4.7 Article

Evaluation of lead release potential of new premise plumbing materials

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 28, 页码 27971-27981

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2816-2

关键词

Premise plumbing material; Lead; Distribution system; Drinking water

资金

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology [MOST 105-2628-E-002-001-MY3]
  2. Taiwan Ministry of Education [NTU-107L901003]
  3. National Taiwan University [103L891302]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Premise plumbing materials such as pipes, valves, fittings, and faucets are made of various materials, including plastic, stainless steel, copper, and brass/bronze. Although lead pipe has been banned for its use in drinking water supply by most countries in the 1980s, lead is still commonly used as an additive in many plumbing materials for its flexibility and malleability. Certified leaching tests for plumbing materials are usually conducted using relatively mild solutions over short periods which may not reveal the true risk of lead exposure when these materials are used. The objective of this study is to investigate the extents of lead release from commonly used premise plumbing materials into drinking water. The maximum lead leaching potential for pluming material was operationally determined using high strength acidic EDTA solutions (pH 4, EDTA=100mg/L) for a stagnation time of 3days for a total period of up to 1month. Lead leaching from each plumbing material was also evaluated using reconstituted tap water. Brass- and bronze-based plumbing materials were found to release dangerous levels of lead. Surface lead weight percentage obtained using SEM-EDX and lead weight percentages of the material body obtained using strong acid digestion were found to positively correlate with lead release. A re-examination of the appropriateness of current certified leaching tests and a more stringent regulation on the use of lead as an additive for plumbing materials should be considered.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据