壶式 POU 过滤器去除饮用水中 75 种全氟辛烷磺酸的性能:不同水源的比较

Termeh Teymoorian, Q. Dinh, Benoit Barbeau, Sébastien Sauvé
{"title":"壶式 POU 过滤器去除饮用水中 75 种全氟辛烷磺酸的性能:不同水源的比较","authors":"Termeh Teymoorian, Q. Dinh, Benoit Barbeau, Sébastien Sauvé","doi":"10.3389/fenvc.2024.1376079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a comprehensive assessment of the performance of popular pitcher-type point-of-use (POU) water filters to remove PFAS contaminants from tap waters. The evaluated filters, Brita (Elite and Standard), ZeroWater, Aquagear, and ClearlyFiltered, were tested for their efficacy in removing 75 targeted PFAS, total organic carbon (TOC), total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sulfate from two Canadian tap waters with background Σ75 PFAS concentrations of 13 and 56 ng/L. Overall, the performances of the filters varied depending on the structure of the filter media, the water source, and the specific contaminants present. ZeroWater was the top performer in the case of total PFAS removal. The volume-weighted average removal of total PFAS after 160 L of filtration using Saint-Donat tap water was 99% for ZeroWater, 99% for ClearlyFiltered, 77% for Aquagear, and 20% for Brita (Elite). In the case of Montreal tap water, which had different water characteristics and lower total PFAS levels, the volume-weighted average removal for PFAS was ≈100% for ZeroWater, 96% for ClearlyFiltered, 60% for Aquagear, 48% for Brita (Elite), and 38% for Brita (Standard). Both laboratory and home tests involving ZeroWater filters yielded similar high-performance results using Montreal tap water. Although ZeroWater exhibited high PFAS removal (99%) in Saint-Donat water, TDS and TOC desorption and a significant drop in pH were observed after 80 L, a phenomenon which was explained by the higher total concentration of anions in this water. In contrast, no desorption was observed in Montreal tap water for TDS and TOC due to the lower concentrations of anions. The Aquagear filter demonstrated an unusual increase in concentrations of sulfate after the initial 20 L, which needs further evaluation. This study discusses individual filter performance, the influence of tap water characteristics, and the potential to meet the new NSF guidelines, which provides valuable insights for consumers seeking to choose an appropriate easy-to-use water filtration system to ensure safe and clean drinking water in different regions.","PeriodicalId":73082,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in environmental chemistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of pitcher-type POU filters for the removal of 75 PFAS from drinking water: comparing different water sources\",\"authors\":\"Termeh Teymoorian, Q. Dinh, Benoit Barbeau, Sébastien Sauvé\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fenvc.2024.1376079\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study presents a comprehensive assessment of the performance of popular pitcher-type point-of-use (POU) water filters to remove PFAS contaminants from tap waters. The evaluated filters, Brita (Elite and Standard), ZeroWater, Aquagear, and ClearlyFiltered, were tested for their efficacy in removing 75 targeted PFAS, total organic carbon (TOC), total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sulfate from two Canadian tap waters with background Σ75 PFAS concentrations of 13 and 56 ng/L. Overall, the performances of the filters varied depending on the structure of the filter media, the water source, and the specific contaminants present. ZeroWater was the top performer in the case of total PFAS removal. The volume-weighted average removal of total PFAS after 160 L of filtration using Saint-Donat tap water was 99% for ZeroWater, 99% for ClearlyFiltered, 77% for Aquagear, and 20% for Brita (Elite). In the case of Montreal tap water, which had different water characteristics and lower total PFAS levels, the volume-weighted average removal for PFAS was ≈100% for ZeroWater, 96% for ClearlyFiltered, 60% for Aquagear, 48% for Brita (Elite), and 38% for Brita (Standard). Both laboratory and home tests involving ZeroWater filters yielded similar high-performance results using Montreal tap water. Although ZeroWater exhibited high PFAS removal (99%) in Saint-Donat water, TDS and TOC desorption and a significant drop in pH were observed after 80 L, a phenomenon which was explained by the higher total concentration of anions in this water. In contrast, no desorption was observed in Montreal tap water for TDS and TOC due to the lower concentrations of anions. The Aquagear filter demonstrated an unusual increase in concentrations of sulfate after the initial 20 L, which needs further evaluation. This study discusses individual filter performance, the influence of tap water characteristics, and the potential to meet the new NSF guidelines, which provides valuable insights for consumers seeking to choose an appropriate easy-to-use water filtration system to ensure safe and clean drinking water in different regions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in environmental chemistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in environmental chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvc.2024.1376079\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in environmental chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvc.2024.1376079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究全面评估了流行的投壶式使用点(POU)滤水器去除自来水中 PFAS 污染物的性能。对接受评估的滤水器(Brita(精英型和标准型)、ZeroWater、Aquagear 和 ClearlyFiltered)进行了测试,以了解它们在去除加拿大两种自来水中 75 种目标 PFAS、总有机碳 (TOC)、总溶解固体 (TDS)、氯化物和硫酸盐方面的功效,这两种自来水的 PFAS Σ75 背景浓度分别为 13 纳克/升和 56 纳克/升。总体而言,过滤器的性能因过滤介质的结构、水源和存在的特定污染物而异。在去除全氟辛烷磺酸总量方面,ZeroWater 表现最佳。使用 Saint-Donat 自来水过滤 160 升后,ZeroWater 对总 PFAS 的体积加权平均去除率为 99%,ClearlyFiltered 为 99%,Aquagear 为 77%,Brita(Elite)为 20%。蒙特利尔的自来水具有不同的水质特征,PFAS 总含量较低,在这种情况下,零水公司对 PFAS 的体积加权平均去除率≈100%,ClearlyFiltered 为 96%,Aquagear 为 60%,Brita(精英型)为 48%,Brita(标准型)为 38%。在使用蒙特利尔自来水进行的实验室和家庭测试中,零度水过滤器都取得了类似的高性能结果。尽管零水公司在圣多纳特(Saint-Donat)自来水中对 PFAS 的去除率很高(99%),但在 80 升水后发现 TDS 和 TOC 被解吸,pH 值显著下降,这种现象的原因是这种水中的阴离子总浓度较高。相比之下,蒙特利尔自来水中的 TDS 和 TOC 由于阴离子浓度较低而未出现解吸现象。Aquagear 过滤器显示,在最初的 20 升水之后,硫酸盐的浓度异常增加,这需要进一步评估。这项研究讨论了单个过滤器的性能、自来水特性的影响以及满足新的美国国家卫生基金会准则的潜力,为消费者选择合适的易用型水过滤系统以确保不同地区安全清洁的饮用水提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Performance of pitcher-type POU filters for the removal of 75 PFAS from drinking water: comparing different water sources
This study presents a comprehensive assessment of the performance of popular pitcher-type point-of-use (POU) water filters to remove PFAS contaminants from tap waters. The evaluated filters, Brita (Elite and Standard), ZeroWater, Aquagear, and ClearlyFiltered, were tested for their efficacy in removing 75 targeted PFAS, total organic carbon (TOC), total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, and sulfate from two Canadian tap waters with background Σ75 PFAS concentrations of 13 and 56 ng/L. Overall, the performances of the filters varied depending on the structure of the filter media, the water source, and the specific contaminants present. ZeroWater was the top performer in the case of total PFAS removal. The volume-weighted average removal of total PFAS after 160 L of filtration using Saint-Donat tap water was 99% for ZeroWater, 99% for ClearlyFiltered, 77% for Aquagear, and 20% for Brita (Elite). In the case of Montreal tap water, which had different water characteristics and lower total PFAS levels, the volume-weighted average removal for PFAS was ≈100% for ZeroWater, 96% for ClearlyFiltered, 60% for Aquagear, 48% for Brita (Elite), and 38% for Brita (Standard). Both laboratory and home tests involving ZeroWater filters yielded similar high-performance results using Montreal tap water. Although ZeroWater exhibited high PFAS removal (99%) in Saint-Donat water, TDS and TOC desorption and a significant drop in pH were observed after 80 L, a phenomenon which was explained by the higher total concentration of anions in this water. In contrast, no desorption was observed in Montreal tap water for TDS and TOC due to the lower concentrations of anions. The Aquagear filter demonstrated an unusual increase in concentrations of sulfate after the initial 20 L, which needs further evaluation. This study discusses individual filter performance, the influence of tap water characteristics, and the potential to meet the new NSF guidelines, which provides valuable insights for consumers seeking to choose an appropriate easy-to-use water filtration system to ensure safe and clean drinking water in different regions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Occurrence of 80 per and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) in muscle and liver tissues of marine mammals of the St. Lawrence Estuary and Gulf, Quebec, Canada Method optimization for benchtop mass spectrometry imaging of lipids in Eisenia hortensis A review of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in biosolids: geographical distribution and regulations Air non-thermal plasma, a green approach for the treatment of contaminated water: the case of sulfamethoxazole Performance of pitcher-type POU filters for the removal of 75 PFAS from drinking water: comparing different water sources
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1