We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comparing in-home and bottled drinking water quality: regulated and emerging contaminants in rural Central Appalachia
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers analyzed regulated and emerging contaminants including bacteria, inorganic ions, PFAS, and microplastics in 23 in-home, 4 roadside spring, and 36 bottled drinking water samples from rural Central Appalachia. They found that coliform bacteria and elevated sodium levels occurred in 52% of home water samples, while PFAS and microplastics were detected across all water source types, complicating the assumption that bottled water is consistently safer than in-home supplies.
An increasing number of Americans rely on bottled water for household use, citing perceptions of poor in-home water quality and/or distrust of public water utilities. We analyzed in-home (n = 23), roadside spring (n = 4), and bottled drinking water (n = 36) in Central Appalachia. All samples were analyzed for regulated (bacteria, inorganic ions) and emerging (PFAS, microplastics) contaminants. Study survey results indicated the majority (83%) of participants viewed their in-home water quality as satisfactory or poor due to negative organoleptic perceptions. Coliform bacteria and sodium levels exceeding recommended levels were detected in 52% of home water samples, though detections varied by source, i.e., high sodium was more often observed in municipal water, while bacteria were more often observed in private system water. Bottled water samples did not exceed any regulations, though median microplastic concentrations were statistically higher (p = 0.001, Wilcoxon rank-sum test) than those recovered from in-home samples. PFAS compounds were detected in some in-home and bottled water samples at very low levels. While in general bottled water appears to be a safe drinking water source in these areas, the associated costs in time and money for lower-income households are considerable, and were estimated by participants as $68-400/month.
More Papers Like This
Occurrence of Microplastics in Tap and Bottled Water: Current Knowledge
AI summary Read the abstract
This review summarizes current research on microplastic contamination in both tap and bottled drinking water. Researchers found that microplastics are present in both water sources, with bottled water generally containing higher concentrations than tap water, and smaller particles being more abundant. The study raises public health concerns and emphasizes the need for improved detection methods and drinking water treatment standards.
The unique chemical and microbiological signatures of an array of bottled drinking water
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers tested 19 bottled water brands (purified, mineral, artesian, and sparkling) and found they all naturally contain different amounts and types of bacteria, mineral water has the most, purified water has the least, plus different mineral contents, though everything still meets safety standards. Interestingly, mineral water in plastic bottles may harbor more bacteria than the same water in glass bottles, hinting that packaging choice could matter for what's in your water, not just for microplastic exposure but for microbial content too.
Microplastics in small semi-industrial desalination stations and bottled waters: Human exposure and emerging health concerns
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers analyzed microplastic contamination in bottled water and small semi-industrial desalination stations in a water-scarce region. The study found microplastics present in both water sources, with higher levels than expected in desalination station output, raising concerns about human exposure through drinking water and highlighting the need for improved filtration standards.
Public Perception of Drinking Water Quality in an Arsenic-Affected Region: Implications for Sustainable Water Management
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers surveyed residents in an arsenic-affected region of Serbia about their perceptions of tap water quality and found that most had a negative view, which closely matched actual water contamination levels. Over 43% of respondents purchased at least five liters of bottled water per week, and because Serbia has low plastic recycling rates, most of those bottles end up in landfills where they slowly break down into microplastics. The study highlights a cycle where water contamination drives bottled water consumption, which in turn contributes to plastic pollution.
Worldwide bottled water occurrence of emerging contaminants: A review of the recent scientific literature
AI summary Read the abstract
Microplastics in the 1-5 µm range are the most prevalent contaminants in bottled water, with water in plastic bottles consistently more contaminated than in glass bottles; while most other contaminant levels (pharmaceuticals, PFAS, BPA) fell below safety thresholds, synergistic effects of multiple contaminants remain unknown.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.