Post a comment on the text below
A study in the Netherlands considered 100 UWWTPs (a third of all Dutch UWWTPs) and loadings in the context of well-characterised understanding of water across the country[1]. UWWT reduced the number of bacteria 100-1000 times and was significantly correlated with E. coli. Most of the differences in removal efficiency can be explained by rainfall, where increased rainfall can flush more waste into sewers but can also dilute the influent.
Some work suggests that urban waste water from hospitals represents a potential hotspot for AMR. However, the study showed that usually hospital effluents were not a very significant proportion of influent concentrations (below 10%), although some showed antibiotic concentrations over the minimum inhibitory concentration.
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
The differences in removal efficiency is important but it is even more important to stress that any treatment, even not enforced by disinfection, is better than direct release of effluent into the environment (Combine Sewer Overflows)
However, the study showed that usually hospital effluents were not a very significant proportion of influent concentrations (below 10%), although some showed antibiotic concentrations over the minimum inhibitory concentration. However, besides the load of antibiotics released by hospitals, also the fact that they are important sources of emerging antibiotis resistance genes and bacteria, often multidrug resistant, should be taken into consideration.