Quality of rainwater and reclaimed water used in buildings and selection of appropriate indicators.

OBJECTIVES: The use of alternative water sources such as rainwater or greywater (i.e., wastewater excluding water from toilets) for non-potable purposes may save water but, on the other hand, can also pose health risks to users. The main health risks come from microorganisms (such as bacteria, viruses, fungi, and protozoa). This work aims to analyse especially microbiological quality of rainwater and greywater used inside buildings in detail and to expand the existing knowledge about the potential health risks associated with these alternative water sources. It also considers methodological problems during E. coli and coliform bacteria detection. The final objective is to discuss requirements and appropriate indicators for monitoring recycled water quality. METHODS: We examined 30 buildings with non-potable water systems in the Czech Republic and analysed a total of 137 samples of rainwater and 120 samples of greywater. From these 30 buildings, eleven, 5 of which used rainwater and 6 of which used greywater, were sampled regularly for 1-2 years for basic chemical parameters, various faecal indicators, C. perfringens, Legionella spp. and P. aeruginosa. Occasionally, samples were analysed also for the presence of environmental mycobacteria, amoebas, viruses, and selected pathogens. RESULTS: Nearly three quarters of rainwater samples contained the faecal indicators E. coli or enterococci, or both, and in samples from several buildings also Clostridium perfringens was repeatedly detected. Untreated and treated rainwater were in respect to microbiological quality similar, suggesting that treatment processes were not very efficient. In greywater samples, beside faecal indicators, also P. aeruginosa and thermotolerant amoebas were repeatedly detected. Treatment technologies used for greywater were more efficient than those for rainwater systems. CONCLUSION: Based on the results we evaluated appropriate indicators for monitoring recycled water quality and drafted the first Czech regulation for non-potable water.

Monitoring of pesticides in drinking water: finding the right balance between under- and over-monitoring - experience from the Czech Republic.

The modern, risk-based approach requires that only those pollutants which are likely to be present in a given water supply should be monitored in drinking water. From this perspective, defining an adequate approach to the monitoring of pesticides in areas with intensive agriculture is currently one of the greatest issues of regulation. This article shows the development and detailed results of pesticide monitoring in drinking water in the Czech Republic (CR). More than 4000 water supply zones serving around a 9.5 million population are routinely monitored, with nearly 250 thousand analyses of over 200 different pesticides and their metabolites being performed every year, with a non-compliance rate of ca. 0.3%. In 2017, pesticides accounted for most derogations in the CR, concerning a total of 64 water supply systems serving more than a 250 thousand population. A representative survey targeting 21 selected chemicals showed that 75% of water supply systems contained up to 11 pesticides per sample. The most commonly found were metabolites of the herbicides used to protect oilseed rape, maize, and sugar beet: acetochlor ESA, alachlor ESA, metazachlor OA, and chloridazon-desphenyl. The health risk assessment did not reveal any risks from these chemicals, even at the highest levels detected or in the most abundant mixtures, to the most vulnerable population (infants). Nevertheless, the increased presence of pesticides undermines the public's trust in drinking water safety.

Survey of human pharmaceuticals in drinking water in the Czech Republic.

The first large-scale assessment of pharmaceuticals in drinking water in the Czech Republic (CR) focused on the detection of five substances. Samples were collected from public water systems supplying 5.3 million people, 50.5% of the Czech population. In the initial survey of tap water from 92 major supply zones using mostly surface water, no pharmaceutical exceeded the limit of quantification (LOQ = 0.5 ng/L). In a second survey, samples were collected from the outlet of 23 water treatment plants (WTPs) considered of high risk because they use surface waters influenced by wastewater. Ibuprofen was the most frequently found pharmaceutical (19 samples), followed by carbamazepine (12), naproxen (8), and diclofenac (3); concentrations ranged from 0.5 to 20.7 ng/L, with medians below 6 ng/L. Concentrations of 17α-ethinylestradiol were below the LOQ. A follow-up survey included tap and outlet samples from eight of the 23 WTPs with the highest concentrations. Pharmaceuticals were quantified in only three tap water samples. Regarding risks to consumers, these results suggest that a relatively small population (<10%) in the CR is exposed to quantifiable concentrations of pharmaceuticals in tap water and that an extremely high margin of safety (several thousand-fold to several million-fold) is associated with these exposures.

[Methods for assessing the potential health risks of traces of pharmaceuticals in drinking water]. / Metody hodnocení zdravotních rizik stopových mnozství Iéciv v pitné vode.

Increasing consumption of pharmaceuticals leads also to higher release of its non-metabolized residues into environment, mostly hydrosphere. Some of these substances may reach also processed drinking water. Although it is found in traces, it causes public concern as it can represent a non-targeted and unwanted medication. Toxicologists and public health authorities are appealed to assess potential health risks carefully and to communicate the risk adequately to public. As health risks assessment of environmental exposure to pharmaceuticals is a new field of expertise, its methodology has not been unified and standardized yet, but several different procedures have been proposed and used. The paper provides overview of these methods.