Implications of Bottled Water Use in Rural Central Appalachia
| dc.contributor.author | Albi, Kate Nicole | en |
| dc.contributor.committeechair | Krometis, Leigh-Anne H. | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Ling, Erin James | en |
| dc.contributor.committeemember | Cohen, Alasdair | en |
| dc.contributor.department | Biological Systems Engineering | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-05-22T08:00:15Z | en |
| dc.date.available | 2024-05-22T08:00:15Z | en |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-05-21 | en |
| dc.description.abstract | An increasing number of Americans identify bottled water as their preferred water source to meet household needs, despite additional expenses and less stringent quality reporting requirements. Previous studies note perceptions of poor water quality and/or distrust in public water authorities as the primary drivers of bottled water use. Examinations of Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) violation data validate these perceptions and highlight the increased prevalence of drinking water disparities in rural, low-income communities. This effort aims to assess in-home and bottled drinking water throughout rural Central Appalachia: a documented water inequity hotspot. To evaluate the uses, perceptions, motivations, expenditures, and quality related to in-home and bottled water sources, 24 homes in three different Central Appalachian counties were recruited to complete household surveys. Concurrently, 23 in-home (11 municipally and 12 privately sourced), 11 brands of bottled water, and four roadside spring samples identified as preferred drinking water sources were collected and analyzed for regulated (bacteria, inorganic ions) and emerging (per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), microplastics) contaminants via Standard Methods and compared to Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) standards (if applicable). The majority of respondents viewed their in-home water quality as satisfactory or less due to negative organoleptic perceptions (taste, odor, appearance). In-home and roadside spring water quality generally aligned with poor perceptions: coliform bacteria, E. coli, aluminum, iron, manganese, and sodium were detected at concentrations above United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) standards and guidelines. Approximately 71 percent of homes reported bottled water as their primary drinking water source. Bottled water samples did not exceed any USEPA health-based regulations. The presence of inorganic ions contaminants varied greatly across the 11 brands of bottled water assessed, and within brand variability was noted in one bottled water brand purchased at two different locations. PFAS compounds were detected in both in-home and bottled water samples, though at relatively low levels. Microplastic particles were found in all samples, regardless of source. Statistical analyses revealed significantly higher concentrations of all contaminants in point-of-use samples compared to bottled water, except total microplastic particle count. Bottled water is a safe drinking water source for those without access to or confidence in their in-home drinking water, though associated time and financial burdens are considerable. | en |
| dc.description.abstractgeneral | An increasing number of Americans regularly choose bottled water over tap water as their preferred water source. Previous studies claim this is because of poor home tap water quality and/or distrust in public water sources. This study aims to understand tap and bottled drinking water quality and opinions in rural West Virginia and Kentucky, where unavailable and/or unsafe tap water has been reported. Through partnerships with nonprofits in West Virginia and Kentucky, 24 homeowners were interviewed about their household water sources, uses, perceptions, motivations, and expenses. Water samples were also collected from homes, locally purchased bottled water, and other sources, including roadside springs. These samples were analyzed for regulated (bacteria, metals, nutrients) and emerging (per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), microplastics) contaminants and compared to federally enforceable standards for safety and aesthetics (if applicable). The majority of participants described their in-home water quality as satisfactory or poor due to unpleasant taste, odor, and appearance. This finding aligned with in-home water quality results, which found coliform bacteria, E. coli, aluminum, iron, manganese, and sodium levels above United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) standards and guidelines. Most homes (71 percent) reported bottled water as their primary drinking water source. While bottled water samples did not exceed any USEPA health-based standards or guidelines, homeowners reported spending an average of $68–80/month and driving up to 1 hour and 45 minutes to buy it. Emerging contaminants (PFAS and microplastics) were detected in all bottled and tap-water samples at relatively low levels. Therefore, although bottled water is a safe drinking water source for those without access to or confidence in their tap water, having to regularly purchase it represents a significant household burden. | en |
| dc.description.degree | Master of Science | en |
| dc.format.medium | ETD | en |
| dc.identifier.other | vt_gsexam:39997 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10919/119046 | en |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.publisher | Virginia Tech | en |
| dc.rights | In Copyright | en |
| dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | en |
| dc.subject | Appalachia | en |
| dc.subject | bottled water | en |
| dc.subject | drinking water | en |
| dc.subject | PFAS | en |
| dc.subject | microplastics | en |
| dc.title | Implications of Bottled Water Use in Rural Central Appalachia | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | en |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Biological Systems Engineering | en |
| thesis.degree.grantor | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | en |
| thesis.degree.level | masters | en |
| thesis.degree.name | Master of Science | en |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1