Uncertainty in Environmental Micropollutant Modeling

Water pollution policies have been enacted across the globe to minimize the environmental risks posed by micropollutants (MPs). For regulative institutions to be able to ensure the realization of environmental objectives, they need information on the environmental fate of MPs. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to further improve environmental decision-making, which heavily relies on scientific data. Use of mathematical and computational modeling in environmental permit processes for water construction activities has increased. Uncertainty of input data considers several steps from sampling and analysis to physico-chemical characteristics of MP. Machine learning (ML) methods are an emerging technique in this field. ML techniques might become more crucial for MP modeling as the amount of data is constantly increasing and the emerging new ML approaches and applications are developed. It seems that both modeling strategies, traditional and ML, use quite similar methods to obtain uncertainties. Process based models cannot consider all known and relevant processes, making the comprehensive estimation of uncertainty challenging. Problems in a comprehensive uncertainty analysis within ML approach are even greater. For both approaches generic and common method seems to be more useful in a practice than those emerging from ab initio. The implementation of the modeling results, including uncertainty and the precautionary principle, should be researched more deeply to achieve a reliable estimation of the effect of an action on the chemical and ecological status of an environment without underestimating or overestimating the risk. The prevailing uncertainties need to be identified and acknowledged and if possible, reduced. This paper provides an overview of different aspects that concern the topic of uncertainty in MP modeling.

Methods for Sample Collection, Storage, and Analysis of Freshwater Phosphorus

Although phosphorus (P) is an essential nutrient for biological productivity, it can cause freshwater degradation when present at fairly low concentrations. Monitoring studies using continuous sampling is crucial for documenting P dynamics in freshwater ecosystems and to reduce the risk of eutrophication. Despite literature updates of developments of the analytical methods for measurement of P species in natural waters, there has been no comprehensive review addressing freshwater sample collection, sample preparation, and sample treatment to fractionate and characterize different forms of P. Therefore, this paper aims to elaborate the different techniques for freshwater sampling and to introduce alternative laboratory methods for sample preservation and P fractionation. The advantages and disadvantages of various sampling techniques, including the traditional manual and the recently developed automatic and passive methods, are presented to highlight the importance of collecting representative freshwater samples. Furthermore, we provide suggestions for sample pretreatment, including filtration, transportation, and storage steps to minimize microbial activity and to maximize the accuracy of measurement of various P fractions. Finally, the most common laboratory methods to measure dissolved and particulate as well as the organic and inorganic freshwater P fractions are efficiently provided. Using this guide, a comprehensive monitoring program of P dynamics in freshwater ecosystems can be developed and applied to improve water quality, particularly of P-rich freshwaters.

Overview of the Chemcatcher® for the passive sampling of various pollutants in aquatic environments Part A: Principles, calibration, preparation and analysis of the sampler

The passive sampler Chemcatcher(®), which was developed in 2000, can be adapted for various types of water contaminants (e.g., trace metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pesticides and pharmaceutical residues) depending on the materials chosen for the receiving phase and the membrane. The Chemcatcher(®) has been used in numerous research articles in both laboratory experiments and field exposures, and here we review the state-of-the-art in applying this passive sampler. Part A of this review covers (1) the theory upon which the sampler is based (i.e., brief theory, calculation of water concentration, Performance and Reference Compounds), (2) the preparation of the device (i.e., sampler design, choice of the membrane and disk, mounting of the tool), and (3) calibration procedures (i.e., design of the calibration tank, tested parameters, sampling rates).

Comparison of five integrative samplers in laboratory for the monitoring of indicator and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls in water

This study aimed at evaluating and comparing five integrative samplers for the monitoring of indicator and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in water: semi-permeable membrane device (SPMD), silicone rubber, low-density polyethylene (LDPE) strip, Chemcatcher and a continuous-flow integrative sampler (CFIS). These samplers were spiked with performance reference compounds (PRCs) and then simultaneously exposed under constant agitation and temperature in a 200 L stainless steel tank for periods ranging from one day to three months. A constant PCB concentration of about 1 ng·L(-1) was achieved by immersing a large amount of silicone rubber sheets ("dosing sheets") spiked with the target PCBs. The uptake of PCBs in the five samplers showed overall good repeatability and their accumulation was linear with time. The samplers SPMD, silicone rubber and LDPE strip were the most promising in terms of achieving low limits of quantification. Time-weighted average (TWA) concentrations of PCBs in water were estimated from uptake of PCBs using the sampling rates calculated from the release of PRCs. Except for Chemcatcher, a good agreement was found between the different samplers and TWA concentrations ranged between 0.4 and 2.8 times the nominal water concentration. Finally, the influence of calculation methods (sampler-water partition coefficients, selected PRCs, models) on final TWA concentrations was studied.

Performance of a passive sampler for the determination of time averaged concentrations of nitrate and phosphate in water

A passive sampler device for the kinetic accumulation of nitrate (NO3(-)) and phosphate (HPO4(2-)) in water was developed and calibrated. The sampler incorporates an ion-exchange disk as the receiving phase and selectively collects nitrate and phosphate at sampling rates of 197 ± 43 and 75 ± 12 mL per day, respectively. Minimum exposure times under nutrient rich and nutrient poor conditions were estimated to be 3 and 27 days respectively for phosphate and 1 and 7 days respectively for nitrate. The influence of the environmental variables pH (5-9), temperature (7-21 °C) and turbulence (50-400 rpm) on sampling rates was investigated. Temperature was found to have a significant influence on uptake rates for both anions, while pH influenced phosphate only. Water turbulence did not influence the uptake rates under the studied conditions. A series of field studies was conducted at a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Results for the passive sampler were lower than concentrations obtained using conventional measurement methods, due to methodological differences, and biofouling was found to affect the results for sampling periods over 3 days. This study shows that passive sampling can be used to monitor nitrate and phosphate concentrations in aqueous media. The approach provides an interesting alternative to grab sampling as it yields time-averaged concentrations of the analytes.

Overview of passive Chemcatcher sampling with SPE pretreatment suitable for the analysis of NPEOs and NPs

The European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC) is an important piece of environmental legislation that protects rivers, lakes, coastal waters and groundwaters (EC 2000). The implementation of the WFD requires the establishment and use of novel and low-cost monitoring programmes, and several methods, e.g. passive sampling, have been developed to make the sampling process more representative compared to spot sampling. This review considers passive sampling methods focusing mainly on a passive sampler named Chemcatcher®, which has been used for monitoring several harmful compounds in aquatic environments. Also, the sample treatment and analysis of nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEOs) and nonylphenol (NPs) from water using solid phase extraction (SPE) is briefly summarized. The procedure of Chemcatcher passive sampling is quite similar to that of the SPE extraction since it concentrates the studied compounds from water as well. After sampling, the accumulated substances are extracted from the receiving phase of the sampler. The concentrations of NPEOs and NPs are currently monitored by taking conventional spot samples; SPE can be successfully used as a pretreatment procedure. Chemcatcher® passive sampling technique is a simple and useful monitoring tool and can be applied to new chemicals, such as NPEOs and NPs in aquatic environments.

Novel silica sol-gel passive sampler for mercury monitoring in aqueous systems

A novel passive sampler for mercury monitoring was prepared using organosilica sol-gel materials. It comprises a binding layer with thiol groups for mercury complexation and a porous diffusive layer through which mercury can diffuse and arrive at the binding layer. Our study demonstrated that this new sampler follows the principle of passive sampling. The mass of mercury accumulated in the binding layer depends linearly on the mercury concentration in solution, the sampling rate and the exposure time. A typical sol-gel sampler is characterized by a diffusive layer of 1.2 μm, in which mercury ions diffuse with a coefficient of D=0.09×10(-6) cm(2) s(-1), resulting in an uptake R(s) of 8.8 mL h(-1). The capacity for mercury uptake is approximately 0.64 μg cm(-2). Mercury diffusion and binding in the passive sampler are independent of the type of mercury-chloride complex, which potentially opens the door to use this device for mercury monitoring in a wide range of natural waters.