ISSN 2277-0836; Volume 2, Issue 5, pp. 106-109; July, 2013.

Journal of Agriculture and Biodiversity Research

2013 Online Research Journals
Review Paper
Available Online at http://www.onlineresearchjournals.org/JABR

Chemical Disinfection and Emerging

Challenges to Safe Drinking Water
E. M. Shaibu-Imodagbe
Samaru College of Agriculture, Division of Agricultural Colleges, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. E-mail:
imodagbe@abu.edu.ng; imodagbe@gmail.com; imodagbe@hotmail.com.
Received 24 May, 2013

Accepted 10 July, 2013

th

Disinfection had been identified as one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20 century.
However, in recent times, this same process has been implicated in the formation of over five hundred
(500) disinfection by-products many of which have been implicated in many debilitating diseases
including cancer. In view of this dichotomy, this review paper attempts to highlight the mechanisms by
which these disinfectants control pathogenic organisms in the course of drinking water treatment as
well as the degree to which these DBPs are formed with known disinfecting agents in the disinfection
process. This review identified chlorine as the oldest and cheapest disinfectant among the range of
chlorine, chloramine, chlorine dioxide, ozone and ultraviolet rays. It is also among the most efficient in
the control of various water borne pathogenic organisms. However, it is the most active DBPs producer
especially the Trihalomethanes DBPs which are noted for their highly carcinogenic properties.
Conversely the use of chlorine dioxide and ultraviolet disinfection in drinking water treatment are noted
to have minimal to zero DBPs formation potentials. This review concludes that while DBPs formation
opens up additional frontier in the disinfection process, it advocates a combined effort of removing
DBPs precursors in drinking water treatment and the selection of suitable disinfectant with minimal
DBPs formation potentials. Furthermore, this should be complimented with detailed research into the
formation, assessment and control of DBPs in drinking water treatment to produce wholesome and
potable drinking water. This is because there is no viable alternative to disinfection in the supply of
potable drinking water to households.
Key words:Disinfection, disinfectant, microbial pathogens, water borne diseases, drinking water.

INTRODUCTION
Surface drinking water has been known to be laden with
impurities which are either naturally or anthropogenically
introduced. In view of this many water treatment
techniques have evolved over the years resulting in
different quality drinking waters. In the past, treatment
strategies include the heating of water with hot metals
and solar energy to inactivate and rid the water of its
contaminants. Later measures included boiling to kill to
microbial contaminants and filtration with linen to remove
suspended and some dissolved solids [1]. Currently large
municipal drinking water supplies are subjected to
conventional
water
treatment
options
involving
modification of previous strategies. These use screening
methods to ensure filtration and removal of all floating
objects, flocculating and precipitating agents (coagulants)
of the finely divided suspended solids and sedimentation

to separate the suspended solids from the water. Slaked

or hydrated lime is added to remove excessive hardness
and correct acidity if any. If the water has undesirable
taste, aeration is applied to oxidise and remove causes of
the undesirable taste. Subsequently, the treated water is
subjected to disinfection [2].
Disinfection became part of the drinking water
treatment process in 1904 when chlorination was first
introduced into the drinking water treatment process in
the water supply to New Jersey, U.S.A. Since then
chlorination had become the worlds most popular
method of disinfection. The disinfection process is to
ensure the inactivation of all microbial pathogens in the
water. Sometimes the disinfectant kills the pathogenic
micro-organisms or inactivates their cysts. Majority of
disinfectants used in treating drinking water are

Shaibu-Imodagbe

chemicals [3]. Since then many other chemicals including

chlorine dioxide, chloramine (monochloramine) and
ozone are successfully used for municipal drinking water
treatment. These chemical disinfectants have varying
attributes and weaknesses. However, chlorine is still the
most widespread disinfectant in use in the water
treatment industry due to the relative lower cost of the
chlorine gas or pellets in relation to other chemical
disinfectants including its hypochlorous form. But among
the factors which are important to successful chlorination
are the concentrations of free chlorine, the contact time,
the temperature, pH and turbidity levels [1]. Chlorine also
has additional advantage of a variety of possible
application points and can therefore be used as a primary
and secondary disinfectant. It was reported that chlorine
has wide ranging successes in the control of bacteria and
viruses even in residual levels in the distribution system
as a secondary disinfectant [4]. One is not unmindful of
the difficult handling properties of the chlorine gas as a
disinfectant. This is why many developing countries are
now using the calcium or sodium hypochlorite forms in
the water treatment process.
Role of Disinfectants in Wholesome drinking water
delivery
In developing countries like Nigeria, microbial
contaminants of drinking water sources have continued to
pose the greatest health challenges in view of water
borne diseases which have been identified to be among
the five predominant causes of morbidity and mortality
[5]. While Snyder and Merson [6] had earlier reported
annual cases of 875 million of diarrhoeal afflictions with
4.6 million deaths among developing countries Reiff [5]
st
reported that between 1 January, 1991 and December
1993, there were more than 950,000 cases of cholera
with more than 9.000 deaths. With this picture,
disinfection in public water supply is considered the most
important process in drinking water treatment. It is
considered by many as one of the public health triumphs
th
of the 20 century especially among developing countries
which have considered it as the main barrier against the
transmission of water borne diseases [2,7]. Disinfectants
simultaneously serve to minimize DBP formation,
oxidation of iron and manganese (which add taste and
odours to drinking water), remove colour, control
nuisances, improve coagulation and filtration efficiencies
among others.
Mechanism of Pathogen Inactivation
The three primary mechanisms of pathogen inactivation
are to:
Destroy or impair cellular structural organization by
attacking major cell constituents, such as destroying the
cell wall or impairing the functions of semi-permeable

107

membranes;
Interfere with energy-yielding metabolism through
enzyme substrates in combination with prosthetic groups
of enzymes, thus rendering the enzymes non-functional;
and
Interfere with biosynthesis and growth by preventing
synthesis of normal proteins, nucleic acids, coenzymes,
or the cell wall.
Depending on the disinfectant and microorganism type,
combinations of these mechanisms can also be
responsible for pathogen inactivation. In water treatment,
it is believed that the primary factors controlling
disinfection efficiency are: the ability of the disinfectant to
oxidize or rupture the cell wall; and the ability of the
disinfectant to diffuse into the cell and interfere with
cellular activity [8].
Chlorine
It is the oldest and most popular disinfectant used in the
United States of America and many countries of the
world. It is used either in the form of chlorine gas or
chlorine pellets or in the form of calcium or sodium
hypochlorite [8].
Chlorine as a Primary Disinfectant
A disinfection barrier is a common component of primary
treatment of drinking water. Primary disinfection is
typically a chemical oxidation process, although
ultraviolet (UV) irradiation and membrane treatment are
gaining increased attention. This section looks at chlorine
as a chemical disinfectant in terms of its effectiveness
against various pathogenic microorganisms.
Chlorine gas and water react to form hypochlorous acid
(HOCl) and hydrochloric acid (HCl). In turn, the HOCl

dissociates into the hypochlorite ion (OCl ) and the

+
hydrogen ion (H ), according to the following reactions:
(a) Cl2 + H2OHOCl + HCl Inactivation (disinfection)
processes
+

(b) HOCl H + OCl

The reactions are reversible and pH dependent:
between pH 3.5 and 5.5, HOCl is the predominant
species

between about pH 5.5 and 9.5, both HOCl and OCl

species exist in various proportions

above pH 8, OCl predominates. The OCl and HOCl

species are commonly referred to as free chlorine, which
is extremely reactive with numerous components of the
bacterial cell. HOCl can produce oxidation, hydrolysis
and deamination reactions with a variety of chemical
substrates, and produces physiological lesions that may

108

J Agric Biodivers Res

affect several cellular processes [8,9]. Earlier findings

had established that chlorine destroys microorganisms by
combining with proteins to form N-chloro compounds.
According to the WHO [9] report, chlorine had long been
found to have powerful effects on sulfhydryl groups of
proteins and to convert several amino acids by oxidation
into a mixture of corresponding nitriles and aldehydes.
But it noted that the exact product of the reaction is heavily
dependent on chlorine concentration and pH of the
medium.
Cytochromes, iron-sulphur proteins and nucleotides are
highly vulnerable to oxidative degradation by HOCl,
suggesting that chlorine causes physiological damage
primarily to the bacterial cell membranes. Also, many
authors as reported by the WHO [9] had earlier observed
that respiration, glucose transport and adenosine
triphosphate (ATP) levels all decrease in chlorine-treated
bacteria. According to USEPA [8], chlorine has rapid
lethal action near the cell membrane, altering the cell
DNA, adversely affecting cell respiration, DNA transport
and its activity rapidly preventing mutation and lesions as
principal inactivation mechanism of bacteria. It is also a
strong viricide, but with limited inactivation ability of
protozoans. From electron microscopy studies, it was
evident that chlorine results in morphological changes in
cell membrane, kill microbes by disrupting their
metabolism and protein synthesis or by purine and
pyrimidine bases modification. Thus in over 100 years of
chlorine disinfection of drinking water chlorine has been
effective in maintaining a significant control over the
microbial contaminants of drinking water [9].
Monochloramine
In dilute aqueous solutions (150 mg/l), chlorine reacts
with ammonia in a series of bimolecular reactions which
are pH and chlorine to nitrogen concentration dependent
HOCl + NH3 NH2Cl (monochloramine) + H20
HOCl + NH2Cl NHCl2 (dichloramine) + H20
HOCl + NHCl2 NCl3 (trichloramine) + H20
Even though these are the three competing reactions
when aqueous chlorine reacts with ammonia, the
monochloramine formation process is of importance in
disinfection and it occurs at pH 7 8 when Chlorine to
Nitrogen ratio is equimolar (5:1 by weight) or less [9].
Monochloramine kills bacteria by reacting mainly with
membrane bound enzymes and like free chlorine
molecules it combines with different functional groups in
the cell membrane in the inactivation of bacteria.
Chloramine is also noted to be more effective in
inactivation of many viruses than bacteria under the
same conditions. It was found not be effective in the
inactivation of Cryptosporidium spp and probably other
protozoan oocytes and cysts. It as such not
recommended as a primary disinfectant because of this
weak disinfecting power [9].

Chlorine dioxide
Chlorine dioxide is a strong oxidant that has been used in
the European Union as a secondary disinfectant in
drinking water supply. Chlorine dioxide is highly soluble in
water (particularly at low temperatures) and is effective
over a range of pH values (pH 510). Theoretically,
chlorine dioxide undergoes five valence changes in
oxidation to chloride ion:

ClO2 + 5e

Cl + 2O

However, in practice, chlorine dioxide is rarely reduced

completely to chloride ion. Chlorine dioxide inactivate
microorganisms through direct oxidation of tyrosine,
methionyl, or cysteine containing proteins, which
interferes with important structural regions of metabolic
enzymes or membrane proteins. In water treatment, chlorine
dioxide has the advantage of being a strong disinfectant
against bacteria, viruses and some protozoans Giardia
and Cryptosporidium spp, and even more effective than
chlorine at pH 8.5. It does not form trihalomethanes
(THMs) or oxidize bromide to bromate [9].
Ozone
Ozone is widely used in disinfecting drinking water in
Europe. Its inactivation of microbes is not fully
understood but it is thought to include both direct and
indirect reactions with the gas and with the free radicals
from its dissociation respectively. It is known to attack
unsaturated bonds forming carbonyl compounds and
participates in electrophilic and nucleophilic reactions
with aromatic compounds and components of microbial
cells. Carbohydrates and fatty acids react slightly with
ozone but amino acids, proteins, protein functional
groups and nucleic acids all react very rapidly with it.
Therefore, microbes become inactivated through ozone
acting on the cytoplasmic membrane (due to the large
number of functional proteins), the protein structure of a
virus capsid, or nucleic acids of microorganisms.
However, heterotrophic bacteria are less susceptible to
ozone inactivation than Giardia spp because these
bacteria contain carotenoid and flavonoid that protect
them from ozone [9].
Challenges from Disinfection in the Treatment of
Drinking Water
Chemical disinfection reduces the risk of water borne
infectious diseases, but the interaction between chemical
disinfectants and precursor materials in source water
results in the formation of disinfection by-products
(DBPs). Trichloroform (chloroform) was the first of these
DBPs to be discovered in treated drinking water in 1974,
with over 500 discovered by 1989 [10]. These DBPs have
been implicated in serious diseases including increasing
carcinogenicity and mutagenicity. Also, recent studies

Shaibu-Imodagbe

have shown that some bacteria especially of the coliform

group (like Escherichia coli, and Enterobacter cloacae)
are provided protection from inactivation from free
chlorine in water when associated with the amphipod
Hyalella azteca.. Similarly, colioform bacteria such as E.
coli, Enterobacter Cloacae, E. agglomerans, Citrobacter
freundii, Klebsiella pneumoniae and K. oxytoca and
several waterborne pathogens including Salmonella
typhimurium, Yersenia enterocolitica, Shigella sonnei,
Legionella gormanii and Campylobacter jejuni have been
reported to escape chlorine inactivation when ingested by
protozoa Acanthamoeba castellanii and Tetrahymena
pyriformis. It is the strongly held opinion that such
association is responsible for chlorination microbial
inactivation which led to outbreaks of water borne
diseases in epidemic proportions in recent time such as
the 1991 cholera outbreak in Peru, and Cryptosporidiosis
in Milwaukee in 1996 [11].
Over 500 DBPs have been discovered by 1989 with
many more in recent times [10,12]. Bougeared et al [13]
noted the impact of bromine in treated water resulted in
speciation of the DBPs while Krasner [14] had earlier
noted that the frontier of recent emerging DBPs is
expanding to include iodinated trihalomethanes and acids,
haloacetonitriles, halonitromethanes, halocetaldehydes
and nitrosamines which may be more toxic than bromine
containing THMs and haloacetic acids. By these, the
problems of DBPs, their formations and effects are
becoming more complex and monumental by the day
despite the belief by developing countries that microbial
safety (provided by chemical disinfectants) takes
precedence over associated health risks of DBPs [5,7].
Conclusion
As more multidimensional studies about DBPs are
underway to discover more, also more efforts should be
geared towards identifying their effects and likely
controls. This is to achieve a balance between
disinfectant level, optimum microbial control and minimal
DBPs formation. Also alternative disinfectants with
minimal and zero DBPs as end products should be more
vigorously pursued and experimented on. Among this
group is the use of Chlorine dioxide and strong oxidising
agents like potassium permanganate in the preliminary
stages of drinking water treatment to remove organic
DBP precursors before the primary disinfection. Also, the
use of ultraviolet treatment as a disinfection method for
drinking water treatment should be comprehensively
assessed for adoption. This is in view of its promising
attributes as an alternative disinfectant.
REFERENCES
[1] USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency).
Environmental Pollution Control Alternatives: Drinking Water Treatment
for Small Communities; EPA/625/5-90/025, US Environmental

109

Protection Agency Office of Technology Transfer and Regulatory

Support, Washington, DC. USA, 1990.
[2] Shaibu-Imodagbe EM. Studies of Disinfection By-Products and
Heavy Metals in Ahmadu Bello University Drinking Water Supplies and
Operations of Some Treatment Plants, Unpublished PhD thesis
submitted to the School of Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello
University, Zaria, Nigeria. 2011.
[3] Wigle DT. Safe Drinking Water: A Public Health Challenge. Chronic
Dis Can, 1998; 19: 103-107.
[4] Clarke RM, Thurnau RC. Control of Microbes and DBPs in Drinking
Water: An Overview Controlling Disinfection By-Products and Microbial
Contamination in Drinking Water; edited by Clark RM, Boutin BK;
EPA/600/R-01/110 December, 1-5 to 1-12, 2001.
[5] Reiff FM. Balancing the chemical and Microbial risks in the
disinfection of drinking water supplies in developing countries.
Proceedings of the Rome Symposium (September, 1994) on Assessing
and Managing Health Risks from drinking water contamination;
Approaches and Applications, 1995; pp 2330.
[6] Snyder JD, Merson MH. The Magnitude of the Global Problem of
Acute Diarrhoeal Disease. A Review of Active Surveillance data. Bull
World Health Organizat, 1982; 60: 605-613.
[7] Schoeny R. Disinfection by-Products: A Question of Balance.
Environ. Health Perspect 118:a466-a467. Doi:10.1289/ehp.1003053
Nov. 2010.
[8] USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency).
Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants; In Disinfectant Use in Water
Treatment - EPA Guidance Manual 2, 2-10. April, 1999; pp 2-9 and P.
54http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/mdbp/upload/2001_01_
12_mdbp_alter_chapt_2.pdf (accessed 7/06/2012).
[9] WHO (World Health Organisation). Inactivation (Disinfection)
Processes In Water Treatment and Pathogen Control, 2004; pp 4165
http://www.who.int/publications/2004/9241562552.pdf.
(accessed
7/06/2012).
[10] Stevens AA, Moore LA, Miltner RJ. Formation and Control of nonTrihalomethane Disinfection by-Products. J Am Water Works Associat,
1989; 81(8): 54-60.
[11] Rice E. Disinfection: In Controlling Disinfection By-Products and
Microbial Contaminants in Drinking Water. EPA /600/R-01/110
December 2001, 5-1 to 5-14; Office of Research and Development US
EPA, Washington DC 20460, 2001.
[12] USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Basic
Information about Disinfection by-Products in Drinking Water: Total
Trihalomethanes, Haloacetic acids, Bromate and Chlorite. 2011;
http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/disinfectionbyp
roducts.cfn (accessed 13/02/2011).
[13] Bougeard CM, Goslan EH, Jefferson B, Parsons SA. Comparison
of the Disinfection by-Products Potentials of Treated Water Exposed to
Chlorine and Monochloramine. Water Res, 2010; 44(3): 729-740.
[14] Krasner SW. The formation and Control of Emerging Disinfection
By-Products of Health Concern. Philos Transact a Math Phys Eng Sci,
Oct 13, 2009; 367(1904): pp 4077-95.