The study demonstrates that transformation products may have a higher environmental risk potential than the respective parent compounds.

In the present study, in vitro toxicity as well as biopersistence and photopersistence of four artificial sweeteners (acesulfame, cyclamate, saccharine, and sucralose) and five antibiotics (levofloxacin, lincomycin, linezolid, m a r b o f l o x a c i n , a n d s a r a f l o x a c i n ) a n d o f t h e i r phototransformation products (PTPs) were investigated. Furthermore, antibiotic activity was evaluated after UV irradiation and after exposure to inocula of a sewage treatment plant. The study reveals that most of the tested compounds and their PTPs were neither readily nor inherently biodegradable in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)-biodegradability tests. The study further demonstrates that PTPs are formed upon irradiation with an Hg lamp (UV light) and, to a lesser extent, upon irradiation with a Xe lamp (mimics sunlight). Comparing the nonirradiated with the corresponding irradiated solutions, a higher chronic toxicity against bacteria was found for the irradiated solutions of linezolid. Neither cytotoxicity nor genotoxicity was found in human cervical (HeLa) and liver (Hep-G2) cells for any of the investigated compounds or their PTPs. Antimicrobial activity of the tested fluoroquinolones was reduced after UV treatment, but it was not reduced after a 28-day exposure to inocula of a sewage treatment plant. This comparative study shows that PTPs can be formed as a result of UV treatment. The study further demonstrated that UV irradiation can be effective in reducing the antimicrobial activity of antibiotics, and * Marlies Bergheim

Environmental context. Many pharmaceuticals on the market have not undergone detailed evaluation for potential aquatic toxicity. We found that most tested pharmaceuticals were persistent, that phototransformation products were likely to be formed as a result of UV treatment of wastewater and that some transformation products were more toxic to bacteria than their precursor pharmaceutical compound. Thus UV treatment of wastewater does not seem appropriate to completely degrade or transform micropollutants into harmless compounds.Abstract. Data allowing for a complete environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and their photoderatives in the environment are still scarce. In the present study, in vitro toxicity and both bio-and photopersistence of various pharmaceuticals (aciclovir, allopurinol, cetirizine, cimetidine, fluconazole, hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril, phenytoin, primidone, ranitidine, sotalol, sulpiride, tramadol and valsartane) as well as their phototransformation products were evaluated in order to fill data gaps and to help prioritise them for further testing. Twelve out of the fourteen compounds investigated were found to be neither readily nor inherently biodegradable in the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development-biodegradability tests. The study further demonstrates that the photo-induced transformation of the pharmaceuticals was faster upon irradiation with a Hg lamp (UV light) than with a Xe lamp emitting a spectrum that mimics sunlight. Comparing the non-irradiated with the respective irradiated solutions, a higher acute and chronic toxicity against bacteria was found for the irradiated solutions of seven compounds (cetirizine, cimetidine, hydrochlorothiazide, ranitidine, sulpiride, tramadol and valsartane). No cyto-and genotoxic effects were found in human cervical (HeLa) and liver (Hep-G2) cells for any of the investigated compounds or their phototransformation products. This comparative study documents that phototransformation products can arise as a result of UV treatment of wastewater containing these pharmaceuticals. It further demonstrates that some phototransformation products may have a higher environmental risk potential than the respective parent compounds because some phototransformation products exhibited a higher bacterial toxicity.

No abstract

Photolytic decomposition of aqueous CIP leads to genotoxic transformation products. This proves that irradiated samples of CIP are able to exert heritable genotoxic effects on human liver cells in vitro. Therefore, photolysis as a technique for wastewater treatment needs to be evaluated in detail in further studies, not only for CIP but in general.

Background The European surfactant and detergent industry initiated a project to conduct an EUSES-based environmental exposure assessment for the total volume of alkyl sulfate (AS) surfactants, and to verify if the EUSES assessment leads to a realistic prediction of the environmental exposure or to an over- respectively under-estimation of the environmental concentrations of the surfactants. Verification of the EUSES environmental concentration prediction (Clocaleffluent) was carried out by benchmarking them against environmental monitoring data. Recently published data from the United States of America adjusted to the European Union (EU) frame conditions were used for the assessment, as for the EU only historical data from the mid-1990s are available. In addition to the standard (default) EUSES assessment, a higher tier assessment using substance-specific properties, particularly increased biodegradation rates (192 per day instead of the default of 24 per day for WWTP), was conducted. Results A figure of 178,400 tonnes of AS was established as the total maximum volume (2016) handled annually in Europe. This total volume includes the volumes from all EU manufacturers and all registered AS > 100 t/a, as well as the amount of AS contained in EU REACH registered alkyl ether sulfates (AES). The total tonnage was split and assigned to the different uses as reported to ECHA in the C12 AS, Na (151-21-3) registration dossier in 2010. The EUSES calculation was limited to widespread (professional and consumer) uses, covering in total 97,889 t of AS homologues. The EUSES calculation gave a Clocaleffluent of 335 µg/L for the SimpleTreat “readily” biodegradation rate default and a Clocaleffluent of 44.6 µg/L for the AS-specific degradation rates. Recent US monitoring data showed a mean effluent concentration of 4.24 µg alkyl sulfates/L (∑ C12 + C14 + C16 homologues). Taking into account the different annual per capita AS use (including AS from AES) in the US (295 g) and the EU (348 g), the daily per capita water use (EU 200 L, US 408 L), and the WWTP efficiency in the EU and the US (comparable), an US to EU adjustment factor of 2.4 was established. Application of the adjustment factor to the US monitoring data resulted in a calculated EU mean effluent concentration = 10.18 µg alkyl sulfates/L (∑ C12, C14, C16 homologues). This value was used as an independent benchmark for the EUSES calculations. Conclusions Comparing the predicted Clocaleffluent = 335 µg alkyl sulfates/L (SimpleTreat default) and a Clocaleffluent = 44.6 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (AS-specific degradation rates) with the 10.18 µg alkyl sulfates/L from the adjusted monitoring data it is evident, that the EUSES calculation overestimates the AS environmental exposure by factors of > 32 and > 4, respectively. Taking into consideration, that only widespread uses (covering only 50% of the total AS volume) were included in the EUSES calculation, the overestimation of the default exposure by a factor of 4 is still conservative, despite the fact, that eightfold higher, substance-specific biodegradation rates were used. In conclusion, using the 2010 C12-AS REACH dossier (CAS-No. 151-21-3) as an example, it has been shown, that EUSES model exposure calculations using default biodegradation rates significantly overestimate effluent concentrations.

BackgroundThe European surfactant and detergent industry initiated a project to conduct an EUSES-based environmental exposure assessment for the total volume of alkyl sulfate ( AS) surfactants, and to verify if the EUSES assessment leads to a realistic prediction of the environmental exposure or to an over- respectively under-estimation of the environmental concentrations of the surfactants. Verification of the EUSES environmental concentration prediction (Clocaleffluent) was carried out by benchmarking them against environmental monitoring data. Recently published data from the United States of America adjusted to the European Union (EU) frame conditions were used for the assessment, as for the EU only historical data from the mid 1990’s are available. In addition to the standard (default) EUSES assessment, a higher tier assessment using substance-specific properties, particularly increased biodegradation rates (192 per day instead of the default of 24 per day for STP), was conducted.ResultsA figure of 178,400 tonnes of AS was established as the total maximum volume (2016) handled annually in Europe. This total volume includes the volumes from all EU manufacturers and all registered AS > 100 t/a, as well as the amount of AS contained in EU REACH registered Alkyl Ether Sulfates (AES). The total tonnage was split and assigned to the different uses as reported to ECHA in the C12 AS, Na (151-21-3) registration dossier in 2010. The EUSES calculation was limited to widespread (professional and consumer) uses, covering in total 97,889 t of AS homologues. The EUSES calculation gave a Clocaleffluent of 335 µg/L for the SimpleTreat “readily” biodegradation rate default and a Clocaleffluent of 44.6 µg/L for the AS specific degradation rates.Recent U.S. monitoring data showed a mean effluent concentration of 4.24 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (∑ C12 + C14 + C16 homologues). Taking into account the different annual per capita AS use (including AS from AES) in the U.S. (295 g) and the EU (348 g), the daily per capita water use (EU 200 L, U.S. 408 L), and the WWTP efficiency in the EU and the U.S. (comparable), an U.S. to EU adjustment factor of 2.4 was established. Application of the adjustment factor to the U.S. monitoring data resulted in a calculated EU mean effluent concentration = 10.18 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (∑ C12, C14, C16 homologues). This value was used as an independent benchmark for the EUSES calculations.ConclusionsComparing the predicted Clocaleffluent = 335 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (SimpleTreat default) and a Clocaleffluent = 44.6 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (AS-specific degradation rates) with the 10.18 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L from the adjusted monitoring data it is evident, that the EUSES calculation overestimates the AS environmental exposure by factors of > 32 and > 4, respectively. Taking into consideration, that only widespread uses (covering only 50 % of the total AS volume) were included in the EUSES calculation, the overestimation of the default exposure by a factor of 4 is still conservative, despite the fact, that 8-fold higher, substance-specific biodegradation rates were used. In conclusion, using the 2010 C12-AS REACH dossier (CAS-No. 151-21-3) as an example, it has been shown, that EUSES model exposure calculations using default biodegradation rates significantly overestimate effluent concentrations.

BackgroundThe European surfactant and detergent industry initiated a project to conduct an EUSES-based environmental exposure assessment for the total volume of alkyl sulfate ( AS) surfactants, and to verify if the EUSES assessment leads to a realistic prediction of the environmental exposure or to an over- respectively under-estimation of the environmental concentrations of the surfactants. Verification of the EUSES environmental concentration prediction (Clocaleffluent) was carried out by benchmarking them against environmental monitoring data. Recently published data from the United States of America adjusted to the European Union (EU) frame conditions were used for the assessment, as for the EU only historical data from the mid 1990’s are available. In addition to the standard (default) EUSES assessment, a higher tier assessment using substance-specific properties, particularly increased biodegradation rates (192 per day instead of the default of 24 per day for WWTP), was conducted.ResultsA figure of 178,400 tonnes of AS was established as the total maximum volume (2016) handled annually in Europe. This total volume includes the volumes from all EU manufacturers and all registered AS > 100 t/a, as well as the amount of AS contained in EU REACH registered Alkyl Ether Sulfates (AES). The total tonnage was split and assigned to the different uses as reported to ECHA in the C12 AS, Na (151-21-3) registration dossier in 2010. The EUSES calculation was limited to widespread (professional and consumer) uses, covering in total 97,889 t of AS homologues. The EUSES calculation gave a Clocaleffluent of 335 µg/L for the SimpleTreat “readily” biodegradation rate default and a Clocaleffluent of 44.6 µg/L for the AS specific degradation rates. Recent U.S. monitoring data showed a mean effluent concentration of 4.24 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (∑ C12 + C14 + C16 homologues). Taking into account the different annual per capita AS use (including AS from AES) in the U.S. (295 g) and the EU (348 g), the daily per capita water use (EU 200 L, U.S. 408 L), and the WWTP efficiency in the EU and the U.S. (comparable), an U.S. to EU adjustment factor of 2.4 was established. Application of the adjustment factor to the U.S. monitoring data resulted in a calculated EU mean effluent concentration = 10.18 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (∑ C12, C14, C16 homologues). This value was used as an independent benchmark for the EUSES calculations. ConclusionsComparing the predicted Clocaleffluent = 335 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (SimpleTreat default) and a Clocaleffluent = 44.6 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L (AS-specific degradation rates) with the 10.18 µg Alkyl Sulfates/L from the adjusted monitoring data it is evident, that the EUSES calculation overestimates the AS environmental exposure by factors of > 32 and > 4, respectively. Taking into consideration, that only widespread uses (covering only 50 % of the total AS volume) were included in the EUSES calculation, the overestimation of the default exposure by a factor of 4 is still conservative, despite the fact, that 8-fold higher, substance-specific biodegradation rates were used. In conclusion, using the 2010 C12-AS REACH dossier (CAS-No. 151-21-3) as an example, it has been shown, that EUSES model exposure calculations using default biodegradation rates significantly overestimate effluent concentrations.