![]() Activated-carbon filters removed 73% of PFAS contaminants, on average, but results varied greatly.Reverse osmosis filters and two-stage filters reduced PFAS levels, including GenX, by 94% or more in water, though the small number of two-stage filters tested necessitates further testing to determine why they performed so well.GenX, which has been found in high levels in water in the Wilmington area of southeastern N.C., was among the PFEAs for which they tested. Samples were tested for a suite of PFAS contaminants, including three perfluoroalkal sulfonic acids (PFSAs), seven perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) and six per- and poly-fluoroalkyl ether acids (PFEAs). They analyzed filtered water samples from homes in Chatham, Orange, Durham and Wake counties in central North Carolina and New Hanover and Brunswick counties in southeastern N.C. It’s the first study to examine the PFAS-removal efficiencies of point-of-use filters in a residential setting. 5 in Environmental Science & Technology Letters. The researchers published their peer-reviewed findings Feb. They are now nearly ubiquitous in human blood serum samples, Stapleton noted. ![]() Some scientists call PFAS “forever chemicals” because they persist in the environment indefinitely and accumulate in the human body. Mothers and young children may be most vulnerable to the chemicals, which can affect reproductive and developmental health. ![]() Exposure to the chemicals, used widely in fire-fighting foams and stain- and water-repellants, is associated with various cancers, low birth weight in babies, thyroid disease, impaired immune function and other health disorders. PFAS have come under scrutiny in recent years due to their potential health impacts and widespread presence in the environment, especially drinking water. “The real goal should be control of PFAS contaminants at their source.” James Ellen Distinguished Professor of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering at NC State, whose lab teamed with Stapleton’s to conduct the study. “Home filters are really only a stopgap,” said Detlef Knappe, the S. The whole-house systems were also widely variable and in some cases actually increased PFAS levels in the water.” “In contrast, the effectiveness of activated-carbon filters used in many pitcher, countertop, refrigerator and faucet-mounted styles was inconsistent and unpredictable. “All of the under-sink reverse osmosis and two-stage filters achieved near-complete removal of the PFAS chemicals we were testing for,” Stapleton said. “We tested 76 point-of-use filters and 13 point-of-entry or whole-house systems and found their effectiveness varied widely,” said Heather Stapleton, the Dan and Bunny Gabel Associate Professor of Environmental Health at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment. A few, if not properly maintained, can even make the situation worse. They may not remove all of the drinking water contaminants you’re most concerned about.Ī new study by scientists at Duke University and North Carolina State University finds that – while using any filter is better than using none – many household filters are only partially effective at removing toxic perfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS, from drinking water. – The water filter on your refrigerator door, the pitcher-style filter you keep inside the fridge and the whole-house filtration system you installed last year may function differently and have vastly different price tags, but they have one thing in common.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |