Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Heejung Kim
 -- 1770 2022-06-21 14:43:27 |
2 format
Jason Zhu
 -6 word(s) 1764 2022-06-22 03:34:02 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Khant, N.A.;  Kim, H. Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/24282 (accessed on 07 July 2024).
Khant NA,  Kim H. Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/24282. Accessed July 07, 2024.
Khant, Naing Aung, Heejung Kim. "Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/24282 (accessed July 07, 2024).
Khant, N.A., & Kim, H. (2022, June 21). Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/24282
Khant, Naing Aung and Heejung Kim. "Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments." Encyclopedia. Web. 21 June, 2022.
Management Strategies of Microplastics in Groundwater Environments
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/w14071020

Microplastic contamination has become widespread in natural ecosystems around the globe as a result of the tremendous rise in plastic production over the past. However, microplastic pollution in marine and riverine habitats has received more attention than that of terrestrial environments or even groundwater. The most prevalent types of plastic detected in groundwater are polyethylene and polyethylene terephthalate, and fibers and fragments represent the most commonly found shapes. The vertical transportation of microplastics in agricultural soils can affect groundwater aquifer systems, which is detrimental to those who use groundwater for drinking as well as to microorganisms present in the aquifers.

groundwater contamination microplastic drinking water

1. Current Issues in Microplastic Pollution Occurrences and Sources in Groundwater

The horizontal and vertical transportation of microplastics from soil migration, surface runoff from mulching waste, and industrialization and urbanization can lead to the contamination of groundwater systems with microplastics. Groundwater can also be contaminated with several toxic materials and contaminants from anthropogenic activities [1], thereby placing groundwater resources at risk [2][3]. Notably, groundwater is used in approximately 38% of agricultural and cultivated areas globally [4]. The invisible nature of groundwater makes it difficult to observe and maintain [5]. Groundwater samples from Chennai, India, were reported to contain fibrous and fragment-shaped microplastics [6]. When synthetic microfibers are too small to be filtered by wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), they can leach into soil via land-applied WWTP’s biosolids [7][8][9][10] and/or may directly be dispensed as grey water out of a septic tank, creating a conduit for microfibers to infiltrate groundwater systems [5][11]. Median and maximum concentrations of microplastics (microfibers) measuring 6.4 and 15.2 n/L, respectively, were observed in a karst groundwater aquifer system [12]. A low concentration of microplastics measuring 0.0007 n/L was reported in Holdorf, Germany, which was smaller than other microplastic concentrations observed in groundwater around the world [13]. In an alluvial sedimentary unconfined aquifer area (agricultural area), groundwater was found to be contaminated with microplastics with a concentration of 38 ± 8 n/L [14]. Groundwater contamination with microplastics [15] and numerous metals, such as Pb, Cu, Cd, As, Zn, and Mn, has been linked with landfills [16] at Chennai and Tamil Nadu, India. These investigations constitute the most recent contributions to the knowledge on groundwater contamination with microplastics, and distribution comments and remarks have been made and published for those investigations [17][18]. The above studies have provided data indicating that research on groundwater should receive international attention.
Therefore, qualifying and quantifying microplastics in groundwater may require a multi-pronged strategy with careful sampling methods and alternative approaches, making it more complicated than studies of other freshwater environments [19]. There have been a few published research and research on groundwater contamination with microplastics. Some of these studies related the problem with soil pollution and determined that soil acts as a potential conduit for microplastics to enter groundwater systems [20][21][22][23]. There is a possibility that microplastics can reach groundwater situated below agricultural or cultivated land [24] The two most common transport systems are horizontal and vertical transportation [25]; horizontal transport of microplastic in soil mostly occurs via surface runoff and wind erosion [26][27], whereas vertical transportation of microplastic in the soil is mainly influenced by microorganisms and earthworms, which increase the risk of microplastic contamination in groundwater systems [9][26].
PE and PET are the most common microplastic materials in groundwater pollution systems [13][14][23][28][29] and fragments and fibers are the most common shapes. There are five main sources and causes of microplastics in groundwater: landfill leachate, soil migration, wastewater effluent, surface runoff from mulching waste [30], and human activities related to plastic usage and disposal [12][16][29][31]. When compared with groundwater microplastic contamination, the surface water contamination is considerably higher since it has directly been impacted and contaminated by anthropogenic activity. WWTPs and Sewage treatment plants (STPs) serve as pathways for microplastics to enter the surface water when such water sources are located near the WWTP and STP areas [32][33]. PE, polypropylene (PP), and polystyrene (PS) are the most abundant types found in the surface water, and fragments, fibers, and films are mostly common shapes [33][34]. Unlike in groundwater, PET is not abundant in surface water because the density of PET is higher than that of the surface water [35].
Landfill leachates are mainly responsible for heavy and hazardous metal contamination in groundwater systems [16][36][37]. Microplastics can absorb persistent organic pollutants and metals and may act as a transporter of these hazardous substances in the subsurface water, soil, and/or groundwater [26][38][39]. The leachate pollution index [40] related to groundwater contamination presents a gap in the research and should be investigated in the future. Washing clothes made from synthetic materials can produce microfibers in the wastewater or septic tank effluent, which is a potential source of microplastics (microfibers) in the hyporheic zone, the zone between surface and groundwater [41] and groundwater systems [6][12][42][43].

2. Effect of Groundwater Microplastics on Health of Humans, Plants, and Other Species

There has been almost no research on the impacts and effects of groundwater microplastic contamination [20][44]. This reveals a major gap in the research that needs to be filled in the future. To reach the groundwater, microplastics need to be smaller than soil pores, as this allows them to pass through the soil layers [45][46][47][48][49], which indicates the degradation of larger plastic waste that is buried in soil [50]. Soils contain macropores (>0.08 mm) and micropores (<0.08 mm) which drive cracks, fissures, and fractures [51]. Some external factors such as earthquakes and liquefaction can also play a vital role in shaking down the soil pores. This creates new paths in the groundwater system, posing a hazard. Additionally, if the soil layer is too shallow and the groundwater level is high, there is a higher chance that microplastic can pass the soil horizon and enter the groundwater environments easily. Drinking water from groundwater contaminated with smaller microplastic particles is a major issue [52][53]. Although the direct effects of groundwater microplastics on human health have not been studied, there is evidence that microplastics bear adverse effects on humans, such as contributing to cardiovascular diseases, skin irritation, cancer, reproductive effects, and respiratory and digestive problems [11][54][55][56][57][58][59].
Research on the effects of microplastics on plants is still in its infancy [29]. According to P. Wanner [24], microplastics are more likely to reach groundwater below farmland or agricultural land. The potential uptake routes mostly occur through the soil and in some farmlands, by the plant roots. Exposing crops to microplastic contaminated groundwater could trigger microplastic uptake throughout plant roots or a change in soil characteristics, both of which could impact plant development [15][60]. Microplastic uptake by microbial activity and plant roots pose a hazard to edible plants and can eventually be distributed up the food chain system [61]. Groundwater contaminated with microplastics is dangerous for use as drinking water or in agricultural processes for human health and is more dangerous than consuming contaminated seafood and fish [5]. In the case of agricultural processes, a microplastic waste cycling system can be developed if groundwater contaminated from the vertical transport of microplastics is used for agricultural and cultivated land. The increase in microplastic contamination in groundwater can impose a destructive effect on groundwater microorganisms. There are several unique faunas in groundwater, such as troglofaunal [62][63][64][65][66] and stygofauna [29], which could be vulnerable to microplastic contamination. However, the exact mechanism underlying how groundwater microplastics affect such faunal species remains unknown and requires additional research.

3. Strategies for Groundwater Microplastic Management

The study of microplastic contamination in groundwater and strategies for groundwater microplastic management are in the early stages. Reports of groundwater contaminated with heavy metals, arsenic, fluoride, chloride (salinization), coliform bacteria, pesticides, petrochemicals, nitrates, light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPL), dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL), pathogens, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) [67][68] surfaced prior to the issue of microplastic pollution emerging. Now, this too poses a serious threat to human health and natural environments as with the other pollutants [20]. Strategies to manage microplastic pollution in groundwater should focus on three main factors: (1) preventive measures and developing national and international rules and regulations, (2) remediation of microplastics that have entered groundwater, and (3) increasing social awareness and encouraging the usage of biodegradable plastics. To reduce the severity of microplastic contamination in groundwater, the quantity of contaminants from different sources needs to be controlled [26][69][70].
One example of prevention measures through national policy is the banning of cosmetic products that contain microplastic beads, which represented the major source of primary microplastics in the United States in 2017 [71]. At the same time, several countries in the EU have already banned or imposed taxes on plastic bags as an effort towards plastic reduction [72]. The EU have been implementing restrictions on the usage of both single and multiple-use plastic bags with various strategies depending on the country [71][73]. By 2030, Europe aims to recycle more than half of all plastic waste. All plastic packaging will be reusable or recycled in order to reduce cost and to prevent microplastic [74]. According to Magnusson and Noren [75], microplastic is often found in the receiving water body from WWTPs, and thus, an initiative monitoring system is required. The United Nations launched 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 to maintain human peace and prosperity, eradicate poverty, and safeguard the planet’s resources for the future. Among the 17 SDGs, Goal 14 (Life Below Water) is the most relevant to microplastic pollution in the environment (mostly marine) [76]. Although no SDGs directly refer to microplastic contamination in groundwater, some SDGs relating to maintaining the health of aquifers are relevant to microplastic pollution management. According to Sinreich [77], different groundwater contaminants, such as heavy metals, arsenic, nitrates, LNAPL, and microplastics, require different remediation methods. There have been no recent studies on the remediation of groundwater microplastic; however, the mitigation of microplastics and other contaminants from groundwater has been studied [71][78][79][80]. The mitigation of microplastics in groundwater plays a vital role and should be carried out before remediation. Additionally, the mitigation of microplastics from soil and surface water is also helpful in mitigating and resolving microplastic contamination in groundwater systems [20][68][81]. Future research should focus on the remediation of microplastics in groundwater. Another strategy for the management of microplastics in groundwater is using biodegradable plastic material that can be completely degraded either anaerobically or aerobically in the environment [48][82]. The impact of which biodegradable plastic can have on hydrological environments and marine species remains a controversial topic [83][84]. However, microplastics in the soil can be reduced by using biodegradable plastic in agricultural or cultivated lands [85]. Therefore, using biodegradable plastic can help reduce the potential impact of microplastics on groundwater indirectly since the soil can provide a potential pathway for microplastics to enter the groundwater environment. Biodegradable plastic will continue to have an undeniable and favorable influence on applications that are likely to end up in the environment [82][86]. It is also necessary to develop organized and systematic methods, protocols, and strategies for reducing microplastic contamination in groundwater through local and international governments and/or agencies.

References

  1. Lapworth, D.J.; Baran, N.; Stuart, M.E.; Ward, R.S. Emerging organic contaminants in groundwater: A review of sources, fate and occurrence. Environ. Pollut. 2012, 163, 287–303.
  2. Prasad, B.; Sangita, K. Heavy metal pollution index of ground water of an abandoned open cast mine filled with fly ash: A case study. Mine Water Environ. 2008, 27, 265–267.
  3. Erostate, M.; Huneau, F.; Garel, E.; Ghiotti, S.; Vystavna, Y.; Garrido, M.; Pasqualini, V. Groundwater dependent ecosystems in coastal Mediterranean regions: Characterization, challenges and management for their protection. Water Res. 2020, 172, 115461.
  4. Siebert, S.; Henrich, V.; Frenken, K.; Burke, J. Update of the Digital Global Map of Irrigation Areas to Version 5 DOCUMENTATION; Technical Report; Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität: Bonn, Germany; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2013; Volume 7, pp. 1–172.
  5. Re, V. Shedding light on the invisible: Addressing the potential for groundwater contamination by plastic microfibers. Hydrogeol. J. 2019, 27, 2719–2727.
  6. Kumar, R.; Sharma, P. Microplastics Pollution Pathways to Groundwater in India. 2021. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348008657 (accessed on 3 January 2022).
  7. Rillig, M.C. Microplastic in Terrestrial Ecosystems and the Soil? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 6453–6454.
  8. Habib, D.; Locke, D.C.; Cannone, L.J. Synthetic fibers as indicators of municipal sewage sludge, sludge products, and sewage treatment plant effluents. Water Air Soil Pollut. 1998, 103, 1–8.
  9. 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, 5800–5808.
  10. Zubris, K.A.V.; Richards, B.K. Synthetic fibers as an indicator of land application of sludge. Environ. Pollut. 2005, 138, 201–211.
  11. Hurley, R.R.; Nizzetto, L. Fate and occurrence of micro (nano) plastics in soils: Knowledge gaps and possible risks. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2018, 1, 6–11.
  12. Panno, S.V.; Kelly, W.R.; Scott, J.; Zheng, W.; McNeish, R.E.; Holm, N.; Hoellein, T.J.; Baranski, E.L. Microplastic contamination in karst groundwater systems. Groundwater 2019, 57, 189–196.
  13. Mintenig, S.M.; Löder, M.G.J.; Primpke, S.; Gerdts, G. Low numbers of microplastics detected in drinking water from ground water sources. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 648, 631–635.
  14. Samandra, S.; Johnston, J.M.; Jaeger, J.E.; Symons, B.; Xie, S.; Currell, M.; Ellis, A.V.; Clarke, B.O. Microplastic contamination of an unconfined groundwater aquifer in Victoria, Australia. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 802, 149727.
  15. Natesan, U.; Vaikunth, R.; Kumar, P.; Ruthra, R.; Srinivasalu, S. Spatial distribution of microplastic concentration around landfill sites and its potential risk on groundwater. Chemosphere 2021, 277, 130263.
  16. Selvam, S.; Jesuraja, K.; Venkatramanan, S.; Roy, P.D.; Kumari, V.J. Hazardous microplastic characteristics and its role as a vector of heavy metal in groundwater and surface water of coastal south India. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 402, 123786.
  17. Lee, J.Y.; Cha, J.; Jeong, E.; Kim, Y.I. Comment on “Spatial distribution of microplastic concentration around landfill sites and its potential risk on groundwater”. Chemosphere 2021, 284, 131376.
  18. Jeong, E.; Lee, J.Y. Comment on “Hazardous microplastic characteristics and its role as a vector of heavy metal in groundwater and surface water of coastal south India”. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 421, 126693.
  19. Kim, H.; Lee, J.Y. Emerging concerns about microplastic pollution on groundwater in South Korea. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5275.
  20. Chia, R.W.; Lee, J.Y.; Kim, H.; Jang, J. Microplastic pollution in soil and groundwater: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2021, 19, 4211–4224.
  21. Yu, M.; Van Der Ploeg, M.; Lwanga, E.H.; Yang, X.; Zhang, S.; Ma, X.; Ritsema, C.J.; Geissen, V. Leaching of microplastics by preferential flow in earthworm (Lumbricus terrestris) burrows. Environ. Chem. 2019, 16, 31–40.
  22. Rillig, M.C.; Ingraffia, R.; de Souza Machado, A.A. Microplastic incorporation into soil in agroecosystems. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1805.
  23. Rillig, M.C.; Ziersch, L.; Hempel, S. Microplastic transport in soil by earthworms. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1362.
  24. Wanner, P. Plastic in agricultural soils—A global risk for groundwater systems and drinking water supplies?—A review. Chemosphere 2021, 264, 128453.
  25. Yu, Q.; Hu, X.; Yang, B.; Zhang, G.; Wang, J.; Ling, W. Distribution, abundance and risks of microplastics in the environment. Chemosphere 2020, 249, 126059.
  26. O’Kelly, B.C.; El-Zein, A.; Liu, X.; Patel, A.; Fei, X.; Sharma, S.; Mohammad, A.; Goli, V.S.N.S.; Wang, J.J.; Li, D.; et al. Microplastics in soils: An environmental geotechnics perspective. Environ. Geotech. 2021, 8, 586–618.
  27. Li, J.; Song, Y.; Cai, Y. Focus topics on microplastics in soil: Analytical methods, occurrence, transport, and ecological risks. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 257, 113570.
  28. Weber, F.; Kerpen, J.; Wolff, S.; Langer, R.; Eschweiler, V. Investigation of microplastics contamination in drinking water of a German city. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 755, 143421.
  29. Huang, J.; Chen, H.; Zheng, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Gao, B. Microplastic pollution in soils and groundwater: Characteristics, analytical methods and impacts. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 425, 131870.
  30. Qadeer, A.; Ajmal, Z.; Usman, M.; Zhao, X.; Chang, S. Agricultural plastic mulching as a potential key source of microplastic pollution in the terrestrial ecosystem and consequences. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 175, 105855.
  31. Singhal, G.; Bansod, B.; Mathew, L.; Goswami, J.; Choudhury, B.U.; Raju, P.L.N. Comparison of parametric and non-parametric methods for chlorophyll estimation based on high-resolution UAV imagery. Curr. Sci. 2019, 117, 1874–1879.
  32. Alvim, C.B.; Mendoza-Roca, J.A.; Bes-Piá, A. Wastewater treatment plant as microplastics release source–quantification and identification techniques. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 255, 109739.
  33. Park, T.J.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, M.S.; Lee, J.K.; Park, J.H.; Zoh, K.D. Distributions of microplastics in surface water, fish, and sediment in the vicinity of a sewage treatment plant. Water 2020, 12, 3333.
  34. Sighicelli, M.; Pietrelli, L.; Lecce, F.; Iannilli, V.; Falconieri, M.; Coscia, L.; Di Vito, S.; Nuglio, S.; Zampetti, G. Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of Italian Subalpine Lakes. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 236, 645–651.
  35. Osorio, E.D.; Tanchuling, M.A.N.; Diola, M. Microplastics occurrence in surface waters and sediments in five river mouths of Manila Bay. Front. Environ. Sci. 2021, 9, 364.
  36. Christensen, T.H.; Kjeldsen, P.; Bjerg, P.L.; Jensen, D.L.; Christensen, J.B.; Baun, A.; Albrechtsen, H.J.; Heron, G. Biogeochemistry of landfill leachate plumes. Appl. Geochem. 2001, 16, 659–718.
  37. Mortula, M.M.; Atabay, S.; Fattah, K.P.; Madbuly, A. Leachability of microplastic from different plastic materials. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 112995.
  38. Połeć, M.; Aleksander-Kwaterczak, U.; Wątor, K.; Kmiecik, E. The occurrence of microplastics in freshwater systems—Preliminary results from Krakow (Poland). Geol. Geophys. Environ. 2018, 44, 391–400.
  39. Hodson, M.E.; Duffus-Hodson, C.A.; Clark, A.; Prendergast-Miller, M.T.; Thorpe, K.L. Plastic bag derived-microplastics as a vector for metal exposure in terrestrial invertebrates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 4714–4721.
  40. Kumar, D.; Alappat, B.J. Evaluating leachate contamination potential of landfill sites using leachate pollution index. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2005, 7, 190–197.
  41. Frei, S.; Piehl, S.; Gilfedder, B.S.; Löder, M.G.J.; Krutzke, J.; Wilhelm, L.; Laforsch, C. Occurence of microplastics in the hyporheic zone of rivers. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 15256.
  42. Browne, M.A.; Crump, P.; Niven, S.J.; Teuten, E.; Tonkin, A.; Galloway, T.; Thompson, R. Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines woldwide: Sources and sinks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 9175–9179.
  43. Shruti, V.C.; Pérez-Guevara, F.; Kutralam-Muniasamy, G. Metro station free drinking water fountain—A potential “microplastics hotspot” for human consumption. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 261, 114227.
  44. Qi, R.; Jones, D.L.; Li, Z.; Liu, Q.; Yan, C. Behavior of microplastics and plastic film residues in the soil environment: A critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 703, 134722.
  45. Bläsing, M.; Amelung, W. Plastics in soil: Analytical methods and possible sources. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 612, 422–435.
  46. Ren, Z.; Gui, X.; Xu, X.; Zhao, L.; Qiu, H.; Cao, X. Microplastics in the soil-groundwater environment: Aging, migration, and co-transport of contaminants—A critical review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 419, 126455.
  47. McGechan, M.B. SW—Soil and Water: Transport of Particulate and Colloid-sorbed Contaminants through Soil, Part 2: Trapping Processes and Soil Pore Geometry. Biosyst. Eng. 2002, 83, 387–395.
  48. Fahrenfeld, N.L.; Arbuckle-Keil, G.; Beni, N.N.; Bartelt-Hunt, S.L. Source tracking microplastics in the freshwater environment. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2019, 112, 248–254.
  49. Cey, E.E.; Rudolph, D.L.; Passmore, J. Influence of macroporosity on preferential solute and colloid transport in unsaturated field soils. J. Contam. Hydrol. 2009, 107, 45–57.
  50. Abu-Rukah, Y.; Al-Kofahi, O. The assessment of the effect of landfill leachate on ground-water quality—A case study. El-Akader landfill site—North Jordan. J. Arid Environ. 2001, 49, 615–630.
  51. Pathan, S.I.; Arfaioli, P.; Bardelli, T.; Ceccherini, M.T.; Nannipieri, P.; Pietramellara, G. Soil pollution from micro- and nanoplastic debris: A hidden and unknown biohazard. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7255.
  52. Campanale, C.; Massarelli, C.; Savino, I.; Locaputo, V.; Uricchio, V.F. A detailed review study on potential effects of microplastics and additives of concern on human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1212.
  53. Wang, L.; Wu, W.M.; Bolan, N.S.; Tsang, D.C.; Li, Y.; Qin, M.; Hou, D. Environmental fate, toxicity and risk management strategies of nanoplastics in the environment: Current status and future perspectives. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 401, 123415.
  54. Kurniawan, S.B.; Said, N.S.M.; Imron, M.F.; Abdullah, S.R.S. Microplastic pollution in the environment: Insights into emerging sources and potential threats. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2021, 23, 101790.
  55. He, P.; Chen, L.; Shao, L.; Zhang, H.; Lü, F. Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill: A source of microplastics?—Evidence of microplastics in landfill leachate. Water Res. 2019, 159, 38–45.
  56. Rai, P.K.; Lee, J.; Brown, R.J.; Kim, K.H. Environmental fate, ecotoxicity biomarkers, and potential health effects of micro- and nano-scale plastic contamination. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 403, 123910.
  57. Sana, S.S.; Dogiparthi, L.K.; Gangadhar, L.; Chakravorty, A.; Abhishek, N. Effects of microplastics and nanoplastics on marine environment and human health. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 44743–44756.
  58. Smith, M.; Love, D.C.; Rochman, C.M.; Neff, R.A. Microplastics in seafood and the implications for human health. Curr. Environ. Health Rep. 2018, 5, 375–386.
  59. De-la-Torre, G.E. Microplastics: An emerging threat to food security and human health. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 57, 1601–1608.
  60. de Souza Machado, A.A.; Lau, C.W.; Kloas, W.; Bergmann, J.; Bachelier, J.B.; Faltin, E.; Becker, R.; Görlich, A.S.; Rillig, M.C. Microplastics can change soil properties and affect plant performance. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 6044–6052.
  61. Igalavithana, A.D.; Mahagamage, M.G.Y.; Gajanayake, P.; Abeynayaka, A.; Gamaralalage, P.J.D.; Ohgaki, M.; Takenaka, M.; Fukai, T.; Itsubo, N. Microplastics and Potentially Toxic Elements: Potential Human Exposure Pathways through Agricultural Lands and Policy Based Countermeasures. Microplastics 2022, 1, 102–120.
  62. White, W.B. Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1988; Available online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=112.%09White%2C+W.B.+Geomorphology+and+Hydrology+of+Karst+Terrains%3B+1988&btnG= (accessed on 24 January 2022).
  63. Breitenbach, S. Breitenbach: Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology. 2008. Available online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Karst%20hydrogeology%20and%20geomorphology&publication_year=2008&author=S.%20Breitenbach (accessed on 24 January 2022).
  64. Momot, O.; Synzynys, B.; Kozmin, G.; Silin, I. Pollution of ground sources of drinking water with technogenic tritium. In Dangerous Pollutants (Xenobiotics) in Urban Water Cycle; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 331–340.
  65. Bloom, A.L. Water-Formed Structures: Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains. William B. White. Oxford University Press, New York, 1988. xiv, 464 pp., illus. $45. Science 1989, 243, 1618–1619. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/water-formed-structures-geomorphology-hydrology/docview/733242605/se-2?accountid=7411 (accessed on 24 January 2022).
  66. Oladoja, N.A.; Unuabonah, I.E. The pathways of microplastics contamination in raw and drinking water. J. Water Process Eng. 2021, 41, 102073.
  67. Kalhor, K.; Ghasemizadeh, R.; Rajic, L.; Alshawabkeh, A. Assessment of groundwater quality and remediation in karst aquifers: A review. Groundw. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 8, 104–121.
  68. Hara, K. Groundwater Contamination and Quality Management Policy in Asia. Int. Rev. Environ. Strateg 2006, 6, 291–306.
  69. Pasalari, H.; Farzadkia, M.; Gholami, M.; Emamjomeh, M.M. Management of landfill leachate in Iran: Valorization, characteristics, and environmental approaches. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 335–348.
  70. Gunarathne, V.; Ashiq, A.; Ramanayaka, S.; Wijekoon, P.; Vithanage, M. Biochar from municipal solid waste for resource recovery and pollution remediation. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 1225–1235.
  71. Picó, Y.; Barceló, D. Analysis and prevention of microplastics pollution in water: Current perspectives and future directions. ACS Omega 2019, 4, 6709–6719.
  72. Convery, F.; McDonnell, S.; Ferreira, S. The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2007, 38, 1–11.
  73. Steensgaard, I.M.; Syberg, K.; Rist, S.; Hartmann, N.B.; Boldrin, A.; Hansen, S.F. From macro-to microplastics-Analysis of EU regulation along the life cycle of plastic bags. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 224, 289–299.
  74. Foschi, E.; Bonoli, A. The commitment of packaging industry in the framework of the european strategy for plastics in a circular economy. Adm. Sci. 2019, 9, 18.
  75. Magnusson, K.; Noren, F. Screening of microplastic particles in and down-stream a wastewater treatment plant. Swed. Environ. Res. Inst. 2014, 55, 24. Available online: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A773505&dswid=-7132 (accessed on 16 February 2022).
  76. Walker, T.R. (Micro) plastics and the UN sustainable development goals. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2021, 30, 100497.
  77. Sinreich, M. Contaminant Attenuation in Karst Aquifers: A Paradigm Shift. In H2Karst Research in Limestone Hydrogeology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 175–184.
  78. Ni, B.J.; Zhu, Z.R.; Li, W.H.; Yan, X.; Wei, W.; Xu, Q.; Xia, Z.; Dai, X.; Sun, J. Microplastics mitigation in sewage sludge through pyrolysis: The role of pyrolysis temperature. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2020, 7, 961–967.
  79. Padervand, M.; Lichtfouse, E.; Robert, D.; Wang, C. Removal of microplastics from the environment. A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2020, 18, 807–828.
  80. Tofa, T.S.; Kunjali, K.L.; Paul, S.; Dutta, J. Visible light photocatalytic degradation of microplastic residues with zinc oxide nanorods. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 1341–1346.
  81. Fu, D.; Chen, C.M.; Qi, H.; Fan, Z.; Wang, Z.; Peng, L.; Li, B. Occurrences and distribution of microplastic pollution and the control measures in China. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 153, 110963.
  82. Paço, A.; Jacinto, J.; da Costa, J.P.; Santos, P.S.; Vitorino, R.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T. Biotechnological tools for the effective management of plastics in the environment. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 49, 410–441.
  83. Green, D.S.; Boots, B.; Sigwart, J.; Jiang, S.; Rocha, C. Effects of conventional and biodegradable microplastics on a marine ecosystem engineer (Arenicola marina) and sediment nutrient cycling. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 208, 426–434.
  84. Straub, S.; Hirsch, P.E.; Burkhardt-Holm, P. Biodegradable and Petroleum-Based Microplastics Do Not Differ in Their Ingestion and Excretion but in Their Biological Effects in a Freshwater Invertebrate Gammarus fossarum. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 774.
  85. Guo, J.J.; Huang, X.P.; Xiang, L.; Wang, Y.Z.; Li, Y.W.; Li, H.; Cai, Q.Y.; Mo, C.H.; Wong, M.H. Source, migration and toxicology of microplastics in soil. Environ. Int. 2020, 137, 105263.
  86. Filiciotto, L.; Rothenberg, G. Biodegradable Plastics: Standards, Policies, and Impacts. ChemSusChem 2021, 14, 56–72.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Environmental Sciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Naing Aung Khant
,
Heejung Kim
View Times: 1.1K
Entry Collection: Environmental Sciences
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 22 Jun 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback