Polycyclic musk fragrances (PMFs) in wastewater and activated sludge: analytical protocol and application to a real case study

Abstract

Two different analytical methods for the determination of polycyclic musk fragrances (PMFs) in wastewater and in activated sludge were developed. PMFs in filtered water samples were determined by gas chromatography coupled with a triplequadrupole mass spectrometer in selected reaction monitoring (SRM) mode. Activated sludge samples were extracted using an ultrasonic bath and analysed using a GC-Ion trap. The developed methods respected a linear model (R 2 > 0.995). Detection limits of selected compounds (Celestolide, Galaxolide, Galaxolidone, Phantolide and Tonalide) varied from 1.7 to 80 ng L −1 for water and from 0.1 ng g −1 to 210 ng g −1 for activated sludge considering laboratory contamination for each PMF. Recovery studies were performed on spiked water samples and, for sludges, on procedural blanks, showing recoveries above 70% for all the considered compounds, while recovery of the internal standard was always above limit of acceptance (30%). Proposed methods were used to determine PMFs concentrations in wastewaters and activated sludges of a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) located in Northern Italy. Concentrations in the range of μg L −1 of Galaxolide and of its metabolite Galaxolidone were detected even in the WWTP effluent. Biotransformation of Galaxolide into Galaxolidone occurred during biological treatment with the consequent release of this compound through WWTP effluents. In activated sludges, concentrations of all PMFs except Galaxolidone were one order of magnitude higher than wastewaters, as expected according to their physicochemical properties. Present wastewater treatment technologies were confirmed to not be efficient in removing PMFs from influent wastewaters since with only ≃ 30% of Celestolide and Tonalide were removed.

Occurrence and Sources of Synthetic Musk Fragrances in the Sewage Treatment Plants and the Han River, Korea

“…The HHCB concentration in the STP influents in this study was higher than that previously reported in Italy [34], Spain [35,36], France [22], and other studies in Korea [25] (Table S4). This might be due to the characteristics of the STPs, which were located in the densely populated city of Seoul, and most of the STP influents were therefore composed of domestic sewage.…”

“…The HHCB/AHTN concentration ratio in the sewage influents was 16.4, which was higher than the previously reported values of 4.5 [25], 1.2 [28], and 3.2 [26], and similar to the value obtained by Tasselli and Guzzella [34]. This result implies that significantly higher amounts of HHCB than AHTN are used in PCPs in Korea.…”

Occurrence and Sources of Synthetic Musk Fragrances in the Sewage Treatment Plants and the Han River in Seoul, Korea

“…The HHCB concentration in the STP influent in this study was higher than that previously reported in Italy [32], Spain [33,34], and France [19], and other studies in Korea [22] (Table S4). This might be due to the characteristics of the STPs, which were located in the densely populated city of Seoul, and most of the STP influents were therefore composed of domestic sewage.…”

Kinetics and Mechanistic Studies of Photochemical and Oxidative Stability of Galaxolide

“…The detailed studies showed that it is liable to aerobic and anaerobic biotransformation [15] as well as to physical processes such as sorption onto active sludge [16]. Its removal efficiency is in the range of 30-99.7% and depends on the applied technology, the construction of the reactors and their numbers as well as the additional advanced oxidation modules used [15][16][17][18]. However, due to its widespread use and continuous supply to the treatment plants, it is perceived as a persistent pollutant [1].…”

“…However, due to its widespread use and continuous supply to the treatment plants, it is perceived as a persistent pollutant [1]. Its concentration in the WWTP influent ranges from 1.9 to 16 µg L −1 [15][16][17][18] and in the effluent from 0.2 to 7.0 µg L −1 [12,15,16,18]. It is found in surface waters at the relatively low level below 100 ng L −1 [5,12] while in drinking water detected at the trace level below 30 ng L −1 or below LOD of the applied analytical procedure [12].…”