Premium
Erratum: Probabilistic application of a fugacity model to predict triclosan fate during wastewater treatment
Author(s) -
Bock Michael,
Lyndall Jennifer,
Barber Timothy,
Fuchsman Phyllis,
Perruchon Elyse,
Capdevielle Marie
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
integrated environmental assessment and management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.665
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1551-3793
pISSN - 1551-3777
DOI - 10.1002/ieam.134
Subject(s) - biosolids , triclosan , effluent , sewage treatment , environmental chemistry , environmental science , sorption , wastewater , environmental engineering , settling , chemistry , waste management , adsorption , engineering , medicine , organic chemistry , pathology
The fate and partitioning of the antimicrobial compound, triclosan, in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) is evaluated using a probabilistic fugacity model to predict the range of triclosan concentrations in effluent and secondary biosolids. The WWTP model predicts 84% to 92% triclosan removal, which is within the range of measured removal efficiencies (typically 70% to 98%). Triclosan is predominantly removed by sorption and subsequent settling of organic particulates during primary treatment and by aerobic biodegradation during secondary treatment. Median modeled removal efficiency due to sorption is 40% for all treatment phases and 31% in the primary treatment phase. Median modeled removal efficiency due to biodegradation is 48% for all treatment phases and 44% in the secondary treatment phase. Important factors contributing to variation in predicted triclosan concentrations in effluent and biosolids include influent concentrations, solids concentrations in settling tanks, and factors related to solids retention time. Measured triclosan concentrations in biosolids and non‐United States (US) effluent are consistent with model predictions. However, median concentrations in US effluent are over‐predicted with this model, suggesting that differences in some aspect of treatment practices not incorporated in the model (e.g., disinfection methods) may affect triclosan removal from effluent. Model applications include predicting changes in environmental loadings associated with new triclosan applications and supporting risk analyses for biosolids‐amended land and effluent receiving waters. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2010;6:393–404. © 2010 SETAC