Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)

Alissa Cordner; Gretta Goldenman; Linda S. Birnbaum; Phil Brown; Mark F. Miller; Rosie Mueller; Sharyle Patton; Derrick H. Salvatore; Leonardo Trasande

doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)

Alissa Cordner
, Gretta Goldenman
, Linda S. Birnbaum
, Phil Brown
, Mark F. Miller
, Rosie Mueller
, Sharyle Patton
, Derrick H. Salvatore
, Leonardo Trasande

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

It has come to our attention that we inaccurately described recent water treatment changes and associated costs in North Carolina. Following extensive contamination by a PFAS manufacturer in the Cape Fear River watershed, Brunswick County, North Carolina is spending $167.3 million on a reverse osmosis plantand the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority spent $46 million on granular activated carbon filters (not $99 million as we originally reported), with recurring annual costs of $2.9 million.We regret the error. This does not change the conclusions or arguments of our paper.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	12739
Number of pages	1
Journal	Environmental Science and Technology
Volume	55
Issue number	18
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04938
State	Published - 21 Sep 2021

Access to Document

10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

Cite this

Cordner, A., Goldenman, G., Birnbaum, L. S., Brown, P., Miller, M. F., Mueller, R., Patton, S., Salvatore, D. H., & Trasande, L. (2021). Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565). Environmental Science and Technology, 55(18), 12739. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

@article{0b131c19d96b408788855af7b788e7d7,

title = "Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)",

abstract = "It has come to our attention that we inaccurately described recent water treatment changes and associated costs in North Carolina. Following extensive contamination by a PFAS manufacturer in the Cape Fear River watershed, Brunswick County, North Carolina is spending \$167.3 million on a reverse osmosis plantand the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority spent \$46 million on granular activated carbon filters (not \$99 million as we originally reported), with recurring annual costs of \$2.9 million.We regret the error. This does not change the conclusions or arguments of our paper.",

author = "Alissa Cordner and Gretta Goldenman and Birnbaum, \{Linda S.\} and Phil Brown and Miller, \{Mark F.\} and Rosie Mueller and Sharyle Patton and Salvatore, \{Derrick H.\} and Leonardo Trasande",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society",

year = "2021",

month = sep,

day = "21",

doi = "10.1021/acs.est.1c04938",

language = "English",

volume = "55",

pages = "12739",

journal = "Environmental Science and Technology",

issn = "0013-936X",

publisher = "American Chemical Society",

number = "18",

}

Cordner, A, Goldenman, G, Birnbaum, LS, Brown, P, Miller, MF, Mueller, R, Patton, S, Salvatore, DH & Trasande, L 2021, 'Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)', Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 55, no. 18, pp. 12739. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

TY - JOUR

T1 - Erratum

T2 - The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)

AU - Cordner, Alissa

AU - Goldenman, Gretta

AU - Birnbaum, Linda S.

AU - Brown, Phil

AU - Miller, Mark F.

AU - Mueller, Rosie

AU - Patton, Sharyle

AU - Salvatore, Derrick H.

AU - Trasande, Leonardo

PY - 2021/9/21

Y1 - 2021/9/21

N2 - It has come to our attention that we inaccurately described recent water treatment changes and associated costs in North Carolina. Following extensive contamination by a PFAS manufacturer in the Cape Fear River watershed, Brunswick County, North Carolina is spending $167.3 million on a reverse osmosis plantand the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority spent $46 million on granular activated carbon filters (not $99 million as we originally reported), with recurring annual costs of $2.9 million.We regret the error. This does not change the conclusions or arguments of our paper.

AB - It has come to our attention that we inaccurately described recent water treatment changes and associated costs in North Carolina. Following extensive contamination by a PFAS manufacturer in the Cape Fear River watershed, Brunswick County, North Carolina is spending $167.3 million on a reverse osmosis plantand the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority spent $46 million on granular activated carbon filters (not $99 million as we originally reported), with recurring annual costs of $2.9 million.We regret the error. This does not change the conclusions or arguments of our paper.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85114933024

U2 - 10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

DO - 10.1021/acs.est.1c04938

M3 - Comment/debate

C2 - 34472851

AN - SCOPUS:85114933024

SN - 0013-936X

VL - 55

SP - 12739

JO - Environmental Science and Technology

JF - Environmental Science and Technology

IS - 18

ER -

Erratum: The True Cost of PFAS and the Benefits of Acting Now (Environ. Sci. Technol. (2021) 55:14 (9630−9633) DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03565)

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this