Wassertechnische Strategien zur Reduzierung der Trinkwasserbelastung durch Arzneimittelwirkstoffe

摘要

Results The available research results concerning the application of innovative methods of wastewater and drinking water purification to eliminate pharmaceuticals are summarized in the present paper. An increase of the activated sludge (aerobic sludge) age to 8–10 days in treatment plants can improve the metabolization of less persistent pharmaceutical agents whereas expansion of the sojourn time beyond 10 days will not result in a remarked increase of degradation for most pharmaceutical substances. First results have shown that wastewater treatment plants with integrated membrane bioreactors (MBR) using micro- and ultrafiltration membranes do not provide significantly better results compared to the conventional wastewater treatment plants with respect to the removal of organic micropollutants (including pharmaceutical residues). The use of powdered carbon in biologically treated wastewater is able to reduce pharmaceutical residues up to 80?% in the run-off water. Pilot studies scrutinize the treatment of highly contaminated effluents via catalytic photooxidation. Regarding the suitability of the method to reduce the contamination of drinking and wastewater with pharmaceuticals yet only few data from laboratory scale testing are available. Activated carbon filtration is preferably used for drinking water treatment. Primarily against the background of disinfection, ozonation is widely used for drinking water treatment, but for wastewater treatment the method is still at the experimental stage and will hardly become of practical importance because of high costs. Sustainable wastewater separation is grounded on decentralized concepts by considering material cycles (recycling) at the place of origin. In the long term, separation measures can significantly contribute to declining drug concentrations in drinking water. Regarding the quarrying of drinking water by bank filtration water, river water or artificially enriched ground water, end-of-pipe techniques are vital. Most commonly, activated carbon or activated carbon combined with ozonization is applied and assures a high drinking water quality. Discussion The advantages and disadvantages of the different water treatment methods mainly concern the varying degrees of effectiveness with respect to the elimination of very persistent pharmaceutical agents, the generation of problematical metabolites and additional waste materials, hygienic problems, energy needs and the necessity to employ appropriate technical staff for operation. Although the biodegradation of very persistent drugs cannot be enhanced by an extension of the activated sludge age, this modification should be considered in sewage plants to reduce the contamination with less persistent medical agents. Compared with conventional wastewater treatment, membrane bioreactors provide the advantage of a better control of biological activities on the plant and a comparably small plant size but high investment and operation costs. Additionally, pharmaceuticals such as carbamazepin are only insufficiently removed from wastewater by membrane bioreactors. The regular use of powdered activated carbon in sewage treatment plants would also increase the costs of wastewater treatment and would additionally exclude the further use of sewage sludge in agriculture. Currently, in Germany the further use of sewage sludge is handled differently by the Federal States and discussed controversially. The implementation of ozonation as an additional treatment method in wastewater treatment plants is not realistic because of cost concerns. Additionally, the method produces analytically as yet not assessed metabolites with unknown (eco-)toxicological impacts. For this reason ozonation should currently not be applied unless the reaction products are removed subsequently by filtration through activated carbon. For industrial sewage photooxidation is in a state of testing but an application for munic