2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.cherd.2022.04.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Updated review on emerging technologies for PFAS contaminated water treatment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 252 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are persistent contaminants that have been dispersed through multiple water sites around the globe. These surfactant-like species contain a highly stable C–F bond that makes them resistant to degradation and can lead to bioaccumulation. Despite multiple efforts to reduce PFAS emissions, their concentration in water is still significant, especially of legacy long-chain PFAS such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Hence, considerable attention has been devoted to developing separation methods to remove PFOA and other PFAS from water. Conventional methods for treatment include reverse osmosis, filtration, ion-exchange, among other adsorption and membrane processes. ,, For adsorption, the predominant materials for PFAS adsorption are carbon-based, , due to their low cost. However, carbon-derived sorbents can incur downstream environmental impacts as they often rely on incineration, while state-of-the-art reusable adsorbents require harsh chemicals for regeneration. ,, At the same time, electrosorption has emerged as a promising approach for PFAS remediation due to its modularity and regeneration solely by electrochemical control. , Electrosorbents mitigate the need for chemicals, solvents, or pH inputs for desorption due to the electrochemical control of binding and release and thus can minimize secondary pollution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are persistent contaminants that have been dispersed through multiple water sites around the globe. These surfactant-like species contain a highly stable C–F bond that makes them resistant to degradation and can lead to bioaccumulation. Despite multiple efforts to reduce PFAS emissions, their concentration in water is still significant, especially of legacy long-chain PFAS such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Hence, considerable attention has been devoted to developing separation methods to remove PFOA and other PFAS from water. Conventional methods for treatment include reverse osmosis, filtration, ion-exchange, among other adsorption and membrane processes. ,, For adsorption, the predominant materials for PFAS adsorption are carbon-based, , due to their low cost. However, carbon-derived sorbents can incur downstream environmental impacts as they often rely on incineration, while state-of-the-art reusable adsorbents require harsh chemicals for regeneration. ,, At the same time, electrosorption has emerged as a promising approach for PFAS remediation due to its modularity and regeneration solely by electrochemical control. , Electrosorbents mitigate the need for chemicals, solvents, or pH inputs for desorption due to the electrochemical control of binding and release and thus can minimize secondary pollution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Water treatment at the community level will provide a more equitable strategy at a lower cost than home-based treatment in certain circumstances. Although reverse osmosis is a proven technology for PFAS removal, most commonly activated carbon or specialized resins are used to remove them . These options are currently used in communities with severe PFAS contamination.…”
Section: Cost For Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although reverse osmosis is a proven technology for PFAS removal, most commonly activated carbon or specialized resins are used to remove them. 22 These options are currently used in communities with severe PFAS contamination. In the coming years, we will need to determine where and to what extent we can generalize this approach to many more communities with lower PFAS concentrations.…”
Section: ■ Cost For Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption, which transfers dissolved compounds to a solid phase, is the most widely used technology for treatment of PFASs. This process results from hydrophobic interactions between PFASs and GAC that enable transport through GAC mesopores. , However, GAC materials have a limited capacity for PFAS uptake, and PFAS breakthrough occurs after a certain volume of water is treated. ,,, Once breakthrough occurs, the GAC must be safely discarded or regenerated. , Regeneration and PFAS destruction are typically accomplished by off-site thermal treatment and reactivation at temperatures of >700 °C, a costly and energy-intensive process requiring the evaporation of all residual water absorbed by the spent GAC. In terms of GAC reusability, thermal regeneration decreases the material’s specific surface area, potentially leading to poorer performance over repeated regeneration cycles. , Given the frequent exchanging of GAC, it would be ideal to perform regeneration on site …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%