Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 23, Issue 13, pp 13581–13584 | Cite as

Cosmet’eau—Changes in the personal care product consumption practices: from whistle-blowers to impacts on aquatic environments

  • Adèle Bressy
  • Catherine Carré
  • Émilie Caupos
  • Bernard de Gouvello
  • José-Frédéric Deroubaix
  • Jean-Claude Deutsch
  • Romain Mailler
  • Anthony Marconi
  • Pascale Neveu
  • Laurent Paulic
  • Sébastien Pichon
  • Vincent Rocher
  • Irina Severin
  • Mathilde Soyer
  • Régis Moilleron
Research and Education Highlights

Abstract

The Cosmet’eau project (2015–2018) investigates the “changes in the personal care product (PCP) consumption practices: from whistle-blowers to impacts on aquatic environments.” In this project, the example of PCPs will be used to understand how public health concerns related to micropollutants can be addressed by public authorities—including local authorities, industries, and consumers. The project aims to characterize the possible changes in PCP consumption practices and to evaluate the impact of their implementation on aquatic contamination. Our goals are to study the whistle-blowers, the risk perception of consumers linked with their practices, and the contamination in parabens and their substitutes, triclosan, and triclocarban from wastewater to surface water. The project investigates the following potential solutions: modifications of industrial formulation or changes in consumption practices. The final purpose is to provide policy instruments for local authorities aiming at building effective strategies to fight against micropollutants in receiving waters.

Keywords

Consumption practices Endocrine disruptors Micropollutants Parabens Personal care products Source reduction Urban water cycle Whistle-blowers 

References

  1. Bedoux G, Roig B, Thomas O et al (2012) Occurrence and toxicity of antimicrobial triclosan and by-products in the environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 19:1044–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Botta F, Alliot F, Dulio V, et al (2014) Parabens in water and sediment: occurrence in river and lakes in different rural and urban environments. 24th annual Meeting of SETAC Europe, Basel, Switzerland, 11–15 May 2014Google Scholar
  3. Brausch JM, Rand GM (2011) A review of personal care products in the aquatic environment: environmental concentrations and toxicity. Chemosphere 82:1518–1532. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.11.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bressy A, Gromaire MC, Lorgeoux C et al (2012) Towards the determination of an optimal scale for stormwater quality management: micropollutants in a small residential catchment. Water Res 46:6799–6810. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bressy A, Lorgeoux C, Mirande-Bret C et al (2013) Ability of polymeric membranes to take into account pollution peaks: exposure to continuous and discontinuous PAH pollution in pilot riverGoogle Scholar
  6. Carey DE, McNamara PJ (2015) The impact of triclosan on the spread of antibiotic resistance in the environment. Front Microbiol. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00780
  7. Chateauraynaud F (2013) Lanceur d’alerte. In: Casillo I, avec Barbier R, Blondiaux L, Chateauraynaud F, Fourniau J-M, Lefebvre R, Neveu C, et Salles D (eds) Dictionnaire critique et interdisciplinaire de la participation, Paris, GIS Démocratie et ParticipationGoogle Scholar
  8. Cladiere M, Gasperi J, Gilbert S et al (2010) Alkylphenol ethoxylates and bisphenol A in surface water within a heavily urbanized area, such as Paris. In: Marinov AM, Brebbia CA (eds) Water pollution X. Wit Press, Southampton, pp 131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dardre PD, Aljarrah A, Miller WR, et al (2004) Concentrations of parabens in human breast tumours. J Appl Toxicol 24:5–13. doi:10.1002/jat.958
  10. DeLeo PC, Sedlak RI (2014) Comment on “On the Need and Speed of Regulating Triclosan and Triclocarban in the United States.”. Environ Sci Technol 48:11021–11022. doi:10.1021/es503494j CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eriksson E, Andersen HR, Madsen TS, Ledin A (2009) Greywater pollution variability and loadings. Ecological Engineering 35:661–669. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.10.015
  12. Ficheux AS, Wesolek N, Chevillotte G, Roudot AC (2015) Consumption of cosmetic products by the French population. First part: frequency data. Food Chem Toxicol 78:159–169. doi:10.1016/j.fct.2015.01.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gasperi J, Geara D, Lorgeoux C, et al (2014) First assessment of triclosan, triclocarban and paraben mass loads at a very large regional scale: Case of Paris conurbation (France). Science of The Total Environment 493:854–861. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.079
  14. Gomez E, Pillon A, Fenet H et al (2005) Estrogenic activity of cosmetic components in reporter cell lines: parabens, UV screens, and musks. J Toxicol Environ Health A 68:239–251. doi:10.1080/15287390590895054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gourlay-Francé C, Bressy A, Uher E, Lorgeoux C (2011) Labile, dissolved and particulate PAHs and trace metals in wastewater: passive sampling, occurrence, partitioning in treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 63:1327–1333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Halden RU (2014a) On the need and speed of regulating triclosan and triclocarban in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 48:3603–3611. doi:10.1021/es500495p CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Halden RU (2014b) Response to Comment on “On the Need and Speed of Regulating Triclosan and Triclocarban in the United States.” Environ Sci Technol. doi: 10.1021/es5041333
  18. Haman C, Dauchy X, Rosin C, Munoz J-F (2015) Occurrence, fate and behavior of parabens in aquatic environments: a review. Water Res 68:1–11. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.09.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu J-L, Wong M-H (2013) Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs): a review on environmental contamination in China. Environ Int 59:208–224. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2013.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Luo Y, Guo W, Ngo HH et al (2014) A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment. Sci Total Environ 473–474:619–641. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.12.065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mailler R, Gasperi J, Coquet Y et al (2015) Study of a large scale powdered activated carbon pilot: removals of a wide range of emerging and priority micropollutants from wastewater treatment plant effluents. Water Res 72:315–330. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.10.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Margot J, Rossi L, Barry DA, Holliger C (2015) A review of the fate of micropollutants in wastewater treatment plants. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Water 2:457–487Google Scholar
  23. Mintel database (2015) Global market research and market insight. http://www.mintel.com. Accessed 29 May 2015
  24. Moilleron R (2015) Personal communication at the Cosmet'eau kick-off meeting, 26 January 2015, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  25. SCCS (2010) SCCS (Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety), Opinion on triclosan (antimicrobial resistance), 22 June 2010Google Scholar
  26. Schwarzenbach RP, Escher BI, Fenner K et al (2006) The challenge of micropollutants in aquatic systems. Science 313:1072–1077. doi:10.1126/science.1127291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tusseau-Vuillemin M-H, Gourlay C, Lorgeoux C et al (2007) Dissolved and bioavailable contaminants in the Seine river basin. Sci Total Environ 375:244–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yamamoto H, Tamura I, Hirata Y et al (2011) Aquatic toxicity and ecological risk assessment of seven parabens: individual and additive approach. Sci Total Environ 410–411:102–111. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.09.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yu Y, Huang Q, Wang Z et al (2011) Occurrence and behavior of pharmaceuticals, steroid hormones, and endocrine-disrupting personal care products in wastewater and the recipient river water of the Pearl River Delta, South China. J Environ Monit 13:871–878. doi:10.1039/C0EM00602E CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adèle Bressy
    • 1
  • Catherine Carré
    • 1
    • 2
  • Émilie Caupos
    • 1
  • Bernard de Gouvello
    • 1
    • 3
  • José-Frédéric Deroubaix
    • 1
  • Jean-Claude Deutsch
    • 4
  • Romain Mailler
    • 5
  • Anthony Marconi
    • 6
  • Pascale Neveu
    • 7
  • Laurent Paulic
    • 6
  • Sébastien Pichon
    • 5
  • Vincent Rocher
    • 5
  • Irina Severin
    • 4
  • Mathilde Soyer
    • 1
  • Régis Moilleron
    • 1
  1. 1.Leesu, UMR-MA 102, École des Ponts, UPEC, AgroParisTech, UPEChamps-sur-MarneFrance
  2. 2.Ladyss, UMR 7533, Université Paris 1 Panthéon SorbonneParisFrance
  3. 3.CSTBChamps-sur-MarneFrance
  4. 4.Arceau-IdFParisFrance
  5. 5.SIAAP, Direction du Développement et de la ProspectiveColombesFrance
  6. 6.Tronico VigiCellLa Roche-sur-YonFrance
  7. 7.Ville de Paris, Services techniques de l’eau et de l’assainissementParisFrance

Personalised recommendations