PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the removal mechanisms of pharmaceutical active compounds (PhACs) and musks in a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Biological removal and adsorption in the activated sludge tank as well as the effect of UV radiation used for disinfection purposes were considered when performing a mass balance on the WWTP throughout a 2-week sampling campaign. METHODS: Solid-phase extraction (SPE) was carried out to analyse the PhACs in the influent and effluent samples. Ultrasonic solvent extraction was used before SPE for PhACs analysis in sludge samples. PhAC extracts were analysed by LC-MS. Solid-phase microextraction of liquid and sludge samples was used for the analysis of musks, which were detected by GC-MS. The fluxes of the most abundant compounds (13 PhACs and 5 musks) out of 79 compounds studied were used to perform the mass balance on the WWTP. RESULTS: Results show that incomplete removal of diclofenac, the compound that was found in the highest abundance, was observed via biodegradation and adsorption, and that UV photolysis was the main removal mechanism for this compound. The effect of adsorption to the secondary sludge was often negligible for the PhACs, with the exceptions of diclofenac, etofenamate, hydroxyzine and indapamide. However, the musks showed a high level of adsorption to the sludge. UV radiation had an important role in reducing the concentration of some of the target compounds (e.g. diclofenac, ibuprofen, clorazepate, indapamide, enalapril and atenolol) not removed in the activated sludge tank. CONCLUSIONS: The main removal mechanism of PhACs and musks studied in the WWTP was most often biological (45%), followed by adsorption (33%) and by UV radiation (22%). In the majority of the cases, the WWTP achieved >75% removal of the most detected PhACs and musks, with the exception of diclofenac.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the removal mechanisms of pharmaceutical active compounds (PhACs) and musks in a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Biological removal and adsorption in the activated sludge tank as well as the effect of UV radiation used for disinfection purposes were considered when performing a mass balance on the WWTP throughout a 2-week sampling campaign. METHODS: Solid-phase extraction (SPE) was carried out to analyse the PhACs in the influent and effluent samples. Ultrasonic solvent extraction was used before SPE for PhACs analysis in sludge samples. PhAC extracts were analysed by LC-MS. Solid-phase microextraction of liquid and sludge samples was used for the analysis of musks, which were detected by GC-MS. The fluxes of the most abundant compounds (13 PhACs and 5 musks) out of 79 compounds studied were used to perform the mass balance on the WWTP. RESULTS: Results show that incomplete removal of diclofenac, the compound that was found in the highest abundance, was observed via biodegradation and adsorption, and that UV photolysis was the main removal mechanism for this compound. The effect of adsorption to the secondary sludge was often negligible for the PhACs, with the exceptions of diclofenac, etofenamate, hydroxyzine and indapamide. However, the musks showed a high level of adsorption to the sludge. UV radiation had an important role in reducing the concentration of some of the target compounds (e.g. diclofenac, ibuprofen, clorazepate, indapamide, enalapril and atenolol) not removed in the activated sludge tank. CONCLUSIONS: The main removal mechanism of PhACs and musks studied in the WWTP was most often biological (45%), followed by adsorption (33%) and by UV radiation (22%). In the majority of the cases, the WWTP achieved >75% removal of the most detected PhACs and musks, with the exception of diclofenac.
Authors: Marta Carballa; Francisco Omil; Juan M Lema; María Llompart; Carmen García-Jares; Isaac Rodríguez; Mariano Gómez; Thomas Ternes Journal: Water Res Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 11.236
Authors: Thomas A Ternes; Nadine Herrmann; Matthias Bonerz; Thomas Knacker; Hansruedi Siegrist; Adriano Joss Journal: Water Res Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 11.236
Authors: Ettore Zuccato; Sara Castiglioni; Roberto Fanelli; Giuseppe Reitano; Renzo Bagnati; Chiara Chiabrando; Francesco Pomati; Carlo Rossetti; Davide Calamari Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Vanessa de Jesus Gaffney; Vitor Vale Cardoso; Eugénia Cardoso; Ana Paula Teixeira; José Martins; Maria João Benoliel; Cristina Maria Martins Almeida Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: M Pomiès; J M Choubert; C Wisniewski; C Miège; H Budzinski; M Coquery Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2014-10-11 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Shaik Basha; David Keane; Kieran Nolan; Michael Oelgemöller; Jenny Lawler; John M Tobin; Anne Morrissey Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2014-08-31 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Oksana Golovko; Vimal Kumar; Ganna Fedorova; Tomas Randak; Roman Grabic Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: P Schröder; B Helmreich; B Škrbić; M Carballa; M Papa; C Pastore; Z Emre; A Oehmen; A Langenhoff; M Molinos; J Dvarioniene; C Huber; K P Tsagarakis; E Martinez-Lopez; S Meric Pagano; C Vogelsang; G Mascolo Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Junwon Park; Changsoo Kim; Youngmin Hong; Wonseok Lee; Hyenmi Chung; Dong-Hwan Jeong; Hyunook Kim Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tamara J H M van Bergen; Ana B Rios-Miguel; Tom M Nolte; Ad M J Ragas; Rosalie van Zelm; Martien Graumans; Paul T J Scheepers; Mike S M Jetten; A Jan Hendriks; Cornelia U Welte Journal: Appl Microbiol Biotechnol Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 4.813