Content uploaded by Cherie Ann Kruger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Cherie Ann Kruger on Feb 02, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Household Water Filter Project K5/1994//3
Presented at Journal Club 21/08/2013
“An independent investigation into the purification
capacity of small-scale water purification units
supplied in South Africa”
Presented By:
Mrs. CA. Kruger and Mrs N. Hodgkinson
Doctoral Candidates
Water and Health Research Centre
University of Johannesburg
Faculty of Health Sciences
Project Supervisor: Dr. TG. Barnard (Director WHRC)
Project Leader: Dr. C. Bartie (NIOH)
Introduction
Major challenge
Intervention
!
Countermeasure !
"#$%&%'(et al#$%%)'* et al#$%%+',#$%%-
Introduction
Problem #
#.)%/&%%01
However
2/
3
In SA
Overall
Therefore 4
# #
"#$%&%'* et al#$%%+5 et al#$%%+'6 et al#$%%)'"#$%%)'7 et al#$%%)
Aims of Study
Aim
#
What is the current tap water quality
situation in SA and how is it
regulated???
5#$%%&'*, et al#$%&%'(et al#$%%)'*8(#$%%)'#$%%)
The provision of safe tap drinking water supplied by local
municipality is ensured by:
& 9 929
$:&;$%%<3
$ *8 " 2 #
3
= 5 * >
Provision of
Safe Tap
Water
?et al#$%%-'?#$%%=',#$%%-'#$%%)'9#$%%)' et al#$%%+'?#$%&%'958#$%%)'"#$%%)
Public perspective on the current water quality status in SA:
&"
##
$*$%%@$%%)#
3.Result*8 !
: &+
@ ! scare tactics /.1
!
Provision of
Safe Tap
Water
Public
Perspective
on Water QC
A>B#$%&%
Criteria of interest of common household tap drinking water
contaminants and interest of removal capabilities of POU water
filtration systems:
Provision of
Safe Tap
Water
Public
Perspective
on Water QC
Criteria of
Interest for
Water
Categories Type of Contaminants Potential Health Effects from Ingestion of Water
Pathogens 52>#>###",3 "2##
#3
62##9#A#7A3
2A#5C#>#D#73
Toxins 7 "#
##
9/#
4
Organic Chemicals 626 >3 B
#E7"##/
Radioactive
Substances
B4
!
Additives >/ "#
"#
#
(
(
/
Tastes and Odours 7 >
#
*
"
Appearance E E
>
What should the public consider
before purchasing a POU water
filtration device in SA???
*8(#$%%)'#$%%)'5#$%%&'"B#$%&%'9*>#$%&%
Concerned
Public
Member
Analyze tap water for possible contaminants:
& >8F28F3*8A
$ ." 81 .5 * > 1
;GGCGHGG
= 8
: 8F#
Analyze
Tap
Water
*, et al#$%&%'(et al#$%%)'#$%%)
Concerned
Public
Member
Still want to purchase a POU home filter device?
& E
$ A
=
: #
@ EIIIII
Analyze Your
Tap
Water
Want to
Purchase
POU Device
958#$%%)'"#$%%)'"B#$%&%
Concerned
Public
Member
What to consider before purchasing a purchase a POU home filter
device :
Analyze Your
Tap
Water
Want to
Purchase
POU Device
What
to
Consider???
Source Water Type of POU Considerations
What type of
contaminants
are present?
Which type of
POU best suits
your needs?
Advantages /
disadvantages
of the system?
Is the
technology
easy to use?
How often do
filters need
replacement?
Does the filter
need service,
maintenance?
Initial cost?
Installation?
Running costs?
What is the
specified flow
rate?
Does it list the types of
contaminates it will
remove?
Does product have
approval or performance
specification criteria?
Product Approval
Does it tell you the type of
source water required to
run the system?
What types of certification
does the product have?
Questionable?????
What are the regulations around the
certification and manufacture of home
water treatment devices in SA???
9&+<@#$%%<'5#$%&%'!#$%&%'8F"#$%%)'#$%%)'5#$%%&
SANS
( !locally#9G5
SANS 1865:2006 “POU Drinking Water Treatment Systems”
A !
C
7# !
9$:&;$%%<
E4
7#
.1 #
I
SANS
Local POU
Laws
9&+<@#$%%<'5#$%&%'!#$%&%'8F"#$%%)'#$%%)'5#$%%&
SANS
E# 9#
I
B 9$:&;$%%<G
#locally
I
, ! .
1
9 &+<@;$%%< !
SANS 9001:2006 “Manufacturing quality of the
system” ##
2
93
SANS
Local POU
Laws
9(B#$%&%'!8#$%%)'9(#$%&%'5#$%&%'!#$%&%
SANS
E National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) international
!
9(
##C
B
9(
7#A 9(.
1
9(
SANS
Local POU
Laws
International
POU
Laws
Is there a need for home water
treatment devices in SA???
"#$%%)'*8(#$%%)'#$%%)'5#$%%&
NO
According to the consumers guide on drinking water quality released by
DWA in 2009:
do not
!
However:
!4
"#
8 !
#
!
* et al#$%&%'7 et al#$%%)'7#$%%)'? et al#$%%-'et al#$%%)
NO
The concern of South African consumers about their drinking water is
warranted in some instances:
8
,
A
#
!
7#
YES
"B#$%&%'E#$%%)'9(B#$%&%'!8#$%%)'9(#$%&%'5#$%&%'!#$%&%
NO
B
informedIIII
A
"
>
9;&%%0 J
#
BC#
9(
YES MAYBE
NO
#
#
E# #
K
YES MAYBE OVERALL
Study Design and Laboratory Testing
Regime of Home Water Treatment
Devices (HWTDs)
Objectives of Study
>survey
#C##
guidelines in the form of a pamphlet !
Evaluate performance ! NSF
SANS
comprehensive report 2
3
>workshops
final report
Study Design
Study Type 4#
##
4
Study Area 78E*#
##D
Home Water Treatment Device Selection Criteria 78E*
E78E*#gravity fed 2J
3faucet mounted
Experimental Set-Up: Gravity Fed
E 4 4 gravity fed
HWTDs #9(
Experimental Set-Up: Faucet Mounted
E 4 4 faucet
mounted 78E*#9(
"!66
=%% #
A
Testing Methodology
A 78E* manufacturers instructions
G
Eflow rate and bed volume
>2microbiological, physicochemical and aesthetic3
9(“challenge test water19(G
9$:&;$%%<
Specific contaminate challenges
Estarting concentration 9(G9$:&;$%%<.
1
#
final contaminant concentration
Testing Methodology
A4 three day period 78E*#
2$:# :+ -$
3
All microbiological, physicochemical, and aesthetic determinant tests were
performed in accordance with NSF and SANS 241:2006 in terms of HWTD minimum
performance requirement criteria set out within these standards
4
E data determine percentage reductions per contaminant
determine the HWTDs removal capabilities
Testing Methodology
Bacteriological
membrane filtration technique 5 E.coli Escherichia
coli2E>>;$@)$$3
protozoan and viral mechanical reduction particle
size exclusion assays
chemical and aesthetic determinant assays "
Spectroquant
Tests and NSF / SANS Standard Requirements
SANS 241:2006 class 1 water NSF Standards in Regulation with FDA / EPA Standards
Determinant Units Standard Units
Spike (Influent
Challenge)
MCL (max
contamination
level)
Minimum Required Removal
Efficiency
Standard Number
and Page
Reference
Microbiological Determinants
5;
Escherichia coli
2E>>;$@)$$3
>(!
G&%%
92
73 >(!G&%% &4&%<>(!G&%%
))))0,<
";L%@
M"
9($=&&+N
$$
9(:$$<
>
;Poliovirus
1 and Rotavirus
G&%
,
92
73 G, &4&%-G,
))))0,:
";L%$
M"
9($=&$$N
=&
C
;Giarida
muris / lamblia
G&%
,
92
73 G, &4&%<G,
))))0,=
";L:/<
M"
9($=&$$N
=&
Tests and NSF / SANS Standard Requirements
SANS 241:2006 class 1 water NSF Standards in Regulation with FDA / EPA Standards
Determinant Units Standard Units
Spike (Influent
Challenge)
MCL (max
contamination
level)
Minimum Required
Removal Efficiency
Standard
Number and
Page Reference
Physical and Aesthetic Determinants
>>/
2G3 G, L@G,2>
73 G, $%G, O&%G,O@%0 9(:$=:
>
$@P> G L&-%G
23 9G 9G 9G 9G
7$@P> 7 O@/L)-
2 3 7 77&&
,7: <@N+@ 9(:$:&
E 9E!
L&2 3
L@
23
9E! &&9E! O%@9E!)@0 9(@=@&
"
9E! L&2
E3
G
M"
&%%%%G
2B >
(E*
C
;%N+%M"3
+@0&$M"
9(@=$@
9(:$$=N
:@
E*
E* G, L&$%%G,
23 G, &@%%G, @%%G,<-0 9(:$$)
Tests and NSF / SANS Standard Requirements
SANS 241:2006 class 1 water NSF Standards in Regulation with FDA / EPA Standards
Determinant Units Standard Units
Spike (Influent
Challenge)
MCL (max
contamination
level)
Minimum Required Removal
Efficiency
Standard Number
and Page
Reference
Chemical Determinants
B;
((/G, L&@2>
73 G, +%G, &@G,+&0 9(@==$
QQ G, L@23 G, &%G, @%G,@%0 9(:$:=
>> MG, L$%%%$G,
2>73 G, =G, &=G,@-0 9(@=<=
B( MG,
L=%%%=G,
23L$
G,2>
73
G, =G, %=G,)%0 9(:$=)
7"
;,
MG, L&%%%&G,
2>73 G, %&@G, %%&G,)=0 9(@=<<
MG, L=%%%=G,
2 3 G, %@G, %$G,<%0 9(:$)
9(@=&%
E>
> MG, L@%%%@G,
2>73 G, %=G, %&G,<-0 9(@=<=
"" MG,
L&%%%&G,
23
L%@G,2>
73
G, &G, %%@G,)@0 9(:$=+
Tests and NSF / SANS Standard Requirements
SANS 241:2006 class 1 water NSF Standards in Regulation with FDA / EPA Standards
Determinant Units Standard Units
Spike (Influent
Challenge)
MCL (max
contamination
level)
Minimum Required Removal
Efficiency
Standard
Number and
Page Reference
Organic Chemical Determinants
E
>
2E >3
G, L&%G,2>
73 G,
&@G,29(
#
93
L&%G,2>73 9G
E ;
MG, L&%%%&G,
23 G, @%G, %$@G,)@0 9(:$=-
Tests and NSF / SANS Standard Requirements
SANS 241:2006 class 1 water NSF Standards in Regulation with FDA / EPA Standards
Determinant Units Standard Units
Spike (Influent
Challenge)
MCL (max
contamination
level)
Minimum Required Removal
Efficiency
Standard Number
and Page
Reference
Additional Tests in Accordance with NSF (not SANS 241 Related)
;
9G 9G G,
&%G
23
&<G23
%@G,&%G
23
%@G,&<G23
2
3
9(:$:-
E7;
>>> =
G, L&@%23 G, =:$G,
;%-@G,
";-@&@%
G,
7;&@%=%%G,
67;=%%
G,2
3
9(::$&
Results of Gravity Fed Home Water
Treatment Devices (HWTDs)
Gravity Fed Devices Information and Performance
Device Treatment Technology Treatment
Mode Claims according to Manufacturers Specifications Certification
Device A > D ! " E 8
B
(*G9(:$;
Device B
D
! " E 8
# B
9G
Device C
B4
D
!"E8#
# # # #
B
E!6G!*
Device D
B4
(
D ! "E8#
#B E!6G!*
Device E
B4
D
! " E 8
2 3# # #
# # #
B
(
Device F
D
! " E 8
# # # # #
# # #
#
9(:=#:+
=:)-
Device G >
D ! " E 8
B 9G
Device H
#
#!(
(
!"E8#
B
8F$%%
9(@=#
E!6G!*#B
)%%&;$%%+#>A
Average
Poor
Good
DEVICE C: Ion Exchange Resin & Activated Carbon
7E!6G!* Average
DEVICE F: Activated Carbon
79(:= Poor
DEVICE H: Silver AC, UF & Sediment
79(@=#8F$%%#E!6G!*#B )%%&#>A
#R#F>
Good
Results of Faucet Mounted Home
Water Treatment Devices (HWTDs)
Faucet Mounted Devices Information & Performance
Average
Poor
Good
Device Treatment Technology Treatment
Mode
Claims according to Manufacturers
Specifications Certification
Device I
>#/?*(
(
! " E8 #
# # # # #
# # # #
# # # 2
3B
9G
Device J ?*(
(
! " E 8
)))0 E. coli # #
# #
####))0
9G
Device K > (
! " E 8
# # #
####
9G
Device L
(
! " E 8#
# # +%0 #
# # ))0 # 4#
#))-0# E. coli# -%0
,# # # -%0
B
B
9G
Device M D>
(
!"E8#
# # )@0 E*# ))0 6 ># #
# B
8F
DEVICE J: KDF and Activated Carbon Good
DEVICE L: Organic Carbon Poor
DEVICE M: Sediment, KDF and Activated Carbon
78F&%% Average
Home Water Treatment Device Testing
Regime Conclusions
Conclusion
(78E*attention
the claims made by the manufacturers
##
only be used with municipal treated tap
9$:&;$%%<
I
78E*
did reducing scale#
of taste, odour, heavy metal microbiological removal
poorly
>most common claims 2
# 3'
.1 G “scare tactic” C
devices did not accomplish what they had claimed
Conclusion: Microbiological & Physicochemical
Analysis
Ultrafiltration and sediment filtration successful
bacteria and cysts' none
viruses
B 78E*
chlorine removal did succeed
* C ceramic, sediment, ultrafiltration (UF), kinetic degradation
fluxion (KDF)#granular activated carbon (GAC)
neutralizedwaters
B turbidity, mechanical reduction and TDS assays, UF and sediment
successful4
Conclusion: Macro & Micro Chemical Analysis
B#none
reducing fluoride
8 C ceramic, sediment and organic carbon (OC)
successreducing zinc
B #
78E*Cactivated carbon (AC), ion exchange resin (IER), sediment, KDF
and ceramic filtration (CF) technologies# # reduced copper
None ##removing iron,
manganese, and lead
E 78E* C cationic exchange resins
reducing aluminium ' carbon based
not
Bchromate reductions 78E*Ccarbon
ceramic
Conclusion: Organic Chemical Analysis
B
78E* 2C
3 infective at reducing total organic carbon (TOC)#
2"et al#$%&%Set al.#$%%@3
None 78E* removing phenol
E manufactures claims, in terms of improving taste and odour or
removing phenol contaminants, being unjustified.
Conclusion: Additional Chemical Analysis
E#
78E* C AC,
IER, sediment, GAC and KDF treatment mechanisms were effective at keeping /
adding phosphate / silicate #
reducing scale
7# “softening” water by decreasing calcium carbonate none
78E*succeeded.
Overall most of the HWTDs failed to comply with NSF P231, 42 or 53 and SANS
241:2006 POU water treatment device standards and most of them did not perform
accordingly to the claims made by their manufacturers, thus their use in households
to purify water should be seriously reconsidered.....drink tap water?
T
Final Thoughts on Home Water
Treatment Devices
Conclusion
E J J improve regulation
commercialization !/#
educate 78E*
B protectrights of consumers #
/#
C !
Thank you for your attention…..
References
#"""#62$%&%3"4G4//
Journal of Hazardous Materials10;&%&</&%$<
A>2$%&%3*8("A4;GGG/G///2
%+G%-G$%&%3
A>B2$%&%3>*8>(
;GGG/G///2$$G%-G$%&%3
5#A62$%&%38I;GGG8////)+@%2$$G%-G$%&%3
>(2$%&%37>(";GGG6/@G>/(2%+G%-G$%&%3
*###A##6#?#"#A2$%%+3#
Bioresource Technology99;$$<)/$$-:
*,#8U#8#"#(#DD#9#2$%&%3B/
;4B8"Environmental Modelling and Software25;:=/@%
*#A#,#,#9##>#>#"2$%&%3Water Research44;=-=:/
=-::
*8(2$%%)3E8*#"CGG(E8B"$@(2
%-G%-G$%&%3
A482$%&%388;GG4CGG<)////2$$G%-G$%&%3
(82$%&%38E;GGGGG//2%+G%-G$%&%3
(#A##5#>2$%%)3>;Journal of Cleaner
Production17;&/&$
(##"#,#(#Q##,#?#,V#V2$%%)3//
. Journal of Environmental Sciences21;&$=-/&$:<
D82$%%)3>8(E;GGGGHH2%+G%-G$%&%3
7#"2$%%)3NDesalination248;$$/$+
7##9#*Q7#2$%%)3A
Science of the Total Environment407;$<$&/$<$:
?#72$%&%388"$%%+N$%&@;GG$$G2%-G%-G$%&%3
?#"U#E#A5#U#2$%%-3*Physics and Chemistry of
Earth32;&%@%/&%@-
?##72$%%=38#;Physics and Chemistry of Earth28;
&%+@/&%):
,#2$%%-3;E 88;GGGIW:%$<+2%-G%-G$%&%3
,2$%&%39(;GGG//2%+G%-G$%&%3
"#,62$%%)3*8FCGGG$%%)H&$-2%-G%-G$%&%3
References
9(2$%&%3*8A;GG/GGGEG"//2
%+G%-G$%&%3
9582$%%)35(8;GGG2%+G%-G$%&%3
9#AU2$%%)3;*/&))=/$%%)
;GGCGGG0$%0$%0$%0$%0$%0$%A0$%*0$%/0$%*
2%-G%-G$%&%3
9*>2$%&%37BI;GGGHH2$$G%-G$%&%3
9(2$%&%3*8E!'>D;GGGGGG*8E!H>HD2
$$G%-G$%&%3
9(B2$%&%38E*;GGGGHG4I
W8*2$$G%-G$%&%3
#2$%%)39$:*> B;GGCGGG$::H&)=0$%2
$$G%-G$%&%3
#,>#7#UU#2$%%)3Physics and Chemistry of
Earth34;:=/:)
52$%%&35$:&;$%%<##
;GGCGG89G"H8HH5H$:&HEH&HRH$2$$G%-G$%&%3
9&+<@2$%%<39//;GGC2&=G%+G$%&%3
"B2$%%)3E8(*8;GGG/G/2%+G%-G$%&%3
"B2$%&%3>"!"8E;GGG/
G/2%+G%-G$%&%3
#"*##>A#>#,"#5#U"A#"2$%%+3;#
Environmental Science Technology42;:$<&/:$<-
B2$%%)35/8(*;GG/G/2%+G%-G$%&%3
#72$%%)3A";GGCGI
WF58+Q!>RW<=-RW<=-RWXXRWRW"*U%5RW4V4$4H5)<5EUUUA"RWR
W"%E,5UE 9VU FBRWVRWHRWRW)RW%>*BF<A>*?YWRRW2%-G%-G$%&%3
E8J2$%&%375/8(8;GGJGHH2%+G%-G$%&%3
E#"2$%%)3E8;GGCG,GE7A/8EA/E S2%-G%-G$%&%3
!82$%%)378E;GGCG2$$G%-G$%&%3
!#"2$%&%38E;GGG///8/E//
&&@-&2$$G%-G$%&%3
8F"2$%%)3,*8F;GGCGG$%$2
$$G%-G$%&%3