COVID-19: reported cases of contamination and effluents and drinking water.

Published on by in Case Studies

Hello to all researchers.  I wonder if we have reported cases of the presence of COVID-19 in treated effluents or drinking water? 

If so, could they provide the location and analytical information and results?  Because we can have more severe cases of dissemination exponentially if they occur. 

please post here and feel free to contact : Denis Fernandes, +55 (11) 998413377 Whatsapp, denis.fernandes.ambiental@gmail.com

Taxonomy

23 Answers

  2. It may seem a pedantic point, but the recent Dutch study, and many others, have found viral RNA  from the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in wastewater samples. This does not necessarily mean that the virus is still infectious.

    With so much misinformation circulating on the internet and elsewhere, it is important that things are reported and discussed accurately.

    2 Comments

    1. I do not have links to the actual science but this article suggests that viable SARS-CoV-2 virus is found in feces. It would be very wise to take a sensible precautionary approach to avoid putting worker's, their families and the community at greater risk ...

      Complacency kills.

      https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-covid-19-spread-through-feces.html

      1 Comment reply

      1. Harry, I agree 100% that we should not be complacent. My concern, however, is that some sections of the media and ill-informed social networkers read these articles and draw the wrong conclusions. Yes, there is evidence of viable virus in faeces (and there was similar evidence during the SARS outbreak). However various people have (incorrectly) interpreted the recent Dutch study as proof of viable virus in wastewater. There may be a risk, and we should take precautions accordingly.

    2. Jeremy. I agree with you 100%. People need to read such articles carefully before jumping to conclusions. For a reasonable assessment of the likely presence of viable COVID-19 in wastewater or its risk to drinking water supplies, there’s plenty of good published works on MERS and SARS, both of which are Coronaviruses.

  6. COVID-19 testing in city sewage

    Patient testing is limited, we need more ways to track COVID-19.

    In collaboration with researchers at MIT, Harvard, and Brigham and Women's Hospital we've launched a  pro bono  program to map COVID-19 across the U.S.


    https://www.biobot.io/covid19

    As part of the industry, Biobot may be receptive to discussing their research and tools?

    1 Comment

  7. COVID19 contamination in treated water indicates improper treatment to sewage/drinking water/ effluent. 

    In the traditional treatment processes, at the fag end, either chlorination or ozonation is envisaged to avoid any microbiological contamination. 

    This is done to ensure a certain excess of residual chlorine or ozone, then there is likelihood of further contamination, till it reaches the users. 

    The very fact that COVID19 was noticed in treated water, itself suggests that recontamination has happened & the same could not be prevented due to absence of residual chlorine/ozone. 

    Thus suffice it to say that under compliance of treatment standard alone has given rise to this observation. 

  11. Here's a second link that actually refers to the same institute's research, but also mentions the official Dutch governmental support health institute RIVM which did similar tests and came to the same conclusion.

    https://www.h2owaternetwerk.nl/h2o-actueel/kwr-vindt-coronavirus-in-rioolwater

    TO the right side of this web-page you can also follow a string of comments that still criticise the interpretation of the results (parts of RNA do not mean that the virus itself IS present in the water, but only WAS present somewhere upstream). For me irrelevant in case you want to determine where in the country the virus (re-)emerges, now or in the future.

  12. The established KWR water-research institute n the Netherlands has tested for various COVID-19 RNA strings in raw municipal wastewater, with which they started before first reported patients occured in the Netherlands, and repeated couple of times. Not to see if the sewage water is contageous but to see if this set-up would be useful to determine per sewage plant how many of the people are infected...also as a predictive measure after the first peak (which we are experiencing now) has wavered off,  in order to be pro-actively monitoring second/third etc. waves. THey did see a correlation, and propose to the state to instate this methodology.

    The amount of patients in the hospital are not a good indication of how many people are actually infected (including the ones not showing any symptoms, but do excrete it with their faeces into the sewer), since only the severe cases of patients end up in hospital. Also the fact that by far not all people who are 'suspect' are being tested, let alone who carry the virus but do not know it...

    KWR also tested the effluent of a conventional sewage plant located in the most heavily impacted area of the Netherlands (over-severe stress on the staff and IC rooms in the hospitals): no virus remains came out positive.

    Here's the link (Dutch however....google translate?) 

    https://utilities.nl/rioolwaterscreening-monitort-verspreiding-coronavirus/

  13. I have read que there is no evidence of coronavirus in wastewater or drinking water after the conventional treatment

  14. But it has been found in wastewater: https://www.rivm.nl/en/news/novel-coronavirus-found-in-wastewater

    2 Comments

    1. The Covid-19 virus has been found in wastewater f.i. at Schiphol airport. This means it was found on short distance from (and time after) it was released by a patient. Once in water the virus will not survive for longer than a few days. So the problem is eliminated without treatment of the wastewater. People in the wastewater utilities have to be careful en wear protection.

  16. Not a resent one, though feces with coronavirus had been found in sewage (cannot find the reference, which I read some days ago).
    These are from some years ago for other strains: 

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12560-008-9001-6

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135409000785

    https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-17819-2_5

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225390936_Survival_of_Coronaviruses_in_Water_and_Wastewater

    https://west.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/data/Gundy2008_Article_SurvivalOfCoronavirusesInWater.pdf

    And this report: https://www.mwwa.net/resources/2020_Coronavirus_Info_Operators%20(002).pdf

  18. Whilst the impact of the pandemic is clear and at times frightening, we need to remember that wastewater already contains many pathogens. They are indicators of the health of the population the treatment plant serves. If we are confident that wastewater treatment with final disinfection (UV or Cl2) is effective against known water borne bacterial and viral pathogens, then I don’t think Coronavirus is likely to pose a threat to plant operators, those taking reclaimed wastewater for re-use, or water sources from where water is extracted and treated to potable standards.

  19. UP  TO  DATE  IT  SEEMS  THAT  CORONAVIRUS IS  NOT  SPREADED  BY  WATER.

  23. I didn't know any contamination of the virus in drinking water see also under Aquatech Corona virus, as there is written no contamination risk in municipal water treatment. But there should be research how long can exist the virus in municipal water depend on Chlorine concentration. A lot of people have open cans /glasses with water for drinking. Turn empty glasses around and or cover if you are not alone in rooms. Same for open food sources. 

    1 Comment

    1. What is so far established is that the virus transmission is not waterborne otherwise the common gospel of washing and washing would have been futile in areas where aesthetically and bacteriologically suitable water is scarce. It is also still not established whether airborne covid 19 transmission is possible. I therefore feel that at this stage and without sufficient research on this barely 5 month old phenomenon,one can contempolate  or dismiss either an airborne or water borne contamination/transmission.

       

      1 Comment reply