To regulate or not to regulate? What to do with more toxic disinfection by-products?
To regulate or not to regulate? What to do with more toxic disinfection by-products?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jece.2020.103939
复制
发表时间：
2020-08-01
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
Plewa, Michael J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Richardson, Susan D.;Plewa, Michael J.
自从20世纪70年代第一次对消毒副产品(DBP)进行监管以来，已确定了700种消毒副产品，其中许多比受监管的产品毒性大得多。此外，今天的饮用水与过去不同，越来越多地使用替代消毒剂，如氯胺、臭氧、二氧化氯和紫外线(这些消毒剂可以形成其他类型的DBPs)，以及气候变化、人口增加、废水入侵和能源勘探对我们的水源产生的新影响。今天的问题是，我们是否在监管正确的DBP以保护人类健康，如果不是，应该做些什么。新的方法可能包括：(1)使用体外数据和预防原则方法，(2)使用成品水的替代指标，如总有机溴/碘、总亚硝胺或总有机氮，而不是创建更长的受监管DBPs列表，(3)对整个饮用水提取物进行毒性测试，以查明潜在的问题，然后使用化学分析来确定有毒物质，最后，(4)采用不同的处理策略来降低毒性。虽然早期的法规可能显著改善了饮用水的安全性，但接触DBP在现代生活中是常态，我们还可以做更多的事情。
Since the first regulation of disinfection by-products (DBPs) in the 1970s, > 700 DBPs have been identified, and many of these are much more toxic than those regulated. Moreover, drinking water today is not the same as it was in the past, with increasing use of alternative disinfectants like chloramine, ozone, chlorine dioxide, and UV (which can form other types of DBPs), as well as new impacts on our source waters from climate change, population increases, wastewater intrusion, and energy exploration. The question today is whether we are regulating the right DBPs to protect human health, and if not, what should be done. New approaches may involve (1) the use of in vitro data and a Precautionary Principle approach, (2) using surrogate metrics of finished waters, such as total organic bromine/iodine, total nitrosamines, or total organic nitrogen rather than creating longer lists of regulated DBPs, and (3) using toxicity assays for whole drinking water extracts to pinpoint potential problems, then using chemical analyses to identify the toxic agents, and finally, (4) invoking different treatment strategies to reduce the toxicity. While the early regulations likely significantly improved the safety of drinking water, DBP exposure is a constant in modern life, and there is more that we can do.