PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment - Revision history

Admin at 19:36, 2 March 2026

2026-03-02T19:36:54Z

Admin at 21:01, 11 February 2026

2026-02-11T21:01:35Z

Admin at 20:53, 11 February 2026

2026-02-11T20:53:02Z

Admin at 20:52, 11 February 2026

2026-02-11T20:52:51Z

Admin at 15:34, 30 October 2024

2024-10-30T15:34:09Z

Admin at 18:47, 23 May 2024

2024-05-23T18:47:55Z

Show changes

Admin at 00:48, 28 April 2022

2022-04-28T00:48:10Z

Show changes

Jhurley: /* Established PFAS Treatment Technologies */

2021-05-11T18:51:54Z

‎Established PFAS Treatment Technologies

Jhurley: /* Anion Exchange */

2021-05-11T18:50:51Z

‎Anion Exchange

Jhurley: /* Conclusions */

2021-05-11T17:32:46Z

‎Conclusions

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 *[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]
 *[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]
 *[[PFAS Sources]]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]
 *[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]
 '''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Scott Grieco]] and [[James Hatton]]
 '''Key Resource(s):'''

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]
 *[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]
 '''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Scott Grieco]] and [[James Hatton]]
 '''Key Resource(s):'''

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]
 *[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]
 '''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Scott Grieco]] and [[James Hatton]]
 '''Key Resource(s):'''

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 *[[PFAS Sources]]
 *[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]
 *[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]
 *[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 * [[wikipedia: Ion_exchange | anion exchange (IX)]]
-However, these technologies are less demonstrated for removal of PFAS from more complex matrices such as wastewater and leachate. <onlyinclude>Site-specific considerations that affect the selection of optimum treatment technologies for a given site include water chemistry, required flow rate, treatment criteria, waste residual generation, residual disposal options, and operational complexity.  Treatability studies with site water are highly recommended because every site has different factors that may affect engineering design for these technologies. </onlyinclude>
+However, these technologies are less demonstrated for removal of PFAS from more complex matrices such as wastewater and leachate. <onlyinclude>Site-specific considerations that affect the selection of optimum treatment technologies for a given site include water chemistry, required flow rate, treatment criteria, waste residual generation, residual disposal options, and operational complexity.  Treatability studies with site water are highly recommended because every site has different factors that may affect engineering design for these technologies.
 ===Membrane Filtration===

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 ===Anion Exchange===
 <onlyinclude>Anion exchange has also been demonstrated for the adsorption of PFAS, and published results note higher sorption per pound than GAC</onlyinclude><ref name="McCleaf2017"/><ref name=" Senevirathna2010">Senevirathna, S.T.M.L.D., Tanaka, S., Fujii, S., Kunacheva, C., Harada, H., Shivakoti, B.R., and Okamoto, R., 2010. A comparative study of adsorption of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) onto granular activated carbon, ion-exchange polymers and non-ion-exchange polymers. Chemosphere, 80(6), pp. 647-651.  [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.04.053 DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.04.053]&nbsp;&nbsp; Free download from: [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chinagarn_Kunacheva/publication/44672056_A_comparative_study_of_adsorption_of_perfluorooctane_sulfonate_PFOS_onto_granular_activated_carbon_ion-exchange_polymers_and_non-ion-exchange_polymers/links/5a3380510f7e9b2a288a2b21/A-comparative-study-of-adsorption-of-perfluorooctane-sulfonate-PFOS-onto-granular-activated-carbon-ion-exchange-polymers-and-non-ion-exchange-polymers.pdf ResearchGate]</ref><ref name="Woodard2017">Woodard, S., Berry, J., and Newman, B., 2017. Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC. Remediation Journal, 27(3), pp. 19-27.  [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21515 DOI: 10.1002/rem.21515]</ref>. The higher capacity is believed to be due to combined hydrophobic and ion exchange adsorption mechanisms, whereas GAC mainly relies on hydrophobic attraction. Anion exchange resins can be highly selective, or they can also remove other contaminants based on design requirements and water chemistry. Resins have greater affinity for PFAS subgroup PFSA than for PFCA, and affinity increases with carbon chain length.
-[[Wikipedia: Ion-exchange resin | Anion exchange resins]] are a viable alternative to GAC for ''ex situ'' treatment of PFAS anions, and several venders sell resins capable of removing PFAS. Resins available for treating PFAS include regenerable resins that can be used multiple times (Figure 3) and single-use resins that must be disposed or destroyed after use<ref name=" Senevirathna2010"/>. Regenerable resins generate a solvent and brine solution, which is distilled to recover the solvent prior to the brine being adsorbed onto a small quantity of GAC or resin for ultimate disposal. This use of one treatment technology (GAC, IX) to support another (RO) is sometimes referred to as a “treatment train” approach. Single-use resins can be more fully exhausted than regenerable resins can and may be a more cost-effective solution for low concentration PFAS contamination, while regenerable resins may be more cost effective for higher concentration contamination.
+[[Wikipedia: Ion-exchange resin | Anion exchange resins]] are a viable alternative to GAC for ''ex situ'' treatment of PFAS anions, and several venders sell resins capable of removing PFAS. Resins available for treating PFAS include regenerable resins that can be used multiple times (Figure 3) and single-use resins that must be disposed or destroyed after use<ref name=" Senevirathna2010"/>. Regenerable resins generate a solvent and brine solution, which is distilled to recover the solvent prior to the brine being adsorbed onto a small quantity of GAC or resin for ultimate disposal. This use of one treatment technology (GAC, IX) to support another (RO) is sometimes referred to as a “treatment train” approach. Single-use resins can be more fully exhausted than regenerable resins can and may be a more cost-effective solution for low concentration PFAS contamination, while regenerable resins may be more cost effective for higher concentration contamination<onlyinclude>. </onlyinclude>
 ==Developing PFAS Treatment Technologies==

@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 As more testing and operational data on adsorbents are generated, it is becoming evident that no adsorbent technology outperforms the others in all cases.  Whether GAC, ion exchange or another technology is the most technically efficient and cost effective long term option for a given site depends on influent water geochemistry and contaminant concentrations, treatment standards, co-contaminants, duration of treatment, and required flow rates. New generation adsorbents are rapidly being introduced into the market at “evaluation scale” which may provide advantages over commercially available adsorbents.
-Several newer technologies are being evaluated in the lab and in the field which include electro-oxidation, heat-activated persulfate, sonolysis, electrocoagulation, low temperature plasma, supercritical water oxidation, and foam fractionation. These and other potential treatments for PFAS are still largely in the developmental stage. Several technologies show promise for improved management of PFAS sites. However, it is unlikely that a single technology will be adequate for full remediation at many sites. A multi-technology treatment train approach may be necessary for effective treatment of this complicated group of compounds.
+<onlyinclude>Several newer technologies are being evaluated in the lab and in the field which include electro-oxidation, heat-activated persulfate, sonolysis, electrocoagulation, low temperature plasma, supercritical water oxidation, and foam fractionation. These and other potential treatments for PFAS are still largely in the developmental stage. Several technologies show promise for improved management of PFAS sites. However, it is unlikely that a single technology will be adequate for full remediation at many sites. A multi-technology treatment train approach may be necessary for effective treatment of this complicated group of compounds.</onlyinclude>
 <br clear="left" />