ABSTRACTPer‐ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination is a critical worldwide issue due to their widespread industrial use and persistence in the environment. PFAS treatment technologies are being applied to address the challenges associated with these substances. Selection of the appropriate treatment technology requires the assessment of many variables before full‐scale implementation. Factors such as cost, effectiveness, availability, and expected treatment duration are commonly considered; however, it is important to also consider the environmental footprint, which is the impact on the environment from the energy and materials used in implementing the treatment technology itself. The low PFAS treatment levels promulgated thus far, such as US Environmental Protection Agency drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels of 4 ng/L for perfluorooctane sulfonate and perfluorooctanoic acid, as well as future low cleanup standards for other compounds and impacted media, will require long‐term remedial actions. Understanding the environmental impacts for PFAS treatment technologies can provide additional insights to be considered during the remedy selection. The authors conducted a comparison study of a wide range of PFAS treatment technology types for both liquids and solids, operating under limited but realistic hypothetical scenarios. The results present the approximate expected greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of each technology type and scenario, compared to one another for the treatment of two key target compounds: perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The liquid treatment technology types considered in this evaluation include technologies that concentrate or separate PFAS from the liquid media (such as ion exchange, granular activated carbon, and foam fractionation), technologies that destroy PFAS (such as supercritical water oxidation and electrochemical oxidation), and landfill disposal via solidification. In practice, remedial solutions for a given site might include both a concentration/separation step and a destruction step. These combinations were not evaluated in this comparison. The solids treatment technologies considered included thermal desorption, soil washing, soil stabilization, and excavation and disposal at a landfill. The factors included in each scenario were material production, material and equipment transportation, equipment and energy use, and material disposal, as these were considered to be the largest contributors to GHG emissions.
Read full abstract