» Articles » PMID: 35559977

Survey of Industrial Perceptions for the Use of Nanomaterials for In-home Drinking Water Purification Devices

Overview
Journal NanoImpact
Date 2022 May 13
PMID 35559977
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

As businesses, specifically technology developers and industrial suppliers, strive to meet growing demand for higher quality drinking water, the use of engineered nanomaterials in commercial point-of-use (POU) in-home water purification devices are becoming an increasingly important option. Anecdotally, some businesses appear wary of developing and marketing nanomaterial-enabled devices because of concerns that they will face onerous regulation and consumer pushback. However, little of substance is known about business perceptions of and attitudes toward the use of engineered nanomaterials in POU water purification devices, or how these compare with consumer perceptions. To address this knowledge-gap, we administered a 14-question survey among 65 participants from US-based industrial companies focused on drinking water purification. Our results indicate that the dominant concerns for businesses are costs and public perceptions associated with nanomaterial-enabled POU devices for drinking water purification. Cost-specific barriers include competition from more conventional technologies, and tensions between operational versus capital costs. 57% of respondents were concerned or very concerned that public perceptions will influence the long-term viability of nanomaterial-enabled POU devices for drinking water purification. 49% of respondents stated that government regulation of nanomaterials would be the preferred approach to ensure public safety, followed by the certification of POU devices (28%). When asked about specific nanomaterials and their potential use in POU devices for drinking water purification, respondents ranked carbon nanotubes as the nanomaterial with highest concern for environmental health and safety, followed by silver, titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, and copper. Respondents ranked nanoclays as the nanomaterial with highest likelihood for public acceptance, followed by silica, cerium oxide, titanium dioxide, and aluminum oxide.

Citing Articles

MAD Water: Integrating Modular, Adaptive, and Decentralized Approaches for Water Security in the Climate Change Era.

Wutich A, Thomson P, Jepson W, Stoler J, Cooperman A, Doss-Gollin J WIREs Water. 2024; 10(6).

PMID: 38162537 PMC: 10756426. DOI: 10.1002/wat2.1680.


Emerging Field of Nanotechnology in Environment.

Laxmi V, Singhvi N, Ahmad N, Sinha S, Negi T, Gupta V Indian J Microbiol. 2023; 63(3):244-252.

PMID: 37781004 PMC: 10533467. DOI: 10.1007/s12088-023-01092-7.


Renal transcriptome profiles in mice reveal the need for sufficient water intake irrespective of the drinking water type.

Shon W, Park M, Lee J, Shin J, Shin D Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):10911.

PMID: 35764881 PMC: 9240086. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-14815-5.


Implementation of Micro-EDM Monitoring System to Fabricate Antimicrobial Nanosilver Colloid.

Tseng K, Chung M, Chiu J Micromachines (Basel). 2022; 13(5).

PMID: 35630257 PMC: 9147843. DOI: 10.3390/mi13050790.


Survey of industrial perceptions for the use of nanomaterials for in-home drinking water purification devices.

Kidd J, Westerhoff P, Maynard A NanoImpact. 2022; 22:100320.

PMID: 35559977 PMC: 9106971. DOI: 10.1016/j.impact.2021.100320.


References
1.
Tong H, Li Z, Hu X, Xu W, Li Z . Metals in Occluded Water: A New Perspective for Pollution in Drinking Water Distribution Systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019; 16(16). PMC: 6720301. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16162849. View

2.
Sadrieh N, Wokovich A, Gopee N, Zheng J, Haines D, Parmiter D . Lack of significant dermal penetration of titanium dioxide from sunscreen formulations containing nano- and submicron-size TiO2 particles. Toxicol Sci. 2010; 115(1):156-66. PMC: 2855360. DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfq041. View

3.
Ginige M, Garbin S, Wylie J, Krishna K . Effectiveness of Devices to Monitor Biofouling and Metals Deposition on Plumbing Materials Exposed to a Full-Scale Drinking Water Distribution System. PLoS One. 2017; 12(1):e0169140. PMC: 5218461. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169140. View

4.
Brown K, Gessesse B, Butler L, MacIntosh D . Potential Effectiveness of Point-of-Use Filtration to Address Risks to Drinking Water in the United States. Environ Health Insights. 2017; 11:1178630217746997. PMC: 5731620. DOI: 10.1177/1178630217746997. View

5.
Liu H, Tang X, Liu Q . A novel point-of-use water treatment method by antimicrobial nanosilver textile material. J Water Health. 2014; 12(4):670-7. DOI: 10.2166/wh.2014.197. View