Chair of Urban Water Systems Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Garching, Germany.
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Chemosphere. 2018 Mar;195:410-426. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.12.100. Epub 2017 Dec 16.
To ensure an appropriate management of potential health risks and uncertainties from the release of trace organic chemicals (TOrCs) into the aqueous environment, many countries have evaluated and implemented strategies to manage TOrCs. The aim of this study was to evaluate existing management strategies for TOrCs in different countries to derive and compare underlying core principles and paradigms and to develop suggestions for more holistic management strategies to protect the environment and drinking water supplies from the discharge of undesired TOrCs. The strategies in different industrial countries were summarized and subsequently compared with regards to three particular questions: 1) Do the approaches different countries have implemented manage all or only specific portions of the universe of chemicals; 2) What implementation and compliance strategies are used to manage aquatic and human health risk and what are their pros and cons; and 3) How are site-specific watershed differences being addressed? While management strategies of the different countries target similar TOrCs, the programs differ in several important aspects, including underlying principles, the balance between aquatic or human health protection, implementation methods, and financing mechanisms used to fund regulatory programs.
为了妥善管理痕量有机化学品(TOrCs)向水环境释放带来的潜在健康风险和不确定性,许多国家已经评估并实施了管理 TOrCs 的策略。本研究旨在评估不同国家现有的 TOrCs 管理策略,以得出和比较潜在的核心原则和范例,并为更全面的管理策略提供建议,以防止环境和饮用水供应受到不希望的 TOrCs 的排放。总结了不同工业国家的策略,并就三个具体问题对其进行了比较:1)不同国家实施的方法是否涵盖了化学物质的全部或仅特定部分;2)用于管理水生和人类健康风险的实施和合规策略是什么,它们的优缺点是什么;3)如何解决特定地点的流域差异?尽管各国的管理策略针对的是相似的 TOrCs,但这些方案在几个重要方面存在差异,包括基本原则、水生或人类健康保护之间的平衡、实施方法以及用于为监管计划提供资金的融资机制。