Are there microplastics in drinking water? – A study on microplastics occurrence at different water treatment plants, Central Europe region

0517320 - ÚH 2020 RIV ES eng A - Abstrakt
Novotná, Kateřina - Čermáková, Lenka - Pivokonský, Martin
Are there microplastics in drinking water? – A study on microplastics occurrence at different water treatment plants, Central Europe region.
MICRO 2018. Fate and Impact of Microplastics: Knowledge, Actions and Solutions. Lanzarote: MSFS-RBLZ, 2018 - (Baztan, J.; Bergmann, M.; Carrasco, A.; Fossi, C.; Jorgensen, B.; Miguelez, A.; Pahl, S.; Thompson, R.; Vanderlinden, J.). s. 29. ISBN 978-84-09-06477-9.
[MICRO2018 Fate and Impact of Microplastics: Knowledge, actions and solutions. 19.11.2018-23.11.2018, Lanzarote]
Institucionální podpora: RVO:67985874
Klíčová slova: Central Europe * drinking water sources * microplastics * plastic contamination * water
Obor OECD: Environmental sciences (social aspects to be 5.7)
https://micro2018.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/micro2018_proceedings_book_1.pdf

The study examined the occurrence of microplastics (MPs) in raw and treated drinking waterobtained from different water treatment plants (WTPs) located within urban areas of the CzechRepublic, Central Europe. Three WTPs (WTP1-3) supplied by diverse kinds of water bodies andapplying distinct treatment technologies were selected. A substantial content of MPs wasdetermined in all samples, i.e. 1473 ± 34, 1812 ± 35 and 3605 ± 497 particles/L in raw water ofWTP1, WTP2 and WTP3, respectively, and 443 ± 10, 338 ± 76 and 628 ± 28 particles/L, resp., intreated water. Although the number of MPs was always significantly lower (by 83% on average) intreated than in raw water, considerable amounts of microplastics remained unremoved. Besides thequantification of MPs, they were also characterized in terms of their size, shape and materialcomposition. Microplastics down to 1 im were determined and divided into five size classes (1-5 im, 5-10 im, 10-50 im, 50-100 im, > 100 im), as shown in Figure 1. The MPs belonging to the firstcategory (1-5 im) prevailed, comprising approximately 40-60% in raw water and 25-60% in treatedwater, and in general, the vast majority was smaller than 10 im (up to 95%). Concerning the shapeof microplastics, fragments were the most plentiful in WTP1 and WTP2 raw water, while fragmentstogether with fibres predominated in the case of WTP3. Similar pattern was observed for treatedwater samples, except for an increase in fibres proportion at WTP3, which might indicate their lessefficient removability by the employed technology. Further, 12 different materials forming the MPswere identified, while PET (polyethylene terephthalate), PP (polypropylene) and PE (polyethylene)particles were the most abundant. These results contribute to fill the knowledge gap regarding theemerging microplastic pollution related to drinking water supply.
Trvalý link: http://hdl.handle.net/11104/0302649