionally, the ecotoxicological effects of the WWTP effluents were also evaluated based on the behavioral effects in larval zebrafish. It was found that biological treatment process provided negative to low removal (<50%), while activated carbon and ozonation provided high removal (>95% overall removal) for 14 out of 15, and 9 out of 11 compounds detected in WWTP influents, respectively. Notably, the final effluents of the seven WWTPs in this study did not show any significant behavioral alterations in zebrafish, indicating that despite differences in removal efficiencies all the treatment processes investigated are sufficient in preventing short-term biological effects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据