Search

The environmental fate of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the urban water cycle is still uncertain and their status is mainly assessed based on specific water components and information on human risk assessments. This study (a) explores the environmental fate of NSAIDs (ibuprofen, IBU; naproxen, NAP; ketoprofen, KET; diazepam, DIA; and diclofenac, DIC) in the urban water cycle, including wastewater, river, and treated water via gas chromatography-mass spectrophotometry (GCMS), (b) assesses the efficiency of reducing the targeted NSAIDs in sewage treatment plant (STP) using analysis of variance (ANOVA), and (c) evaluates the ecological risk assessment of these drugs in the urban water cycle via teratogenic index (TI) and risk quotient (RQ). The primary receptor of contaminants comes from urban areas, as a high concentration of NSAIDs is detected (ranging from 5.87 × 103 to 7.18 × 104 ng/L). The percentage of NSAIDs removal in STP ranged from 25.6% to 92.3%. The NAP and KET were still detected at trace levels in treated water, indicating the persistent presence in the water cycle. The TI values for NAP and DIA (influent and effluent) were more than 1, showing a risk of a teratogenic effect. The IBU, KET, and DIC had values of less than 1, indicating the risk of lethal embryo effects. The NAP and DIA can be classified as Human Pregnancy Category C (2.1 > TI = 0.76). This work proved that these drugs exist in the current urban water cycle, which could induce adverse effects on humans and the environment (RQ in high and low-risk categories). Therefore, they should be minimized, if not eliminated, from the primary sources of the pollutant (i.e., STPs). These pollutants should be considered a priority to be monitored, given focus to, and listed in the guideline due to their persistent presence in the urban water cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the present study was to investigate the potential sources of heavy metals in fine air particles (PM 2.5 ) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and isomeric xylenes (BTEX) in gas phase indoor air. PM 2.5 samples were collected using a low volume sampler. BTEX samples were collected using passive sampling onto sorbent tubes and analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). For the lower and upper floors of the evaluated building, the concentrations of PM 2.5 were 96.4 ± 2.70 μg/m 3 and 80.2 ± 3.11 μg/m 3 , respectively. The compositions of heavy metals in PM 2.5 were predominated by iron (Fe), zinc (Zn), and aluminum (Al) with concentration of 500 ± 50.07 ng/m 3 , 466 ± 77.38 ng/m 3 , and 422 ± 147.38 ng/m 3 . A principal component analysis (PCA) showed that the main sources of BTEX were originated from vehicle emissions and exacerbate because of temperature variations. Hazard quotient results for BTEX showed that the compounds were below acceptable limits and thus did not possess potential carcinogenic risks. However, a measured output of lifetime cancer probability revealed that benzene and ethylbenzene posed definite carcinogenic risks. Pollutants that originated from heavy traffic next to the sampling site contributed to the indoor pollution., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

It is important to have good indoor air quality, especially in indoor office environments, in order to enhance productivity and maintain good work performance. This study investigated the effects of indoor office activities on particulate matter of less than 2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) and ozone (O 3 ) concentrations, assessing their potential impact on human health. Measurements of indoor PM 2.5 and O 3 concentrations were taken every 24 h during the working days in five office environments located in a semi-urban area. As a comparison, the outdoor concentrations were derived from the nearest Continuous Air Quality Monitoring Station. The results showed that the average 24 h of indoor and outdoor PM 2.5 concentrations were 3.24 ± 0.82 μg m -3 and 17.4 ± 3.58 μg m -3 respectively, while for O 3 they were 4.75 ± 4.52 ppb and 21.5 ± 5.22 ppb respectively. During working hours, the range of PM 2.5 concentrations were 1.00 μg m -3 to 6.10 μg m -3 while for O 3 they were 0.10 ppb to 38.0 ppb. The indoor to outdoor ratio (I/O) for PM 2.5 and O 3 was <1, thus indicating a low infiltration of outdoor sources. The value of the hazard quotient (HQ) for all sampling buildings was <1 for both chronic and acute exposures, indicating that the non-carcinogenic risks are negligible. Higher total cancer risk (CR) value for outdoors (2.67E-03) was observed compared to indoors (4.95E-04) under chronic exposure while the CR value for acute exposure exceeded 1.0E-04, thus suggesting a carcinogenic PM 2.5 risk for both the indoor and outdoor environments. The results of this study suggest that office activities, such as printing and photocopying, affect indoor O 3 concentrations while PM 2.5 concentrations are impacted by indoor-related contributions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)