text:
In 1831, the McCarty Plantation, located upriver from the central hub of New Orleans, was bought by investors including the New Orleans Canal and Banking Company and Senator John Slidell. Two years later the property was subdivided into squares and lots. The new land was designated as the village of Carrollton in 1845; it is believed this was done in honor of William Carroll, a general under Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans. The main street dividing the town was originally named Canal Avenue. The streets running parallel to Canal were named in honor of presidents-Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison--and other public officials--Hamilton, Clay, and Livingston. The streets crossing Canal were numbered. The annexation of Carrollton in 1874 by New Orleans resulted in the changing of street names that conflicted with existing streets in New Orleans: Canal became Carrollton, numbered streets were replaced with the names of trees, and most of the streets named after presidents and public officials were changed as well when they conflicted.
The original plan for the village, drawn up by Charles Zimple, included three pieces of property that were not designated with lot numbers. These areas were designated as Green Square-bounded by 6th (later changed to Birch), Green, and Leonidas, and later the site of the Walter C. Flowers Public School; Frederick Square-bounded by Hamilton, Laurel Grove, Olive, and Edinburgh, and later the site of Humphreys Playground; and Hamilton Square, bounded by Canal (later changed to Carrollton), Sycamore, Dublin, and Mobile. Hamilton Square is believed to have been named after Alexander Hamilton, one of the principal figures in the creation of the American republic. Originally designated for “public use” by the village in 1861, the squares were “formally” re-designated for “public use” by an ordinance of the city of New Orleans in 1902.
John Paul Bordes, in his "Carrollton Columns," remembered being in Hamilton Square as a child: "My first experience with Palmer Park took place in 1899, when I was 5 years old. It was a low spot of land, filled with briar bushes. The cows from the surrounding dairies used to get all tangled up in there. I had wandered away from home, which was only ll blocks away, but I got lost in the high bushes, and I couldn't find my way out. I kept yelling and crying so loud that my brother finally heard me and came to my rescue" (1978, 48).


text:
How to prepare for court and courtroom etiquette
Attending court, whether for the first time or otherwise, is always daunting. Understanding courtroom etiquette and ensuring you follow formalities is essential to a good first impression. We have consulted with our solicitors to create this guide to courtroom etiquette to help make your day in court as smooth as possible.
Preparing for court
- James Yates, Solicitor Advocate at Martin Cray says: “The best preparation for court is to be proactive about getting advice early so that your representative can actually have something in place by the time of the first appearance.”
- “For example, if a guilty plea is indicated and the offence was influenced by alcohol then we can have an expert dealing with alcohol dependency and judgement making in place by the first hearing.”
- “If a not guilty plea is entered then we can already have taken key witness statements which allow us to present a strong base at the first appearance.”
- When it comes to the courtroom, always look and act your best. You want the judge to look on your favourably, so dress appropriately and be polite; first impressions are everything.
- Dress professionally; shirt, smart jacket, trousers or knee-length skirt, fitted dress
- Avoid wearing trainers, sportswear, shorts, short skirts, crop tops
- Always address the judge as ‘your honour’ (in the high courts, you may use My Lord/ Lady)
- If it is a bench of magistrates then you should refer to the bench as ‘your worships’ or ‘sir/madam’
- Never talk over the judge
- Answer the questions you are asked (you may confer with your solicitor before answering them)
- Never raise your voice, even if you are displeased with the line of questioning or outcome (as this could lead to repercussions)
- Do not use foul language including taking the Lord’s name in vain
- Bring a bottle of water, or a flask or cup with a lid if you decide to bring a hot drink
- Do not bring any glass
- Please make sure that your phone is switched off or on silent and ensure that anyone with you in the public gallery also has their phones turned off or on silent.
Arriving at court
- If you have to be in court, arrive at least 30 minutes early as you will need time to go through security and find the room where your case is being heard. Security will often check through your bags and ask you to empty your pockets. Do not bring any sharp objects, glass, tools, crash helmets or full-length umbrellas with you into the courthouse.
- If you bring a drink to Court then you will be required to take a sip of the drink in front of the security staff.
- Ensure you speak to the staff on the front desk to let them know you have arrived. If you do not do this, no one will know to look for you when your session starts.
Finding your room
- There will likely be many cases taking place on the day you arrive at court, so take the time to find the room where your case is being heard. Often there will be a list displayed on paper or electronically. If you cannot find this, speak to a member of staff or security.
- Once you have located which Court you are in, it is important that you locate the Court usher (who will usually be wearing a black gown over their normal clothes) and give your name. They will then sign you in as there and take a note of when you arrived.
- Many cases are listed for the same time so the Court will normally deal with cases in the order they are arrived, or depending on who is ready. Signing in and being ready to go will often reduce the amount of time you are waiting at Court for your case to be called.
Entering the room
- When you enter a courtroom you should make a small bow towards the judge or the magistrates as a sign of respect to the Court process. It gives a good first impression.
- Enter the room quietly as there may be a case in session. Find a seat and wait until the session is finished and follow the directions of the usher
- When you leave Court, it is custom that you again bow to the judge or magistrates as you leave the Court.
Need help preparing for court?
Our solicitors are on hand 24/7 to provide you with support and representation when you need it most. Although we are unable to offer legal aid, we are able to offer advice and are proud to be recognised for our superior expertise and professionalism, standing out as one of the best solicitors in Brighton.
My colleagues and I have, for many years, had the privilege of being able to assist young people who have autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and bipolar disorder. Overwhelmingly this would be young men and boys between the ages of 12 and 25. As we know these disorders significantly effect personality and in…Read More
Today ReviewSolicitors named Martin Cray & Co one of the top 3 solicitors in Brighton – crediting our perfect 5-star rating. The team are chuffed by the rating and should be commended for their hard work and commitment to their clients across Private Criminal, Family Law, Business Law and Private Law. We have often been…Read More

domain: law


text:
Bengaluru: Singapore-based firms Ascendas-Singbridge Group and Temasek Holdings Pvt. Ltd have jointly committed to invest around $300 million in logistics and industrial real estate projects in India through Ascendas India Logistics Programme.
The commitment of capital comes after Ascendas-Singbridge partnered with Indian industrial real estate firm Firstspace Realty in 2017 to form the joint venture Ascendas-Firstspace to deliver logistics and industrial facilities across major warehousing and manufacturing hubs in the country.
Ascendas-Singbridge is jointly owned by Temasek Holdings and JTC Corp.
Industrial real estate is swiftly emerging as the go-to asset class for investors and developers as India’s consumption and e-commerce story gets a boost from the government’s Make in India initiative and the goods and services tax (GST).
“Given strong domestic consumption trends, investments in high quality logistics and industrial facilities are necessary to support India’s economic growth in the years to come," said He Jihong, chief investment officer, Ascendas-Singbridge Group in a statement. “We welcome Temasek’s support and investment in the Programme, which will leverage Ascendas-Firstspace’s global customer base and local execution capabilities to meet the needs of the future economy."
Tapping on India’s growing logistics sector, Ascendas India Logistics Programme will invest in projects in Mumbai, National Capital Region (NCR), Pune, Chennai, Bengaluru and Ahmedabad among others. It aims to develop a portfolio of 13 to 15 million sq ft of space. So far, it has two seed assets with 1.25 million sq ft of operational space and over 4 million sq ft in development potential.
Promeet Ghosh, managing director, India, Temasek, said, “We view the logistics and industrial sector as a good proxy to growing middle-income populations and transforming economies. The positive momentum of the sector, underpinned by the Indian government’s Make in India vision as well as healthy consumption trends, present opportunities for us to further invest in India’s continued growth."
India’s warehousing and logistics sector has attracted investments of more than a billion dollars in 2017 and is expected to witness higher interest in building businesses around steady rental income.
“With its institutional backing and local execution ability, Ascendas-Firstspace is the leading player in India’s logistics and industrial real estate sector. We are excited to further strengthen our position, and are privileged to have the support of Ascendas-Singbridge and Temasek," said Aloke Bhuniya, CEO of Ascendas-Firstspace.

domain: news


text:
Birth Name: Clotilde Marie Pascale Courau
Born In: Levallois-Perret, France
Birthdate: April 3, 1969
Age: 53 years old (as of 2023)
Clotilde Courau was born on the 3rd of April, 1969. She is famous for being a Princess. She appeared alongside Peter Coyote in the 2015 French film Eva & Leon. Clotilde Courau’s age is 53. Prolific French actress who is the Princess of Venice via her marriage to Prince Emanuele Filiberto of the house of Savoy. She is the granddaughter-in-law of Umberto II, the final reigning king of Italy.
The 53-year-old princess was born in Levallois-Perret, France. She earned her first on-screen acting credit in 1988 in the French TV mini-series Civilisations. She appeared in her first film in 1990 in Le petit criminel. She was honored with the French Medal of the Order of Arts and Letters, 3rd Class in February 2007. She earned a Cesar Award nomination for her work on the 1990 film Le petit criminel.
Clotilde Courau is a Aries and her 54th birthday is in .
Clotilde Courau was born in 1960s. The 1960s were an era of protests. The decade was dominated by the Vietnam War, Civil Rights Protests, Cuban Missile Crisis, antiwar protests and saw the assassinations of US President John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. It also marked the first man landed on the moon. Discover what happened on this day.
Clotilde Marie Pascale Courau is part of the Baby boomers generation. Baby Boomer is the result of the end of World War II, when birth rates across the world spiked. They are associated with a rejection of traditional values. These hippie kids protested against the Vietnam War and participated in the civil rights movement.
You can also find out who is Clotilde Courau dating now and celebrity dating histories at CelebsCouples.
While we don't know Clotilde Courau birth time, but we do know her mother gave birth to her on a Thursday. People born on a Thursday are naturally well-meaning and open. Luck is on their side.
[fetch instagram=”” display=”posts” ]
The 53-year-old French was born in the Generation X and the Year of the Rooster
The education details are not available at this time. Please check back soon for updates.
Clotilde Courau’s mother’s name is unknown at this time and her father’s name is under review. We will continue to update information on Clotilde Courau’s parents.
Like many famous people and celebrities, Clotilde Courau keeps her personal life private. Once more details are available on who she is dating, we will update this section.
|REAL NAME:||Clotilde Marie Pascale Courau|
|NICKNAME:||Clotilde, Princess of Venice and Piedmont, Princess Clotilde of Savoy, Princess of Venice and Piedmont, Clotilde Marie Pascale Courau, Clothilde Courau|
|AGE GENERATION:||Generation X|
|DAYS SINCE BIRTH:|
The 53-year-old French princess has done well thus far. Majority of Clotilde’s money comes from being a princess. CelebsMoney has recently updated Clotilde Courau’s net worth.
Zodiac Sign: Clotilde Courau is a Aries. People of this zodiac sign like physical challenges, taking on leadership roles, individual sports and dislike inactivity, delays, and work that doesn't use one's talents. The strengths of this sign are being courageous, determined, confident, enthusiastic, optimistic, while weaknesses can be to be impatient, moody, short-tempered, impulsive and aggressive. The greatest overall compatibility with Aries is Libra and Leo.
Chinese Zodiac: Clotilde Courau was born in the Year of the Rabbit. People born under this sign are honest, observant and hardworking. They seldom rely on other people in daily life, which can make them impatient when dealing with others.
Ruling Planet: Clotilde Courau has a ruling planet of Mars and has a ruling planet of Mars and by astrological associations Tuesday is ruled by Mars. This planet symbolizes the principle of assertive drive and energy. People who are born with Mars as the ruling planet have huge drive, aggression and commpetitiveness.
[fetch instagram=”” display=”posts” show=”2″ ]
Clotilde Courau’s birth sign is Aries and she has a ruling planet of Mars.
Fans also viewed
Fact Check: We strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn’t look right, contact us. This page is updated often with latest details about Clotilde Courau. Bookmark this page and come back often for updates.

domain: celebrity


text:
One thing about working on a guidebook is that you can’t put off trying things on the “to do” list. You’ve got to do them now, especially annual events since they don't come around often. Juggle Fest was on my “check it out someday” list. I had heard buzz about it. It’s in my Austin Events calendar. So I grabbed my family troupe and we went to check it out. I haven't missed a year since!
Organized by the Texas Juggling Society, a UT student group, it’s three days of workshops on the art of juggling, filled with games, races, and prizes. It’s open to jugglers of all levels, and spectators too. But for you non-juggling types like myself, the group organizes a Public Show on Saturday evening that is just plain fun!
Held in the old-style auditorium of the Texas School for the Deaf, all ages flock to watch local and international acts perform silly, zany acts - from unicyclists and jugglers to choreographed hula hooping and circus arts. I was amazed by the talent, and it was fun to sit in a crowd of giggling kids and cheering college students. Where those two crowds intersect, you know you’ve hit on something that creates a wonder and excitement that is never outgrown.
If you miss the old Austin that everyone laments is fading, the “weird” that is harder to find these days, and the homegrown, community feel to events, mark your calendar for Juggle Fest!

domain: artistic


text:
The latest medical
verdict on the use of antidepressant pills to treat teenagers and
children is every bit as depressing as the original warnings raised
months ago. There is remarkably little evidence that most of the
pills are effective in treating depression in such young patients
and increasing evidence that they can lead to suicidal thoughts and
behavior. An advisory panel to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
was quite right this week when it urged the strongest possible
warnings for doctors and patients about the potential
|Risks of antidepressants
Friday, September 17,
The panel shied away from urging a complete ban on
antidepressants in children and teenagers, and for good reason.
Doctors need weapons to combat major depression, even if those
weapons carry some risk.
Unfortunately, nothing in their
arsenal is notably effective. One large trial showed that talk
therapy was no better than a placebo at alleviating depression in
these young patients, and a vast majority of antidepressant pills
have also failed when tested for this age group.
has shown consistent effectiveness, although there is new evidence
that it, too, can cause suicidal tendencies. The other
antidepressants are prescribed by doctors in the belief, perhaps
mistaken, that they are effective for young people.
expert panel thought the pills too important to ban. A third of the
panelists opposed even an extra-strong warning on information sheets
for doctors lest it discourage treatment that could be lifesaving
for some young patients. The FDA typically gives great weight to the
views of its advisory committees, but it is not obliged to adopt
What patients, parents and doctors most need is not
just a warning, but the clearest possible guidance as to which of
these drugs are safer and more effective than the others.

domain: medical


text:
Nail art stickers how to apply easy designs for beginners step by tutorials images brushes uses. How i do gradient nail art types of sponges a to paint tools target designs 2017 brushes canada. Nail art easy designs ideas how to do 2017. 6 ways to do nail art stickers halloween 2017 youtube brushes target.
Nail art easy for beginners brushes canada 6 ways to do. Nail art designs 2017 supplies cheap flowers most beautiful design ideas for girls. Nail art ideas for short nails tools 2017 step by best sponge on with.


Emerging environmental health risks associated with the land application of biosolids: a scoping review
Environmental Health volume 22, Article number: 57 (2023)
Over 40% of the six million dry metric tons of sewage sludge, often referred to as biosolids, produced annually in the United States is land applied. Biosolids serve as a sink for emerging pollutants which can be toxic and persist in the environment, yet their fate after land application and their impacts on human health have not been well studied. These gaps in our understanding are exacerbated by the absence of systematic monitoring programs and defined standards for human health protection.
The purpose of this paper is to call critical attention to the knowledge gaps that currently exist regarding emerging pollutants in biosolids and to underscore the need for evidence-based testing standards and regulatory frameworks for human health protection when biosolids are land applied. A scoping review methodology was used to identify research conducted within the last decade, current regulatory standards, and government publications regarding emerging pollutants in land applied biosolids.
Current research indicates that persistent organic compounds, or emerging pollutants, found in pharmaceuticals and personal care products, microplastics, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have the potential to contaminate ground and surface water, and the uptake of these substances from soil amended by the land application of biosolids can result in contamination of food sources. Advanced technologies to remove these contaminants from wastewater treatment plant influent, effluent, and biosolids destined for land application along with tools to detect and quantify emerging pollutants are critical for human health protection.
To address these current risks, there needs to be a significant investment in ongoing research and infrastructure support for advancements in wastewater treatment; expanded manufacture and use of sustainable products; increased public communication of the risks associated with overuse of pharmaceuticals and plastics; and development and implementation of regulations that are protective of health and the environment.
During wastewater treatment, solids are separated from liquids and are then treated physically and chemically to produce a semisolid, nutrient-rich product known as biosolids or sewage sludge. Biosolids are typically disposed of through landfilling, incineration, or are used as a soil amendment (fertilizer) as they contain high concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorous, organic carbon, and other essential elements which are beneficial for soil quality and crop production [1,2,3]. Although the benefit of recycling nutrients necessary for crop production and avoiding the use of energy-intensive synthetic fertilizers is significant, biosolids also act as a sink for emerging pollutants [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Preventing harmful exposures to these emerging pollutants when land applied remains a challenge [10, 20, 22]. The debate over safely using these human waste-derived biosolids as soil amendments is ongoing .
The US EPA standards for determining biosolids quality are found in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 503, but are limited in focus to the presence of ten inorganic metals (As, Cd, Cu, Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Cr, Se, and Zn), pathogens, and vector attractiveness. These standards do not currently contain regulatory standards or thresholds that pertain to the presence of synthetic organic contaminants . And, while many organic compounds degrade easily and have minimal harmful effects on the environment, other more toxic organic contaminants meet the US EPA’s definition of being persistent and can accumulate in environment, causing harm to humans and wildlife when land applied . In addition to the lack of standards for monitoring persistent and toxic organic contaminants in biosolids prior to land application, there are significant gaps in our understanding of fate of these pollutants once land applied and the synergistic effects of multiple organic compounds on their distribution and transport within the environment. Moreover, the lack of efficient technologies to detect and measure these organic contaminants further reduces our ability to monitor their presence in the environment and evaluate potential impacts on human health.
The volume of biosolids produced in the US is not inconsequential. The US EPA estimates that, in states where they are the permitting authority, 4.5 million dry metric tons were produced in 2021 with nearly half (43%) being land applied . The remaining biosolids were landfilled, incinerated, or managed by other methods such as storage or deep well injection. The US EPA also notes that the actual amount produced could be as much as 6 million dry metric tons according to a 2018 survey conducted by the North East Biosolids and Residuals Association, because it additionally accounts for states where US EPA is not the permitting authority. The global market for biosolids was estimated at 7.5 billion USD in 2022 and is projected to reach 10.7 billion USD by 2030 .
This scoping review provides a landscape of the current research regarding emerging pollutants in biosolids and their fate in the environment when land applied. Potential pathways of exposure, current detection methods, and possible impacts on human health and the environment are discussed. The need for additional research on the fate of these pollutants and their synergistic effects in the environment along with the significant need for novel treatment methods and detection technologies for emerging pollutants is highlighted. The authors call critical attention to the many knowledge gaps that currently exist to guide state and Federal regulatory frameworks for human health protection when biosolids are land applied.
We used an iterative process to select academic and governmental publications for inclusion in this scoping review. Initially, we searched databases and governmental websites to identify publications associated with risks to human health and the environment from the land application of biosolids using the following terms combined with “biosolids” or “land application of biosolids”: contaminants; organic contaminants; emerging pollutants; PFAS; microplastics; ground water; surface water; plant uptake; wildlife; agriculture; health risk; benefits of; pharmaceutical; personal care products; antibiotic; endocrine disrupter; treatment technology; diagnostic techniques; regulations; and fate and transport. Publications were initially screened for relevance using the title and/or abstract, and those relevant to biosolids land application were reviewed in their entirety. Authors identified through the literature search were contacted for further discussion regarding their study findings and were asked for suggestions on additional publications or resources for inclusion. References from identified publications’ citation lists were also reviewed to identify other applicable resources. A concerted effort was made to establish an exhaustive list of studies that were published in the last decade (between 2011 and 2022) pertaining to the land application of biosolids.
A total of 172 scholarly research articles and governmental reports were included in this scoping review (Supplemental Fig. 1). Biosolids contain nutrients and energy which can be used in agriculture or waste-to-energy processes  or to replenish organic carbon in soils. However, while they do contain valuable nutrients (mostly nitrogen and phosphorus), they also contain a range of synthetic organic compounds. These organic compounds are produced for a variety of purposes, including healthcare, agriculture, and transportation, and are considered indispensable for modern society [27,28,29]. While many organic compounds degrade easily and have minimal harmful effects on the environment, other more persistent synthetic organic contaminants have the potential to accumulate in biological matrices and can eventually cause harm to humans, wildlife, and the environment [24, 30]. Conventional wastewater treatment plants were not designed to remove these emerging pollutants and currently they are only partially effective in removing or degrading synthetic organic compounds [22, 31] resulting in the accumulation of these pollutants in biosolids.
While the risk of direct human exposure to emerging pollutants in biosolids is low and realistically may involve only those who work with biosolids such as farmers and biosolids workers , the risk of indirect exposure is significantly higher. Not only can the land application of biosolids result in ingestion of contaminated food-crops, animal up-take in meat or milk, and drinking water contamination, but it can also lead to pollutant exposure via inhalation [14, 19, 32,33,34,35,36]. Although exposure to individual synthetic organic pollutants in biosolids such as antimicrobials, pharmaceuticals, personal care products, surfactants and hormones would not accumulate in the food chain at concentrations that may pose a risk for human health, the sum of them could be of considerable concern [11, 37].
In this review we focus on three broad classes of emerging pollutants that pose the most significant risks to human and environmental health when biosolids are land applied to agricultural soils. Then, we explore the fate, transport, and synergistic effects of these emerging pollutants generally in the environment. Finally, we discuss current diagnostic tools, treatment methods and the critical need for the development of standards to protect human and environmental health.
Microplastics, plastic pieces less than five millimeters in diameter, are typically the result of larger plastic debris degrading into smaller sizes; however some microplastics, such as microbeads, are manufactured at micro sizes and are often used in commercial health and beauty products . Microplastics easily pass through wastewater treatment systems and approximately 70 to 98% of microplastics from liquid wastewater accumulate in biosolids during the treatment process [20, 39,40,41].
Unsurprisingly, the land application of biosolids has led to agricultural soils being one of the largest natural reservoirs of microplastics . Corradini et al.  evaluated 31 agricultural fields and found that concentration of microplastics in agricultural soils increased over time after successive land applications of biosolids. Soils with 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 applications of biosolids had medians of 1.1, 1.6, 1.7, 2.3, and 3.5 particles g− 1 dry soil, respectively, demonstrating that microplastic concentrations were significantly correlated with biosolids applications. In addition, microplastics from land applied biosolids do not always remain in the soil but can also be released into the surrounding environment [3, 5]. Although the true scale of microplastic contamination has yet to be assessed, studies have repeatedly detected microplastics at significant distances from their source of origin and at higher elevations, indicating their susceptibility to becoming airborne [3, 42,43,44,45,46]. Inhalation of microplastics is associated with oxidative stress in lung tissues, along with general inflammatory responses in airways and bronchi and chronic exposure can lead to death [3, 47, 48]. Several other studies have also directly measured microplastic concentrations suspended in air or dust, [49,50,51,52] deposited on land, [53, 54] or trapped on tree canopies [3, 55]. And because the impact of the horizontal and vertical intra- and inter-ecosystem spread of microplastics in the environment remains unquantified on the whole ecosystem , and ultimately on humans via the food chain, this area needs further investigation, particularly because microplastics are persistent in the environment and can accumulate in soil [3, 20, 57, 58].
Per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS)
Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFAS) is a broad term for manmade aliphatic compounds with at least one carbon-fluorine (C-F) bond [14, 59]. PFAS have been mass produced since the 1940s [14, 59]; however, due to environmental concerns, the production and use of long-chain (≥ 8 carbons) PFAS in North America, Europe, and Australia were voluntarily phased out in the early 2000s and replaced with shorter-chain PFAS [59, 60]. Short-chained PFAS have a lower tendency to be absorbed or leached into the soil and bioaccumulate, but are also more mobile in the environment than the longer chain (C8) compounds [19, 59, 61] increasing risks of groundwater contamination and human exposure. Short-chain PFAS replacements also still persist in the environment and can have adverse health and environmental effects [62,63,64].
A study measuring perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acid (PFCA), a subset of PFAS, in biosolids from multiple wastewater treatment plants in the US, Canada, Australia, and Spain found that biosolids in the US have significantly higher amounts of PFCA compared to other countries . This difference could be due to the continued use of PFAS precursors in domestic and industrial products in the US or more sensitive methods used to detect PFAS in the reported study [3, 65]. Nevertheless, PFAS concentrations in biosolids in the US have not decreased even after long-chain PFAS use was phased out in the early 2000s [3, 10, 66].
The transformation of PFAS during wastewater treatment processing is of particular concern. A statewide assessment of PFAS in Michigan found that wastewater industrial pretreatment programs were unable to break the C-F bond and instead transformed polyfluorinated precursors to Perfluoroalkyl Acids (PFAAs) which are highly resistant to further degradation, effectively increasing effluent concentrations of total PFAS . The stability of PFAAs, most notably perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), has earned PFAS the moniker “forever chemicals” [67, 68].
In addition to being considered a ‘forever chemical’ the fate of PFAS after being land applied is alarming. One of the earliest studies on PFAS in soil following the land application of biosolids found trace levels of perfluorochemicals in soil cores from biosolids-amended soils to depths of 120 cm, suggesting potential movement of these compounds within the soil profile over time . A more recent study , investigating the impact of land applying biosolids on the occurrence, concentration, and distribution of PFAS in soils, the vadose zone, and groundwater detected PFAS in all near surface soil samples (< 30 cm below ground surface), in more than 83% of soils between 30 and 90 cm below ground surface, and in the immediately underlying groundwater. PFAS, however, were not detected in adjacent irrigation ditch soil samples where biosolids were not land applied.
Like microplastics, PFAS have been detected in the remotest areas on earth [14, 67, 69] and high concentrations of both microplastics and PFAS have even been detected in dust samples [52, 70]. The persistence of PFAS, with a half-life exceeding several decades, leads to complex cycling in the atmosphere, biosphere, geosphere, and hydrosphere (Fig. 1) further raising concerns regarding their ubiquitous distribution into human exposure pathways [3, 58, 71,72,73].
PFAS can cause adverse health impacts even at ultra-low concentrations, and have been found to bioaccumulate in animals and humans in lung, kidney, liver, brain, and bone tissue [14, 74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82]. According to The California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s recently published chemical profile for PFAS, “Product – Chemical Profile for Treatments Containing Perfluoroalkyl or Polyfluoroalkyl Substances for Use on Converted Textiles or Leathers” (February 2021 Final Version), PFAS exposure is associated with reproductive and developmental, liver and kidney, and immunological effects, as well as tumors in laboratory animals. In addition, inhalation of PFAS can cause acute lung toxicity and inhibit lung surfactant function [3, 83, 84]. The most consistent finding from human epidemiology studies is the increase in serum cholesterol levels among exposed populations. Additionally, there are limited findings correlating exposure to infant birth weights, immune system dysfunction, cancer, and thyroid hormone disruption, and PFAS have also been linked to phytotoxicity, aquatic toxicity, and terrestrial ecotoxicity . The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which monitors Americans’ exposure to PFAS as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, has detected PFAS in the blood of all people tested and notes that nearly all humans show evidence of exposure . However, despite this universal exposure and the potential adverse impacts to human health, there is a major data gap in our understanding of the relationship between exposure levels and toxicological outcomes, particularly for PFAS classes other than PFOA and PFOS .
The extent of environmental PFAS contamination is also not well quantified; however, based on the usage of biosolids reported by the US EPA and other study estimates, 1760 kg or more of PFAS could be annually deposited onto land directly via land application, from where they could spread into the environment via stormwater runoff, wind, and infiltration into ground water supplies [3, 10, 87].
Pharmaceuticals and personal care products
Pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) are used by consumers for health and cosmetic purposes and by agroindustry to enhance the growth or health of livestock [88,89,90]. While not all PPCPs are persistent, many are considered “pseudo-persistent” because even though they have high transformation/removal rates this is offset by their continuous use and introduction into the environment [32, 91]. Traditional wastewater treatment plants are unable to effectively remove PPCPs [90, 92] and they can persist through wastewater treatment processes [12, 93,94,95,96,97,98]. Studies investigating the occurrence and distribution of pharmaceuticals in biosolids following wastewater treatment indicate that pharmaceuticals find their way into the environment mainly through the land spreading of biosolids [32, 99,100,101,102].
PPCPs contain chemicals that can disrupt endocrine functions and antibiotics that can lead to acquisition and spread of antibiotic resistance [12, 103]. The potential for reproductive failure caused by endocrine disrupting compounds in aquatic ecosystems (e.g., fathead minnows, zebra fish and white sucker fish) has been extensively documented [12, 104,105,106,107,108]. However, the exposure, toxicity, and bioaccumulation of endocrine disruption compounds in terrestrial organisms has been less well studied. Preliminary evidence has suggested potential risks that are similar to those observed in aquatic species and these compounds have been implicated as potential contributors to diabetes, cancer, fertility decline, and a host of other environmental and public health issues . Ultra-low nanogram per liter (ng/L) concentrations have exhibited impacts to both humans and aquatic organisms, including hormonal interference in fishes, genotoxicity, carcinogenicity in lab animals, endocrine disruption, and immune toxicity [29, 109, 110].
A recent nontargeted analysis using high-resolution mass spectrometry with predictive estrogenic activity modeling was performed on biosolids samples from wastewater treatment plants in California to identify compounds in biosolids that present the most significant environmental barriers to its beneficial use as a soil amendment . The study found that the combination of predictive and in vitro estrogenicity with nontargeted analysis led to confirmation of estrogen-active contaminants in California biosolids and highlighted the importance of evaluating both agonistic and antagonistic responses when evaluating the bioactivity of complex samples. While these findings are compelling, it should be noted that the full spectrum of chemicals that have estrogenic activity and/or can affect the estrogen receptor signaling pathway and subsequent downstream physiological events remains largely unexplored .
According to the World Health Organization, the biggest threat to global health, food security, and development is antibiotic resistance, of which PPCPs are a contributor. An increasing number of infections and diseases are becoming difficult to treat, as antibiotics used to treat them become less effective [29, 111, 112]. Our ability to effectively treat infections is hindered by the proliferation of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) and antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB), which encode various mechanisms conferring drug resistance . A study by Law et al. (2021) found that the spread of ARGs among bacteria is largely driven by the horizontal transfer of mobile genetic elements (MGEs) such as plasmids (Fig. 2) . And they indicate that plasmids are important vectors of horizontal gene transfer and are capable of transferring multiple ARGs simultaneously, providing multidrug resistance to the recipient bacteria in one event. Enrichment of soils with ARGs following the application of biosolids has also been reported [8, 113,114,115] and given the frequent use of biosolids as fertilizer, their ability to actively transfer resistance genes to pathogens by means of these plasmids is concerning and needs to be further investigated . Wolters et al.  also found that disinfectants, heavy metals (including Arsenic as a metalloid), and antibiotics can enhance horizontal gene transfer at sub-inhibitory concentrations. The authors of this study also indicate that use of biosolids as organic fertilizer is contentious – on the one hand, they provide valuable fertilization while on the other they introduce pollutants that likely affect the soil resistome and increase transferability of ARGs, reinforcing the need for further investigation.
A study by Sherburne et al. (2016) also found concentrations of Triclocarban (TCC) and Triclosan (TCS) measured in each trophic level of a terrestrial food web at an agricultural field that had biosolids land applied over a seven-year period. The study investigated a terrestrial food web encompassing biosolids, soil, earthworms (primary consumer), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus, secondary consumer), European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris, a secondary consumer of invertebrates), and American kestrels (Falco sparverius, a tertiary consumer of rodents, small birds, and invertebrates) at the biosolids experimental site. The results were compared to the same type of sample results obtained from another agricultural reference site that did not have biosolids land applied and found that antimicrobials were detected in soil as well as in primary (earthworms), secondary (deer mice, starlings), and tertiary (kestrels) consumers. Moreover, concentrations were higher in biosolids (TCC − 1026 − 1472 ng/g wet weight (ww) and TCS − 1114 − 1350 ng/g ww), soil (TCC 14.8 − 27.3 ng/g ww and TCS − 2.7 − 4.4 ng/g ww), deer mice livers (TCC: 12.6 − 33.3 ng/g ww), and starling eggs (TCC: 15.4 − 31.4 ng/g ww) at the experimental site than at the reference site.
Furthermore, a recent study by Hung et al. , found that the biosolid samples contained significantly higher levels of selected ARGs than the raw agricultural soils (p < 0.05). Average relative abundances of (intI1, sul1, blaSHV, and ermB) genes were significantly higher in biosolid-amended soils compared to nearby agricultural soils (p < 0.05). A spatial interpolation analysis of relative gene abundances (of intI1, sul1, sul2, and tetW) across the studied area indicated directional trends towards the northwest and southeast directions, highlighting possible airborne spread. Hung et al. concluded that this study brings attention to the need to redefine our antimicrobial standards in soils in terms of public health, in addition to highlighting the importance of considering relatively unstudied transmission routes, such as groundwater and air, when dealing with the current worldwide antibiotic resistance crisis .
Aging, degradation, and synergistic effects of emerging pollutants
The actual fate of organic pollutants in soil is governed by many different factors including soil characteristics, compound properties, and environmental factors such as temperature, precipitation, and the ability of soil microbes to degrade the compound [32, 117]. Emerging pollutants have now also been spread into areas where biosolids have not been land applied because of their persistence during long distance transport and bioaccumulation. For example, land applied biosolids enriched with longer chain PFAS can be adsorbed to microplastics or dust and become airborne . Biosolids can also release fine particles or colloids when subjected to natural drying and freeze thaw cycles, which can carry PFAS to subsurface and ground water [3, 118, 119].
The fate of emerging pollutants in biosolids after land application can vary based on physicochemical properties of the organic compound, the treatment process used to generate the biosolids, and soil properties (e.g., pH and organic carbon), as well as climate [120,121,122,123,124,125]. Organic compounds present in biosolids, however, can be mobilized during rainfall events following land application, and have been detected in both the dissolved phase, as well as associated with suspended particulates [126, 127]. Gottschall et al. reported the presence of PPCPs in agricultural tile drainage and ground water after application of dewatered biosolids . While Gottschall et al., indicate that the dissipation of many PPCPs in biosolids-amended soils occurs within the first few months after application, some PPCPs, including those in biosolid aggregates incorporated into soil, can still be detected for more than one year following biosolids land application.
Emerging pollutants can also be transformed during degradation into products that have similar biological activity or can have greater toxicity than the parent compound [129, 130]. Macherius et al. reported the formation of triclosan conjugates in carrot cell cultures such that the quantity of conjugates exceeded the amount of parent triclosan by a factor of five . Mordechay et al., reported extensive epoxidation of carbamazepine in the leaves of multiple plant species exposed to the pharmaceutical . More information is needed on the importance of the production of contaminant transformation products after environmental release of these compounds, and the potential for further translocation of pollutants and transformation products beyond plants, especially among nontarget organisms consuming exposed plants . In addition, further study of the role of environmental factors such as rhizosphere microorganisms may play in uptake and transformation of pharmaceuticals in the environment is required .
Another factor widely recognized as affecting the bioavailability of organic contaminants in soil is residence time. As soil pollutant contact time increases, pollutant bioavailability and extractability decrease [32, 117]. During aging, pollutants slowly diffuse into the soil matrix via isomorphic dissolution reactions, thus becoming increasingly inaccessible for biodegradation and bioaccumulation . Weathering and aging have been reported to result in decreased toxicity and bioavailability of many soil-applied chemicals [32, 134]. And since long-term aging reactions modify organic contaminants’ availability and toxicity over time, they are important in human and ecological risk assessments and the development of soil quality standards . For instance, sediments can become potentially bioavailable to benthic organisms, and if the level of bioaccumulation is high, they can generate acute and chronic exposure and spread to higher trophic levels [29, 135,136,137]. Recalcitrant organic contaminants have been found to uptake into plant roots and vegetable crop plants [138,139,140,141] and earthworms that can in turn be consumed by other predators in the food chain [142, 143].
Vasilachi et al. further indicated that if emerging pollutants are in mixtures, the toxic effects can be cumulative and generate synergistic or antagonistic interactions, leading to the so-called “cocktail effect”, so that the difficulty of risk analysis increases [29, 144,145,146]. Microplastics, for instance, are characterized as being hydrophobic, which makes them inclined to attach to the solid matrix [20, 147]. Studies have also confirmed a high concentration of both and PFAS in dust samples [52, 70]. As a result of these characteristics, the application of biosolids as a fertilizer on agricultural fields may release pollutants such as microplastics and PFAS into the air and pose an inhalation risk because they are more susceptible to suspension by wind than natural soil particles . In this context, the authors indicate that the precautionary principle needs to be applied consistently to ensure a clean and healthy environment for future generations, which is also why further studies on the risks induced by emerging pollutants, due to their specific environmental behavior, toxicity, and impacts on the environment and human health become essential . Figure 3 illustrates the relationships between potential exposure pathways and potential ecological receptors after a source, such as biosolids, releases a stressor to soil.
Evolution of diagnostic techniques
Although some emerging pollutants and their transformation by-products have existed in the environment for years, their qualitative and quantitative occurrence have been analyzed only recently [27, 29, 101, 149]. New analytical techniques have made it possible to detect and quantify approximately 3000 biologically active chemical compounds in the environment [29, 150,151,152,153]. However, efficient and rapid methods for detection in biosolid matrices are lacking.
Detection methods used to count microplastics in biosolids may underestimate or even exclude many microplastics smaller than 10 μm - the fraction that could pose a greater risk for human and animal health [3, 5, 154,155,156]. Thus, it is critical to develop a simple, rapid method of isolating and quantifying microplastics from environmental samples.
Hutchinson et al. demonstrated through improvements to the analytical method that levels of PFAS in biosolids are significantly higher than historically understood, indicating that the land application of biosolids could result in sensitive environments being exposed to PFAS at levels much higher than previously anticipated . The total oxidizable precursor (TOP) assay, originally published by Houtz and Sedlak , has been widely used as an estimate of the total PFAA content of a sample, particularly in wastewater and biosolid matrices; however, it appears this method is failing to adequately digest all the PFAA precursors present in the sample . Still, progress is being made in this arena. The US EPA and the Department of Defense are working to complete a multi-laboratory validation study of a new Method 1633 to test for 40 unique PFAS compounds in wastewater, surface water, ground water, soil, biosolids, sediment, landfill leachate, and fish tissue .
Future work is also needed to investigate additional compounds and transformation products that have estrogenic characteristics using non-targeted chemical analysis in conjunction with effects-directed analysis to gain a more comprehensive understanding of endocrine active consumer product chemicals that persist beyond their intended use in consumerism and enter the environment upon ultimate disposal .
Biosolids treatment to remove emerging pollutants
Research and experiments into new technologies, or a combination of technologies are needed to reduce the risk wastewater and biosolids can have on the environment and human health as conventional wastewater treatment plants are, in principle, not designed to remove emerging pollutants [22, 31]. In April of 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) formed the PFAS Innovative Treatment Team to explore innovative tools and methods for destroying all the carbon fluorine (C-F) bonds in PFAS-containing waste . The work resulted in improved understanding and advancement of four innovative non-combustion technologies to supplement ongoing EPA research into PFAS treatment. These technologies are electrochemical oxidation (EO), supercritical water oxidation (SCWO), mechanochemical degradation, and gasification and pyrolysis .
Berg et al. describes EO as being used to oxidize pollutants by means of passing an electrical current through a solution . They describe that the electronegativity and electron affinity of fluorine allows the C-F bond to be broken and the fluorine atoms reduced when a high overpotential is applied to a solution. Their review of SCWO indicates that preliminary studies on biosolids treatment have shown strong reductions in PFOS and PFOA levels in the processed effluent. They also indicate that sufficiently dewatered sludge, or wet sludge dried by addition of co-milling agents, would be applicable to treatment in a mechanochemical degradation system. However, they indicate no such tests with PFAS have been identified in the literature. They further indicate that PFAS testing on a biosolids pyrolysis system was repeated in a test commissioned by the PFAS Innovative Treatment Team confirming high levels of degradation of the target PFAS compounds analyzed in the feed. Research to evaluate these promising technologies for PFAS destruction are ongoing.
Chen et al. indicates that hydrothermal processing (HTP), including hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) and hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL), is a promising method to sustainably manage biosolids because it can convert it into useful products while mitigating the environmental risks of biosolids simultaneously . They describe that products from HTP are normally biocrude oil, aqueous products (containing fertilizer precursors), and hydrochar. The authors also indicate that HTC has been extensively used for phosphorus recovery, while HTL can effectively remove constituents of emerging concern. They go on to indicate that energy analysis of HTP indicates that HTP has a 11-fold higher energy recovery than landfilling .
Low temperature mineralization of perfluorocarboxylic acids is also being experimented with. Trang et al. found that perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) could be mineralized through a sodium hydroxide-mediated defluorination pathway . Their study found that PFCA decarboxylation in polar aprotic solvents produced reactive perfluoroalkyl ion intermediates that degraded to fluoride ions (78 to ~ 100%) within 24 h. The study also indicates that degradation was observed for branched perfluoroalkyl ether carboxylic acids. They surmised that this may then inform the development of engineered PFAS degradation processes and facilitate expanding this reactivity mode to PFAS with other polar head groups.
For perspective, and as described by Vasilachi et al., source reduction and substitution of emerging pollutants with products having lower toxicity and easier removal from water have played an important role in reducing the impact of emerging pollutants on the environment and human health . Amending biosolids with biochar or wood chips has been demonstrated to significantly enhance the degradation and/or retention (sorption) of target total and(or) leachable pharmaceuticals . However, one should keep in mind that the solution to pollution should not always be dilution, so efforts to treat biosolids to remove contaminants of potential risk to health and the environment should continue to be pursued, particularly due to the demonstrated biopersistence of many of these synthetic organic chemicals. Related to PFAS, another study of commercial biosolids from the U.S. and Canada found that while thermal hydrolysis had no apparent effect on the PFAA concentration, heat treatment and composting increased PFAA concentrations (especially PFHxA) via the degradation of precursors . Only blending with PFAS-free material decreased the concentration of PFAAs in the commercial biosolids, by diluting it. With millions of tons of biosolids being land applied annually, dilution cannot be a sustainable or a long-term treatment solution to removing contaminants that persist and bioaccumulate in the environment.
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control chemical profile for PFAS, “Product – Chemical Profile for Treatments Containing Perfluoroalkyl or Polyfluoroalkyl Substances for Use on Converted Textiles or Leathers” (February 2021 Final Version) indicates that intentional or accidental combustion of PFAS forms hazardous chemicals . For instance, the combustion of various fluorinated polymers can result in emissions of C3-C14 PFCAs, ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons, and greenhouse gases such as fluorocarbons when fluoropolymers are combusted at temperatures representative of municipal incinerators . During incineration at temperatures above 450 °C, Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (aka Teflon) also forms additional hazardous substances including the ultra-short-chain PFAA tetrafluoroacetic acid and hydrofluoric acid (HF) [166, 167]. Moreover, an industry-sponsored study in a rotary kiln test facility simulating municipal incinerators found that PTFE polymer pellets begin to decompose at around 500˚C, and by approximately 650˚C they completely convert to HF gas and F-containing ash, with no significant PFAA emissions . Other authors have reported that at lower temperatures, as could occur during accidental landfill fires, fluoropolymers such as PTFE can break down into PFCAs, including PFOA [169, 170].
In this regard, future technologies need to be both effective and environmentally-friendly treatments, capable of removing the widest possible spectrum of emerging pollutants, with low energy consumption and capital expenditures. And the efficiency of the treatment must be adjustable to emerging pollutants concentrations in an aquatic environment to make it possible to recover the treated water .
Monitoring and regulations
The lack of standards and regulations for the emerging pollutants discussed in this review are due, in part, to lack of available data on the effects of chronic exposure on human health. This underscores the need for complete epidemiological and toxicological studies, in addition to the development of better treatment technologies, and standardized diagnostic testing methods for monitoring emerging pollutants in biosolids. Additionally, systematic approaches are needed to identify and prioritize pollutants of emerging concern [10, 171]. A complete ban on land application would not only place a heavy burden on public municipalities but could also lead to unintended consequences .
Recently, two states in the US have adopted regulations relating to the presence of PFAS substances in biosolids. In 2021 under an interim strategy, Michigan began prohibiting the land application of industrially impacted biosolids containing more than 150 parts per billion (ppb) of PFOS and requires testing of biosolids prior to land application. On April 15, 2022, the Maine state House and Senate both passed a bill (LD 1911) that would ban the use of biosolids that contain PFAS in land applications, unless it can be shown that the biosolids are PFAS free.
On the national level, in a move toward regulation of PFAS, EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan announced the Agency’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap on October 18, 2021. The roadmap charts an approach to addressing PFAS with EPA’s Commitments to Action steps that take place between 2021 and 2024. In addition, the EPA’s Office of Water developed a Biosolids Chemical Risk Assessment and Biosolids Screening Tool (BST) with an accompanying User Guide to identify pollutants, pathways, and receptors of greatest interest and to inform decisions regarding the need for refined risk assessment of land-applied biosolids. In late 2021, the US EPA also selected a Science Advisory Board to review and provide input on the overall risk assessment approach and on the scientific credibility and usability of the BST. But these actions have not yet translated into protective standards for public health with respect to biosolids land application.
From a regulatory standpoint, there is an urgent and critical need to modernize environmental health standards that pertain to the land application of biosolids. Current US EPA regulatory standards have not been updated since 1993 and do not take the emerging contaminants described in this review into account. The revision of these standards should be risk-based, prioritizing emerging pollutants that are persistent and can bioaccumulate. Support should be provided for the development of novel technologies to better treat biosolids to remove the contaminants of concern before they are land applied and novel methods for recycling or reuse of these pollutants should be explored. However, these changes require political will and collaboration among state and federal agencies to prioritize new policies and regulations.
Ongoing development of analytical methodologies for identifying emerging contaminants in soil, water, waste, and other media should be a priority of relevant regulatory agencies. Of note, Hutchinson et al. indicate that a standardized analytical methodology is needed to protect environmental assets from PFAS contamination from land-applied biosolids . Inconsistencies between current testing methods used to detect and measure emerging pollutants, likely underestimate concentrations of these pollutants in receiving matrices, especially where published quantification methods are adapted to biosolids but not the receiving matrix. At the time of this writing, the US EPA is developing a new standardized testing methodology; however, the authors’ conclusions remain relevant as prior studies have not captured a complete picture of the extent and impact of contamination.
More research is also needed to assess the long-term human health risks from exposure to emerging pollutants. The ecological risks of microplastics in agricultural soils urgently need to be assessed with respect to animals, plants, and microorganisms inhabiting soils and humans involved via the food web. Additionally, future studies should measure microplastics and associated PFAS in dust from biosolids and quantify exposure risks via inhalation. Studies evaluating the factors that contribute to the fate of emerging pollutants must be conducted to better understand exposure routes and the risks of surface and ground water contamination with these pollutants.
Lastly, effective communication to the public on the significance of pharmaceutical ingestion and personal care product use and the resulting environmental effects due to runoff from agricultural land may help to put pressure on decision-makers and create an awareness of unwarranted excessive use of these products . This also presents an opportunity to promote use of more sustainable products to reduce the volume of contaminants that are released to the environment via wastewater infrastructure pathways.
Humans are being continuously exposed to the emerging pollutants described in this review and a concerted effort should be made to mitigate these exposures and risks among the general public, policymakers, wastewater treatment plant operators, and farmers, in terms of raising awareness, controlling the sources, and establishing a reasonable regulatory risk level for biosolids reuse. As a society we must also promote the use of more environmentally sustainable products that can be flushed into the environment.
Research indicates that biosolids contain a complex mixture of contaminants, and investment in effective treatment and diagnostic technologies are essential for detecting and reducing the presence of contaminants so the benefits of biosolids related to carbon sequestration and soil health can be fully realized. We should reconsider the continued land application of biosolids in this seemingly endless loop of spreading contaminants into our environment, and we should most certainly not continue to do it in the name of recycling, climate change, and soil health. Instead, efforts need to be pursued to work within the current system to better communicate and act upon the human health risks in order to achieve desired public health outcomes. Significant funding and support for upgrading wastewater treatment infrastructure are also needed to address these issues of today in order to better prepare for a safer tomorrow.
A final note to ponder as we consider this issue. Biosolids, in their current form, have often been referred to as an organic waste to be recovered and recycled. But given the presence of contaminants that originate from both domestic and industrial wastewater sources, is that really the appropriate designation in law or regulation? As a society, if we fail to take definite policy actions to modernize environmental standards that pertain to the land application of biosolids, and continue to land apply layer upon layer of these complex mixtures of pollutants to our soil without adequate public health protections in place, and without regard to the long-term environmental consequences, we may potentially cause irreversible damage to the very soils we use to grow our food and to our surface and ground water that sustain life.
Not applicable. All literature cited is available at the reference provided.
Broderick SR, Evans WB. Biosolids promote similar plant growth and quality responses as conventional and slow-release fertilizers. HortTechnology hortte. 2017;27(6):794–804.
Shober AL, Stehouwer RC, Macneal KE. On-Farm Assessment of Biosolids Effects on Soil and Crop tissue quality. J Environ Qual. 2003;32(5):1873–80.
Borthakur A, Leonard J, Koutnik VS, Ravi S, Mohanty SK. Inhalation risks of wind-blown dust from biosolid-applied agricultural lands: are they enriched with microplastics and PFAS? Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2022;25:100309.
Crossman J, Hurley RR, Futter M, Nizzetto L. Transfer and transport of microplastics from biosolids to agricultural soils and the wider environment. Sci Total Environ. 2020;724:138334.
Koutnik VS, Alkidim S, Leonard J, DePrima F, Cao S, Hoek EMV, Mohanty SK. Unaccounted microplastics in Wastewater Sludge: where do they go? ACS ES&T Water. 2021;1(5):1086–97.
Mohajerani A, Karabatak B. Microplastics and pollutants in biosolids have contaminated agricultural soils: an analytical study and a proposal to cease the use of biosolids in farmlands and utilise them in sustainable bricks. Waste Manag. 2020;107:252–65.
Benítez E, Romero E, Gómez M, Gallardo-Lara F, Nogales R. Biosolids and Biosolids-ash as sources of Heavy Metals in a plant-soil system. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2001;132(1):75–87.
Munir M, Xagoraraki I. Levels of Antibiotic Resistance genes in Manure, Biosolids, and fertilized soil. J Environ Qual. 2011;40(1):248–55.
Harrison EZ, Oakes SR, Hysell M, Hay A. Organic chemicals in sewage sludges. Sci Total Environ. 2006;367(2):481–97.
Venkatesan AK, Halden RU. National inventory of perfluoroalkyl substances in archived U.S. biosolids from the 2001 EPA National Sewage Sludge Survey. J Hazard Mater. 2013;252–253:413–8.
Paz-Ferreiro J, Nieto A, Méndez A, Askeland MP, Gascó G. Biochar from Biosolids Pyrolysis: a review. In: Int J Environ Res Public Health vol. 15; 2018.
Black GP, Anumol T, Young Thomas M. Analyzing a broader spectrum of endocrine active organic contaminants in sewage sludge with high resolution LC-QTOF-MS suspect screening and QSAR toxicity prediction. Environ Science: Processes Impacts. 2019;21(7):1099–114.
Corradini F, Meza P, Eguiluz R, Casado F, Huerta-Lwanga E, Geissen V. Evidence of microplastic accumulation in agricultural soils from sewage sludge disposal. Sci Total Environ. 2019;671:411–20.
Helmer RW, Reeves DM, Cassidy DP. Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFAS) cycling within Michigan: contaminated sites, landfills and wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2022;210:117983.
Hung W-C, Miao Y, Truong N, Jones A, Mahendra S, Jay J. Tracking antibiotic resistance through the environment near a biosolid spreading ground: resistome changes, distribution, and metal(loid) co-selection. Sci Total Environ. 2022;823:153570.
Hutchinson S, Rieck T, Wu X. Advanced PFAS precursor digestion methods for biosolids. Environ Chem. 2020;17(8):558–67.
Johnson GR. PFAS in soil and groundwater following historical land application of biosolids. Water Res. 2022;211:118035.
Law A, Solano O, Brown CJ, Hunter SS, Fagnan M, Top EM, Stalder T. Biosolids as a source of antibiotic resistance plasmids for commensal and pathogenic Bacteria. Front Microbiol 2021, 12.
Sepulvado JG, Blaine AC, Hundal LS, Higgins CP. Occurrence and fate of Perfluorochemicals in Soil following the Land Application of Municipal Biosolids. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(19):8106–12.
Liu H, Wang Z, Nghiem LD, Gao L, Zamyadi A, Zhang Z, Sun J, Wang Q. Solid-embedded microplastics from Sewage Sludge to Agricultural Soils: detection, occurrence, and impacts. ACS ES&T Water. 2021;1(6):1322–33.
Sherburne JJ, Anaya AM, Fernie KJ, Forbey JS, Furlong ET, Kolpin DW, Dufty AM, Kinney CA. Occurrence of Triclocarban and Triclosan in an agro-ecosystem following application of Biosolids. Environ Sci Technol. 2016;50(24):13206–14.
Koumaki E, Noutsopoulos C, Mamais D, Fragkiskatos G, Andreadakis A. Fate of emerging contaminants in high-rate activated Sludge Systems. In: Int J Environ Res Public Health vol. 18; 2021.
Black GP, He G, Denison MS, Young TM. Using estrogenic activity and Nontargeted Chemical Analysis to identify contaminants in Sewage Sludge. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55(10):6729–39.
Steele JC, Meng X-Z, Venkatesan AK, Halden RU. Comparative meta-analysis of organic contaminants in sewage sludge from the United States and China. Sci Total Environ. 2022;821:153423.
Biosolids. Global Strategic Business Report [https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5139451/biosolids-global-strategic-business-report#rela0-5327510].
Gavrilescu M, Demnerová K, Aamand J, Agathos S, Fava F. Emerging pollutants in the environment: present and future challenges in biomonitoring, ecological risks and bioremediation. New Biotechnol. 2015;32(1):147–56.
Petrie B, Barden R, Kasprzyk-Hordern B. A review on emerging contaminants in wastewaters and the environment: current knowledge, understudied areas and recommendations for future monitoring. Water Res. 2015;72:3–27.
Vasilachi IC, Asiminicesei DM, Fertu DI, Gavrilescu M. Occurrence and fate of emerging pollutants in Water Environment and Options for their removal. In: Water vol. 13; 2021.
United Nations Environment Programme. : An Assessment Report on Issues of Concern: Chemicals and Waste Issues Posing Risks to Human Health and the Environment. In.; 2020.
Richardson SD, Ternes TA. Water Analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Anal Chem. 2018;90(1):398–428.
Clarke RM, Cummins E. Evaluation of “Classic” and emerging contaminants resulting from the application of Biosolids to Agricultural Lands: a review. Hum Ecol Risk Assessment: Int J. 2015;21(2):492–513.
Lenka SP, Kah M, Padhye LP. A review of the occurrence, transformation, and removal of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2021;199:117187.
Lindstrom AB, Strynar MJ, Delinsky AD, Nakayama SF, McMillan L, Libelo EL, Neill M, Thomas L. Application of WWTP Biosolids and resulting perfluorinated compound contamination of Surface and Well Water in Decatur, Alabama, USA. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(19):8015–21.
Lee H, Tevlin AG, Mabury SA, Mabury SA. Fate of polyfluoroalkyl phosphate diesters and their metabolites in Biosolids-Applied Soil: Biodegradation and Plant Uptake in Greenhouse and Field experiments. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48(1):340–9.
Schowanek D, Carr R, David H, Douben P, Hall J, Kirchmann H, Patria L, Sequi P, Smith S, Webb S. A risk-based methodology for deriving quality standards for organic contaminants in sewage sludge for use in agriculture—conceptual Framework. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2004;40(3):227–51.
Prosser RS, Sibley PK. Human health risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in plant tissue due to biosolids and manure amendments, and wastewater irrigation. Environ Int. 2015;75:223–33.
What are Microplastics?. [https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html].
Murphy F, Ewins C, Carbonnier F, Quinn B. Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) as a source of Microplastics in the aquatic environment. Environ Sci Technol. 2016;50(11):5800–8.
Liu X, Yuan W, Di M, Li Z, Wang J. Transfer and fate of microplastics during the conventional activated sludge process in one wastewater treatment plant of China. Chem Eng J. 2019;362:176–82.
Hidayaturrahman H, Lee T-G. A study on characteristics of microplastic in wastewater of South Korea: identification, quantification, and fate of microplastics during treatment process. Mar Pollut Bull. 2019;146:696–702.
Allen S, Allen D, Phoenix VR, Le Roux G, Durántez Jiménez P, Simonneau A, Binet S, Galop D. Atmospheric transport and deposition of microplastics in a remote mountain catchment. Nat Geosci. 2019;12(5):339–44.
Brahney J, Hallerud M, Heim E, Hahnenberger M, Sukumaran S. Plastic rain in protected areas of the United States. Science. 2020;368(6496):1257–60.
Evangeliou N, Grythe H, Klimont Z, Heyes C, Eckhardt S, Lopez-Aparicio S, Stohl A. Atmospheric transport is a major pathway of microplastics to remote regions. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):3381.
Feng S, Lu H, Tian P, Xue Y, Lu J, Tang M, Feng W. Analysis of microplastics in a remote region of the Tibetan Plateau: implications for natural environmental response to human activities. Sci Total Environ. 2020;739:140087.
Peeken I, Primpke S, Beyer B, Gütermann J, Katlein C, Krumpen T, Bergmann M, Hehemann L, Gerdts G. Arctic sea ice is an important temporal sink and means of transport for microplastic. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):1505.
Prata JC, da Costa JP, Lopes I, Duarte AC, Rocha-Santos T. Environmental exposure to microplastics: an overview on possible human health effects. Sci Total Environ. 2020;702:134455.
Prata JC. Airborne microplastics: consequences to human health? Environ Pollut. 2018;234:115–26.
Dehghani S, Moore F, Akhbarizadeh R. Microplastic pollution in deposited urban dust, Tehran metropolis, Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24(25):20360–71.
Gasperi J, Wright SL, Dris R, Collard F, Mandin C, Guerrouache M, Langlois V, Kelly FJ, Tassin B. Microplastics in air: are we breathing it in? Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2018;1:1–5.
Mbachu O, Jenkins G, Pratt C, Kaparaju P. A New Contaminant Superhighway? A review of sources, measurement techniques and Fate of Atmospheric Microplastics. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2020;231(2):85.
Pramanik BK, Roychand R, Monira S, Bhuiyan M, Jegatheesan V. Fate of road-dust associated microplastics and per- and polyfluorinated substances in stormwater. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2020;144:236–41.
Abbasi S, Keshavarzi B, Moore F, Turner A, Kelly FJ, Dominguez AO, Jaafarzadeh N. Distribution and potential health impacts of microplastics and microrubbers in air and street dusts from Asaluyeh County, Iran. Environ Pollut. 2019;244:153–64.
Järlskog I, Strömvall A-M, Magnusson K, Gustafsson M, Polukarova M, Galfi H, Aronsson M, Andersson-Sköld Y. Occurrence of tire and bitumen wear microplastics on urban streets and in sweepsand and washwater. Sci Total Environ. 2020;729:138950.
Liu K, Wang X, Song Z, Wei N, Li D. Terrestrial plants as a potential temporary sink of atmospheric microplastics during transport. Sci Total Environ. 2020;742:140523.
Rillig MC. Microplastic in Terrestrial Ecosystems and the Soil? Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(12):6453–4.
Calderón-Preciado D, Matamoros V, Bayona JM. Occurrence and potential crop uptake of emerging contaminants and related compounds in an agricultural irrigation network. Sci Total Environ. 2011;412–413:14–9.
Krause S, Molari M, Gorb EV, Gorb SN, Kossel E, Haeckel M. Persistence of plastic debris and its colonization by bacterial communities after two decades on the abyssal seafloor. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):9484.
Buck RC, Franklin J, Berger U, Conder JM, Cousins IT, de Voogt P, Jensen AA, Kannan K, Mabury SA, van Leeuwen SPJ. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2011;7(4):513–41.
Dean WS, Adejumo HA, Caiati A, Garay PM, Harmata AS, Li L, Rodriguez EE, Sundar S. A Framework for Regulation of New and existing PFAS by EPA. J Sci Policy Gov. 2020;16(1):1–14.
Chow SJ, Ojeda N, Jacangelo JG, Schwab KJ. Detection of ultrashort-chain and other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in U.S. bottled water. Water Res. 2021;201:117292.
Cousins IT, Vestergren R, Wang Z, Scheringer M, McLachlan MS. The precautionary principle and chemicals management: the example of perfluoroalkyl acids in groundwater. Environ Int. 2016;94:331–40.
Kotlarz N, McCord J, Collier D, Lea CS, Strynar M, Lindstrom AB, Wilkie AA, Islam JY, Matney K, Tarte P, et al. Measurement of Novel, drinking Water-Associated PFAS in blood from adults and children in Wilmington, North Carolina. Environ Health Perspect. 2020;128(7):077005.
Scheringer M, Trier X, Cousins IT, de Voogt P, Fletcher T, Wang Z, Webster TF. Helsingør Statement on poly- and perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFASs). Chemosphere. 2014;114:337–9.
Glüge J, Scheringer M, Cousins IT, DeWitt JC, Goldenman G, Herzke D, Lohmann R, Ng CA, Trier X, Wang Z. An overview of the uses of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Environ Science: Processes Impacts. 2020;22(12):2345–73.
Armstrong DL, Lozano N, Rice CP, Ramirez M, Torrents A. Temporal trends of perfluoroalkyl substances in limed biosolids from a large municipal water resource recovery facility. J Environ Manage. 2016;165:88–95.
Miner KR, Clifford H, Taruscio T, Potocki M, Solomon G, Ritari M, Napper IE, Gajurel AP, Mayewski PA. Deposition of PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ on Mt. Everest. Sci Total Environ. 2021;759:144421.
Prevedouros K, Cousins IT, Buck RC, Korzeniowski SH. Sources, fate and transport of Perfluorocarboxylates. Environ Sci Technol. 2006;40(1):32–44.
Butt CM, Berger U, Bossi R, Tomy GT. Levels and trends of poly- and perfluorinated compounds in the arctic environment. Sci Total Environ. 2010;408(15):2936–65.
Young AS, Sparer-Fine EH, Pickard HM, Sunderland EM, Peaslee GF, Allen JG. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and total fluorine in fire station dust. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2021;31(5):930–42.
Nicole W. Breaking it down: estimating short-chain PFAS half-lives in a Human Population. Environ Health Perspect. 2020;128(11):114002.
Sáez M, de Voogt P, Parsons JR. Persistence of perfluoroalkylated substances in closed bottle tests with municipal sewage sludge. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2008;15(6):472–7.
Zareitalabad P, Siemens J, Hamer M, Amelung W. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in surface waters, sediments, soils and wastewater – a review on concentrations and distribution coefficients. Chemosphere. 2013;91(6):725–32.
Shin H-M, Vieira VM, Ryan PB, Detwiler R, Sanders B, Steenland K, Bartell SM. Environmental fate and transport modeling for Perfluorooctanoic Acid emitted from the Washington Works Facility in West Virginia. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(4):1435–42.
De Silva AO, Armitage JM, Bruton TA, Dassuncao C, Heiger-Bernays W, Hu XC, Kärrman A, Kelly B, Ng C, Robuck A, et al. PFAS exposure pathways for humans and Wildlife: a synthesis of current knowledge and key gaps in understanding. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2021;40(3):631–57.
Kennedy GL, Butenhoff JL, Olsen GW, O’Connor JC, Seacat AM, Perkins RG, Biegel LB, Murphy SR, Farrar DG. The Toxicology of Perfluorooctanoate. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2004;34(4):351–84.
Sunderland EM, Hu XC, Dassuncao C, Tokranov AK, Wagner CC, Allen JG. A review of the pathways of human exposure to poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and present understanding of health effects. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2019;29(2):131–47.
Trudel D, Horowitz L, Wormuth M, Scheringer M, Cousins IT, Hungerbühler K. Estimating consumer exposure to PFOS and PFOA. Risk Anal. 2008;28(2):251–69.
Conder JM, Hoke RA, Wolf Wd, Russell MH, Buck RC. Are PFCAs Bioaccumulative? A critical review and comparison with Regulatory Criteria and Persistent Lipophilic Compounds. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(4):995–1003.
Martin JW, Whittle DM, Muir DCG, Mabury SA. Perfluoroalkyl Contaminants in a Food web from Lake Ontario. Environ Sci Technol. 2004;38(20):5379–85.
Pérez F, Nadal M, Navarro-Ortega A, Fàbrega F, Domingo JL, Barceló D, Farré M. Accumulation of perfluoroalkyl substances in human tissues. Environ Int. 2013;59:354–62.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (US). Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyls. Atlanta, GA: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (US); 2021.
Sørli JB, Låg M, Ekeren L, Perez-Gil J, Haug LS, Da Silva E, Matrod MN, Gützkow KB, Lindeman B. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) modify lung surfactant function and pro-inflammatory responses in human bronchial epithelial cells. Toxicol In Vitro. 2020;62:104656.
Product. – Chemical Profile for Treatments Containing Perfluoroalkyl or Polyfluoroalkyl Substances for Use on Converted Textiles or Leathers. In. Edited by Control DoTS; 2021.
Calafat AM, Kuklenyik Z, Reidy JA, Caudill SP, Tully JS, Needham LL. Serum concentrations of 11 Polyfluoroalkyl Compounds in the U.S. Population: data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999 – 2000. Environ Sci Technol. 2007;41(7):2237–42.
Toxicological Effects of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances., 1 edn: Humana Cham; 2015.
Borthakur A, Wang M, He M, Ascencio K, Blotevogel J, Adamson DT, Mahendra S, Mohanty SK. Perfluoroalkyl acids on suspended particles: significant transport pathways in surface runoff, surface waters, and subsurface soils. J Hazard Mater. 2021;417:126159.
Wang Y, Huang H. Chap. 8 - Carbon nanotube composite membranes for microfiltration of pharmaceuticals and personal care products. In: Advanced Nanomaterials for Membrane Synthesis and its Applications Edited by Lau W-J, Ismail AF, Isloor A, Al-Ahmed A: Elsevier; 2019: 183–202.
Bishnoi MM, Verma A, Kushwaha A, Goswami S. Chap. 9 - Social factors influencing household waste management. In: Emerging Trends to Approaching Zero Waste Edited by Hussain CM, Singh S, Goswami L: Elsevier; 2022: 197–213.
Bayabil HK, Teshome FT, Li YC. Emerging contaminants in Soil and Water. Front Environ Sci 2022, 10.
Cooper ER, Siewicki TC, Phillips K. Preliminary risk assessment database and risk ranking of pharmaceuticals in the environment. Sci Total Environ. 2008;398(1):26–33.
Wang J, Wang S. Removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) from wastewater: a review. J Environ Manage. 2016;182:620–40.
Clarke BO, Smith SR. Review of ‘emerging’ organic contaminants in biosolids and assessment of international research priorities for the agricultural use of biosolids. Environ Int. 2011;37(1):226–47.
Körner W, Bolz U, Süßmuth W, Hiller G, Schuller W, Hanf V, Hagenmaier H. Input/output balance of estrogenic active compounds in a major municipal sewage plant in Germany. Chemosphere. 2000;40(9):1131–42.
Langdon KA, Warne MSJ, Smernik RJ, Shareef A, Kookana RS. Selected personal care products and endocrine disruptors in biosolids: an Australia-wide survey. Sci Total Environ. 2011;409(6):1075–81.
Chen J, Pycke BFG, Brownawell BJ, Kinney CA, Furlong ET, Kolpin DW, Halden RU. Occurrence, temporal variation, and estrogenic burden of five parabens in sewage sludge collected across the United States. Sci Total Environ. 2017;593–594:368–74.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. : Targeted National Sewage Sludge Survey Sampling and Analysis Technical Report. In. Edited by Water Oo; 2009.
Guo J, Li J, Chen H, Bond PL, Yuan Z. Metagenomic analysis reveals wastewater treatment plants as hotspots of antibiotic resistance genes and mobile genetic elements. Water Res. 2017;123:468–78.
Jelic A, Fatone F, Di Fabio S, Petrovic M, Cecchi F, Barcelo D. Tracing pharmaceuticals in a municipal plant for integrated wastewater and organic solid waste treatment. Sci Total Environ. 2012;433:352–61.
Morais SA, Delerue-Matos C, Gabarrell X, Blánquez P. Multimedia fate modeling and comparative impact on freshwater ecosystems of pharmaceuticals from biosolids-amended soils. Chemosphere. 2013;93(2):252–62.
Rivera-Utrilla J, Sánchez-Polo M, Ferro-García M, Prados-Joya G, Ocampo-Pérez R. Pharmaceuticals as emerging contaminants and their removal from water. A review. Chemosphere. 2013;93(7):1268–87.
Buta M, Hubeny J, Zieliński W, Harnisz M, Korzeniewska E. Sewage sludge in agriculture – the effects of selected chemical pollutants and emerging genetic resistance determinants on the quality of soil and crops – a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021;214:112070.
De Coster S, van Larebeke N. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Associated Disorders and Mechanisms of Action. J Environ Public Health. 2012;2012:713696.
Nash Jon P, Kime David E, Van der Ven Leo TM, Wester Piet W, Brion F, Maack G, Stahlschmidt-Allner P, Tyler Charles R. Long-term exposure to environmental concentrations of the Pharmaceutical Ethynylestradiol causes Reproductive failure in Fish. Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112(17):1725–33.
Kidd KA, Blanchfield PJ, Mills KH, Palace VP, Evans RE, Lazorchak JM, Flick RW. Collapse of a fish population after exposure to a synthetic estrogen. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2007, 104(21):8897–8901.
Barber LB, Vajda AM, Douville C, Norris DO, Writer JH. Fish Endocrine disruption responses to a major Wastewater Treatment Facility Upgrade. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(4):2121–31.
Vajda AM, Barber LB, Gray JL, Lopez EM, Bolden AM, Schoenfuss HL, Norris DO. Demasculinization of male fish by wastewater treatment plant effluent. Aquat Toxicol. 2011;103(3):213–21.
OECD. : Pharmaceutical Residues in Freshwater; 2019.
Miraji H, Othman OC, Ngassapa FN, Mureithi EW. Research Trends in Emerging Contaminants on the Aquatic Environments of Tanzania. Scientifica 2016, 2016:3769690.
Mortensen A, Granby K, Eriksen FD, Cederberg TL, Friis-Wandall S, Simonsen Y, Broesbøl-Jensen B, Bonnichsen R. Levels and risk assessment of chemical contaminants in byproducts for animal feed in Denmark. J Environ Sci Health Part B. 2014;49(11):797–810.
Cycoń M, Mrozik A, Piotrowska-Seget Z. Antibiotics in the Soil Environment—Degradation and their impact on Microbial Activity and Diversity. Front Microbiol 2019, 10.
Kraemer SA, Ramachandran A, Perron GG. Antibiotic Pollution in the Environment: from Microbial Ecology to Public Policy. In: Microorganisms vol. 7; 2019.
Ross J, Topp E. Abundance of Antibiotic Resistance genes in bacteriophage following Soil fertilization with dairy manure or municipal biosolids, and evidence for potential transduction. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81(22):7905–13.
Yang L, Liu W, Zhu D, Hou J, Ma T, Wu L, Zhu Y, Christie P. Application of biosolids drives the diversity of antibiotic resistance genes in soil and lettuce at harvest. Soil Biol Biochem. 2018;122:131–40.
Murray R, Tien Y-C, Scott A, Topp E. The impact of municipal sewage sludge stabilization processes on the abundance, field persistence, and transmission of antibiotic resistant bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes to vegetables at harvest. Sci Total Environ. 2019;651:1680–7.
Wolters B, Hauschild K, Blau K, Mulder I, Heyde BJ, Sørensen SJ, Siemens J, Jechalke S, Smalla K, Nesme J. Biosolids for safe land application: does wastewater treatment plant size matters when considering antibiotics, pollutants, microbiome, mobile genetic elements and associated resistance genes? Environ Microbiol. 2022;24(3):1573–89.
Reid BJ, Jones KC, Semple KT. Bioavailability of persistent organic pollutants in soils and sediments—a perspective on mechanisms, consequences and assessment. Environ Pollut. 2000;108(1):103–12.
Borthakur A, Cranmer BK, Dooley GP, Blotevogel J, Mahendra S, Mohanty SK. Release of soil colloids during flow interruption increases the pore-water PFAS concentration in saturated soil. Environ Pollut. 2021;286:117297.
Borthakur A, Olsen P, Dooley GP, Cranmer BK, Rao U, Hoek EMV, Blotevogel J, Mahendra S, Mohanty SK. Dry-wet and freeze-thaw cycles enhance PFOA leaching from subsurface soils. J Hazard Mater Lett. 2021;2:100029.
Tran NH, Reinhard M, Gin KY-H. Occurrence and fate of emerging contaminants in municipal wastewater treatment plants from different geographical regions-a review. Water Res. 2018;133:182–207.
Chen W, Xu J, Lu S, Jiao W, Wu L, Chang AC. Fates and transport of PPCPs in soil receiving reclaimed water irrigation. Chemosphere. 2013;93(10):2621–30.
Al-Rajab AJ, Sabourin L, Lapen DR, Topp E. Dissipation of triclosan, triclocarban, carbamazepine and naproxen in agricultural soil following surface or sub-surface application of dewatered municipal biosolids. Sci Total Environ. 2015;512–513:480–8.
Cantarero R, Richter P, Brown S, Ascar L, Ahumada I. Effects of applying biosolids to soils on the adsorption and bioavailability of 17α-ethinylestradiol and triclosan in wheat plants. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24(14):12847–59.
Yager TJB, Furlong ET, Kolpin DW, Kinney CA, Zaugg SD, Burkhardt MR. Dissipation of contaminants of emerging concern in Biosolids Applied to Nonirrigated Farmland in Eastern Colorado. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Association. 2014;50(2):343–57.
Wang K, Larkin T, Singhal N, Song Y. Mobility of pharmaceutical and personal care products in lime amended wastewater biosolids. Sci Total Environ. 2018;624:1263–73.
Yang Y-Y, Gray JL, Furlong ET, Davis JG, ReVello RC, Borch T. Steroid hormone runoff from Agricultural Test Plots Applied with Municipal Biosolids. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(5):2746–54.
Gray JL, Borch T, Furlong ET, Davis JG, Yager TJ, Yang Y-Y, Kolpin DW. Rainfall-runoff of anthropogenic waste indicators from agricultural fields applied with municipal biosolids. Sci Total Environ. 2017;580:83–9.
Gottschall N, Topp E, Metcalfe C, Edwards M, Payne M, Kleywegt S, Russell P, Lapen DR. Pharmaceutical and personal care products in groundwater, subsurface drainage, soil, and wheat grain, following a high single application of municipal biosolids to a field. Chemosphere. 2012;87(2):194–203.
Shipkova M, Armstrong VW, Oellerich M, Wieland E. Acyl Glucuronide Drug Metabolites: Toxicological and Analytical Implications. Ther Drug Monit 2003, 25(1).
Walgren JL, Mitchell MD, Thompson DC. Role of metabolism in Drug-Induced Idiosyncratic Hepatotoxicity. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2005;35(4):325–61.
Macherius A, Eggen T, Lorenz W, Moeder M, Ondruschka J, Reemtsma T. Metabolization of the Bacteriostatic Agent Triclosan in Edible plants and its consequences for Plant Uptake Assessment. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(19):10797–804.
Ben Mordechay E, Tarchitzky J, Chen Y, Shenker M, Chefetz B. Composted biosolids and treated wastewater as sources of pharmaceuticals and personal care products for plant uptake: a case study with carbamazepine. Environ Pollut. 2018;232:164–72.
Kinney CA, Heuvel BV. Translocation of pharmaceuticals and personal care products after land application of biosolids. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2020;14:23–30.
Kinney CA, Campbell BR, Thompson R, Furlong ET, Kolpin DW, Burkhardt MR, Zaugg SD, Werner SL, Hay AG. Earthworm bioassays and seedling emergence for monitoring toxicity, aging and bioaccumulation of anthropogenic waste indicator compounds in biosolids–amended soil. Sci Total Environ. 2012;433:507–15.
Dsikowitzky L, Crawford SE, Nordhaus I, Lindner F, Dwiyitno, Irianto HE, Ariyani F, Schwarzbauer J. Analysis and environmental risk assessment of priority and emerging organic pollutants in sediments from the tropical coastal megacity Jakarta, Indonesia. Reg Stud Mar Sci. 2020;34:101021.
Al Aukidy M, Verlicchi P, Jelic A, Petrovic M, Barcelò D. Monitoring release of pharmaceutical compounds: occurrence and environmental risk assessment of two WWTP effluents and their receiving bodies in the Po Valley, Italy. Sci Total Environ. 2012;438:15–25.
Stuart M, Lapworth D, Crane E, Hart A. Review of risk from potential emerging contaminants in UK groundwater. Sci Total Environ. 2012;416:1–21.
Engwall M, Hjelm K. Uptake of dioxin-like compounds from sewage sludge into various plant species–assessment of levels using a sensitive bioassay. Chemosphere. 2000;40(9–11):1189–95.
Wu C, Spongberg AL, Witter JD, Fang M, Czajkowski KP. Uptake of Pharmaceutical and Personal Care products by soybean plants from Soils Applied with Biosolids and Irrigated with Contaminated Water. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(16):6157–61.
Wu C, Spongberg AL, Witter JD, Sridhar BBM. Transfer of wastewater associated pharmaceuticals and personal care products to crop plants from biosolids treated soil. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2012;85:104–9.
Wu X, Dodgen LK, Conkle JL, Gan J. Plant uptake of pharmaceutical and personal care products from recycled water and biosolids: a review. Sci Total Environ. 2015;536:655–66.
Gaylor MO, Harvey E, Hale RC. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether (PBDE) Accumulation by earthworms (Eisenia fetida) exposed to Biosolids-, polyurethane foam Microparticle-, and Penta-BDE-Amended Soils. Environ Sci Technol. 2013;47(23):13831–9.
Rivier P-A, Havranek I, Coutris C, Norli HR, Joner EJ. Transfer of organic pollutants from sewage sludge to earthworms and barley under field conditions. Chemosphere. 2019;222:954–60.
Geissen V, Mol H, Klumpp E, Umlauf G, Nadal M, van der Ploeg M, van de Zee SEATM, Ritsema CJ. Emerging pollutants in the environment: a challenge for water resource management. Int Soil Water Conserv Res. 2015;3(1):57–65.
Tang Y, Yin M, Yang W, Li H, Zhong Y, Mo L, Liang Y, Ma X, Sun X. Emerging pollutants in water environment: occurrence, monitoring, fate, and risk assessment. Water Environ Res. 2019;91(10):984–91.
Naidu R, Arias Espana VA, Liu Y, Jit J. Emerging contaminants in the environment: risk-based analysis for better management. Chemosphere. 2016;154:350–7.
Horton AA, Walton A, Spurgeon DJ, Lahive E, Svendsen C. Microplastics in freshwater and terrestrial environments: evaluating the current understanding to identify the knowledge gaps and future research priorities. Sci Total Environ. 2017;586:127–41.
EPA EcoBox Tools by Exposure Pathways - Soil. [https://www.epa.gov/ecobox/epa-ecobox-tools-exposure-pathways-soil].
Bao L-J, Wei Y-L, Yao Y, Ruan Q-Q, Zeng EY. Global trends of research on emerging contaminants in the environment and humans: a literature assimilation. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2015;22(3):1635–43.
Hernández F, Sancho JV, Ibáñez M, Guerrero C. Antibiotic residue determination in environmental waters by LC-MS. TRAC Trends Anal Chem. 2007;26(6):466–85.
Boyd GR, Reemtsma H, Grimm DA, Mitra S. Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in surface and treated waters of Louisiana, USA and Ontario, Canada. Sci Total Environ. 2003;311(1):135–49.
Petrović M, Hernando MD, Díaz-Cruz MS, Barceló D. Liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry for the analysis of pharmaceutical residues in environmental samples: a review. J Chromatogr A. 2005;1067(1):1–14.
Richardson BJ, Lam PKS, Martin M. Emerging chemicals of concern: pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in Asia, with particular reference to Southern China. Mar Pollut Bull. 2005;50(9):913–20.
Gray AD, Weinstein JE. Size- and shape-dependent effects of microplastic particles on adult daggerblade grass shrimp (Palaemonetes pugio). Environ Toxicol Chem. 2017;36(11):3074–80.
Hwang J, Choi D, Han S, Jung SY, Choi J, Hong J. Potential toxicity of polystyrene microplastic particles. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):7391.
Xing Y-F, Xu Y-H, Shi M-H, Lian Y-X. The impact of PM2.5 on the human respiratory system. J Thorac Disease. 2016;8(1):E69–E74.
Houtz EF, Sedlak DL. Oxidative Conversion as a Means of detecting precursors to perfluoroalkyl acids in Urban Runoff. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46(17):9342–9.
United States Environmental Protection Agency Press Office. : EPA Announces First Validated Laboratory Method to Test for PFAS in Wastewater, Surface Water, Groundwater, Soils. In.; 2021.
Berg C, Crone B, Gullett B, Higuchi M, Krause MJ, Lemieux PM, Martin T, Shields EP, Struble E, Thoma E, et al. Developing innovative treatment technologies for PFAS-containing wastes. J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2022;72(6):540–55.
Winchell LJ, Ross JJ, Brose DA, Pluth TB, Fonoll X, Norton JW Jr, Bell KY. Pyrolysis and gasification at water resource recovery facilities: Status of the industry. Water Environ Res. 2022;94(3):e10701.
Chen W-T, Haque MA, Lu T, Aierzhati A, Reimonn G. A perspective on hydrothermal processing of sewage sludge. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2020;14:63–73.
Chen W-T, Zhang Y, Lee TH, Wu Z, Si B, Lee C-FF, Lin A, Sharma BK. Renewable diesel blendstocks produced by hydrothermal liquefaction of wet biowaste. Nat Sustain. 2018;1(11):702–10.
Trang B, Li Y, Xue X-S, Ateia M, Houk KN, Dichtel WR. Low-temperature mineralization of perfluorocarboxylic acids. Science. 2022;377(6608):839–45.
Liu Y, Ptacek CJ, Beauchemin S, MacKinnon T, Blowes DW. Effect of composting and amendment with biochar and woodchips on the fate and leachability of pharmaceuticals in biosolids destined for land application. Sci Total Environ. 2022;810:151193.
Kim Lazcano R, de Perre C, Mashtare ML, Lee LS. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in commercially available biosolid-based products: the effect of treatment processes. Water Environ Res. 2019;91(12):1669–77.
Huber S, Moe MK, Schmidbauer JN, Hansen G, Herzke D. Emission from Incineration of Fluoropolymer materials: A literature survey. In: 2009; 2009.
Henry BJ, Carlin JP, Hammerschmidt JA, Buck RC, Buxton LW, Fiedler H, Seed J, Hernandez O. A critical review of the application of polymer of low concern and regulatory criteria to fluoropolymers. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2018;14(3):316–34.
Aleksandrov K, Gehrmann H-J, Hauser M, Mätzing H, Pigeon D, Stapf D, Wexler M. Waste incineration of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) to evaluate potential formation of per- and poly-fluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) in flue gas. Chemosphere. 2019;226:898–906.
Feng M, Qu R, Wei Z, Wang L, Sun P, Wang Z. Characterization of the thermolysis products of Nafion membrane: a potential source of perfluorinated compounds in the environment. Sci Rep. 2015;5(1):9859.
Schlummer M, Sölch C, Meisel T, Still M, Gruber L, Wolz G. Emission of perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCA) from heated surfaces made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) applied in food contact materials and consumer products. Chemosphere. 2015;129:46–53.
Venkatesan AK, Done HY, Halden RU. United States National Sewage Sludge Repository at Arizona State University—a new resource and research tool for environmental scientists, engineers, and epidemiologists. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2015;22(3):1577–86.
Kim Lazcano R, Choi YJ, Mashtare ML, Lee LS. Characterizing and comparing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in commercially available Biosolid and Organic Non-Biosolid-Based Products. Environ Sci Technol. 2020;54(14):8640–8.
This literature review was prepared with the support of the California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health (CCDEH) Executive Committee and Executive Director Justin Malan; the CCDEH Water and Land Policy Committee Chaired by Vicki Jones, REHS; and the CCDEH Solid Waste Resource and Recovery Committee co-chaired by Lars Seifert, REHS and Charles Genkel, REHS. CCDEH would also like to thank Chad A. Kinney, Ph.D. who assisted with peer review.
Not applicable. No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. E.P. is a recently retired County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health Director, and L.S. is employed as the Environmental Health Services Director for Santa Barbara County, California. Authors are both participating members in the California Conference of Directors of Environmental Health, a 501(3)c non-profit professional association.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Consent for publication
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
PRISMA Flow Diagram
About this article
Cite this article
Pozzebon, E.A., Seifert, L. Emerging environmental health risks associated with the land application of biosolids: a scoping review. Environ Health 22, 57 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-023-01008-4
- Emerging pollutants
- Land application
- Organic contaminants
- Per-and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS)
- Pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs)