| Literature DB >> 34981371 |
Md Jainal Abedin1, Mayeen Uddin Khandaker2, Md Ripaj Uddin3, Md Rezaul Karim4, M Shahab Uddin Ahamad5, Md Ariful Islam4, Abu Mohammad Arif6, Abdelmoneim Sulieman7, Abubakr M Idris8,9.
Abstract
The present study focuses on the indiscriminate disposal of personal protective equipment (PPEs) and resulting environmental contamination during the 3rd wave of COVID-19-driven global pandemic in the Chittagong metropolitan area, Bangladesh. Because of the very high rate of infection by the delta variant of this virus, the use of PPEs by the public is increased significantly to protect the ingestion/inhalation of respiratory droplets in the air. However, it is a matter of solicitude that general people throw away the PPEs to the dwelling environment unconsciously. With the increase of inappropriate disposal of PPEs (i.e., mostly the disposable face masks made from plastic microfibers), the possibility of transmission of the virus to the general public cannot be neglected completely. This is because this virus can survive for several days on the inanimate matter like plastics and fibers. At the same time, the result of environmental contamination by microplastic/microfiber has been widespread which eventually creates the worst impact on ecosystems and organisms. The present results may help to increase public perception of the use and subsequent disposal of PPEs, especially the face masks.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Disposal; Environmental contamination; PPEs; Pandemic
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34981371 PMCID: PMC8723821 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-17859-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 5.190
Fig. 1Impact of microplastic pollution on aquatic lives, environmental degradation, and health disorder
Fig. 2Sampling area
Fig. 3PPE abundance and sampling in different surveyed locations
Summary of the surveyed locations and corresponding PPE abundance. Note that, during the sampling campaign period, the government of Bangladesh imposed a 2-weeks countrywide lockdown, and within that period, the prevalence of PPE wastes was observed to be low compared to the normal time
| Surveyed locations and sampling code | Surveyed area (m2) | PPE density (items/m2) | Geographical location | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Longitude | Latitude | |||
| SA-1 | 710,500 | 3.6 × 10−4 | 22°24′08.4″N | 91°50′14.0″E |
| SA-2 | 54,054 | 4.6 × 10−3 | 22°20′11.9″N | 91°49′49.2″E |
| SA-3 | 58,823 | 4.8 × 10−3 | 22°19′32.9″N | 91°48′47.3″E |
| SA-4 | 50,000 | 3.7 × 10−3 | 22°25′40.2″N | 91°52′15.5″E |
| SA-5 | 66,743 | 2.2 × 10−3 | 22°18′29.1″N | 91°47′49.9″E |
| SA-6 | 76,923 | 2.4 × 10−3 | 22°19′52.1″N | 91°50′29.6″E |
| SA-7 | 62,500 | 2.6 × 10−3 | 22°21′21.9″N | 91°48′27.3″E |
| SA-8 | 909,091 | 2.9 × 10−4 | 22°22′10.1″N | 91°50′31.0″E |
| SA-9 | 81,289 | 1.9 × 10−3 | 22°21′34.7″N | 91°49′10.8″E |
| SA-10 | 142,856 | 1.3 × 10−3 | 22°21′04.9″N | 91°50′02.2″E |
| SA-11 | 250,000 | 2.6 × 10−3 | 22°22′07.4″N | 91°50′37.7″E |
| SA-12 | 50,000 | 6.8 × 10−3 | 22°19′56.0″N | 91°51′06.0″E |
| SA-13 | 125,000 | 1.5 × 10−3 | 22°19′22.9″N | 91°51′32.9″E |
| SA-14 | 333,333 | 7.5 × 10−4 | 22°19′24.8″N | 91°49′35.0″E |
| SA-15 | 270,000 | 1.6 × 10−3 | 22°20′06.6″N | 91°50′50.8″E |
| SA-16 | 254,000 | 1.1 × 10−3 | 22°21′00.7″N | 91°52′03.6″E |
| SA-17 | 54,000 | 4.3 × 10−3 | 22°22′30.6″N | 91°48′46.7″E |
| SA-18 | 65,000 | 4.3 × 10−3 | 22°15′51.4″N | 91°47′26.6″E |
| SA-19 | 51,000 | 2.4 × 10−3 | 22°21′35.0″N | 91°49′22.5″E |
| SA-20 | 45,000 | 2.9 × 10−3 | 22°19′42.1″N | 91°49′25.7″E |
| SA-21 | 85,000 | 1.1 × 10−3 | 22°14′06.6″N | 91°47′29.8″E |
| Total | 3,795,112 | 5.3 × 10−2 | 22°24′08.4″N | 91°50′14.0″E |
| Mean ± SD | 2.8 × 10−3 ± 1.7 × 10−3 | |||
Fig. 4Information on the PPE types in the surveyed area
Total facemask wastes generated by the general population in Chittagong metropolitan area
| City | Population | Urban population (%) | Facemask acceptance rate (%) | Total facemask disposal per day | Average weight of a facemask (g) | Waste generated (t/day) | Number of days taken into account | Total waste generated (t) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chittagong | 5,133,000 | 100 | 80 | 4,106,400 | 30 | 123.192 | 31 | 3818.95 |
Population source: https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/20115/chittagong/population
Total medical waste in CMA during the 3rd wave of COVID-19 in July 2021
| Sample type | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical wastes | 15,825 | 106 | 1445 | 14,274 | 3.4 | 31 | 1504.48 |
Total medical wastes only from hospitalized COVID-19 patients during July 2021
| Sample type | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical wastes | 831 | 3.4 | 31 | 87.59 |
Fig. 5Water and sediments pollution due to the face mask in the aquatic ecosystem