Does the reuse of PET bottles during solar water disinfection pose a health risk due to the migration of plasticisers and other chemicals into the water?

Does the reuse of PET bottles during solar water disinfection pose a health risk due to the migration of plasticisers and other chemicals into the water?

Publication Year:
2008
Authors:
Schmid, Peter; Kohler, Martin; Meierhofer, Regula; Luzi, Samuel; Wegelin, Martin
Language:
English
Affiliated Orgs.:
Empa Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research, State Food Law Enforcement Authority Switzerland, Eawag Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology
Resource Type:
Technical Guide
Solar water disinfection (SODIS) is a low-cost method used in developing countries, treating water using sunlight in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles for 6 hours. Concerns arose about chemical release from PET. This study assessed the transfer of substances from PET to water under SODIS conditions. Results indicated low concentrations of potentially harmful chemicals, with the SODIS procedure deemed safe regarding human exposure to these substances.
Share to:
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email
WhatsApp
Reddit

Resource Information

Abstract

Solar water disinfection (SODIS) is a simple, effective and inexpensive water treatment procedure suitable for application in developing countries. Microbially contaminated water is filled into transparent polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic bottles and exposed to full sunlight for at least 6 h. Solar radiation and elevated temperature destroy pathogenic germs efficiently. Recently, concerns have been raised insinuating a health risk by chemicals released from the bottle material polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Whereas the safety of PET for food packaging has been assessed in detail, similar investigations for PET bottles used under conditions of the SODIS treatment were lacking until now. In the present study, the transfer of organic substances from PET to water was investigated under SODIS conditions using used colourless transparent beverage bottles of different origin. The bottles were exposed to sunlight for 17 h at a geographical latitude of 47° N. In a general screening of SODIS treated water, only food flavour constituents of previous bottle contents could be identified above a detection limit of 1 μg/L. Quantitative determination of plasticisers di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA) and di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) revealed maximum concentrations of 0.046 and 0.71 μg/L, respectively, being in the same range as levels of these plasticisers reported in studies on commercial bottled water. Generally, only minor differences in plasticiser concentrations could be observed in different experimental setups. The most decisive factor was the country of origin of bottles, while the impact of storage conditions (sunlight exposure and temperature) was less distinct. Toxicological risk assessment of maximum concentrations revealed a minimum safety factor of 8.5 and a negligible carcinogenic risk of 2.8 × 10−7 for the more critical DEHP. This data demonstrate that the SODIS procedure is safe with respect to human exposure to DEHA and DEHP.

Resource Type

Technical Guide

Publication Year

2008

Author

Schmid, Peter; Kohler, Martin; Meierhofer, Regula; Luzi, Samuel; Wegelin, Martin

Language

English

Organizational Affiliation

Empa Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research, State Food Law Enforcement Authority Switzerland, Eawag Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology

Specific Contaminants

Other Chemicals, di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA), di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP)

Business Connect Takeaways

The article discusses a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of point-of-use water treatment interventions in reducing diarrhoeal disease in low- and middle-income countries. The meta-analysis included 38 studies and found that point-of-use water treatment interventions were effective in reducing diarrhoeal disease, with an overall risk reduction of 22%.
The meta-analysis found that the effectiveness of point-of-use water treatment interventions varied depending on the type of intervention used. Chlorination was found to be the most effective intervention, with an overall risk reduction of 29%, followed by filtration (22%) and solar disinfection (16%).
The authors note that despite the effectiveness of point-of-use water treatment interventions in reducing diarrhoeal disease, there are still challenges to their implementation and uptake in low- and middle-income countries. These challenges include issues related to cost, sustainability, and cultural acceptability. The authors suggest that future research should focus on identifying strategies to overcome these challenges and increase the uptake of point-of-use water treatment interventions in low- and middle-income countries.

Something To Contribute?

Notice any missing or outdated information in our Knowledge Hub? We welcome your insights! Please contact us with the specific details, and we’ll make sure to review it promptly!

We're undergoing some maintenance. Please excuse the mess!