How we reduce PFAS levels in water has an environmental impact

Granular activated carbon is the best way to treat PFAS. This stands for per-, polyfluoroalkyl and organic chemicals. In its simplest form, the technology works when unwanted compounds are absorbed into the carbon.

Activated carbon is made from coal and must be heated to the required temperatures. This process can release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which contributes towards climate change.

Once the activated charcoal has been used to eliminate the PFAs, the materials must then be disposed of. That’s often done via incineration, or by sending it to a landfill, potentially releasing more carbon dioxide. Although activated carbon can sometimes be recycled for reuse it also requires a lot energy.

The potential environmental impact of PFAS in drinking waters is greater if the MCLs are lower. This is because it would take more work to reduce the levels.

There is no magic number that will achieve a balance.

What is the right MCL that’s also good for the planet? I don’t have that answer I dont think anybody does, Coleman-Kammula said.

There are currently no federal MCLs that regulate PFAS in public water. The Environmental Protection Agency has established a federal health advisory level at 70 parts per billion for two PFAS compounds, PFOA, and PFOS. However, unlike MCLs, this advisory is not enforceable. Pennsylvania and Delaware chose their proposed MCLs on the basis of an estimate of the chemical a person can consume, eat, or breathe each day without a discernable risk to their health. Delaware’s Division of Public Health spokeswoman said that the state does not consider the environmental impact of the carbon dilemma because there is no solution at the moment.

Drexel University received funding from the U.S. Department of Defense’s Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program to study the use of non-thermal (or cool) plasma technology to destroy PFAS and create benign products such as carbon dioxide and fluoride. If it is successful, it would solve the problem that there are still contaminated materials.

Although PFAS pose a health risk at levels of parts-per trillion, the generation of parts-per trillion levels of carbon dioxide or fluoride from the decomposition of PFAS is not dangerous, according to Christopher Sales, an environmental engineering professor at the university’s College of Engineering.

Fluoride is commonly added to drinking waters at levels of 1 mg per liter (approximately a part per million), Sales stated. The amount of fluoride that is generated from the destruction PFAS should therefore be of negligible concern. Sales stated that the amount of carbon dioxide produced would be negligible. Seawater has a dissolved carbon dioxide content of 40 mg perliter (40 parts per millions).

We’re at the early stages of demonstrating and optimizing cold plasma systems for degrading PFAS, he said. For destructive technologies, it is important to figure out the mechanisms of how they’re being degraded, and also what byproducts they are producing. Although the goal of these destructive technologies is to produce CO2 and fluoride, we have to make sure they don’t lead to toxic byproducts that are undesirable. We want to make sure we’re optimizing destructive technologies so they not only remove PFAS fast, but also so that they only generate safe byproducts as energy efficiently as possible.

He stated that research is ongoing on dozens of other technologies. [The science community is]Throwing the kitchen sink at PFAS now and seeing what works.

Yanna LIANG, chair of the Department of Environmental & Sustainable Engineering at University at Albany (SUNY), said that granular activated charcoal doesn’t have a perfect efficacy for all PFAS compound. While the technology does a good job of removing PFOA, PFOS and other PFAS compounds, it is less effective at removing short-chain PFAS.

Unfortunately, we don’t have a perfect solution for dealing with PFAS. She stated that researchers are all trying to find the perfect solution.

Liangs team is researching a technology that would use plants as a way to remove PFAS from soil, sediment, or surface water. Then, they would use a thermal process in order to destroy any chemicals accumulated in the plant’s biomass.

We want a technique or technology to remove all PFAS chemicals in water and soil. She also stated that we want it to be economically viable, as well as sustainable and environmentally friendly. That is our goal. But again, we are still in the process of aiming to achieve that goal, we’re not there yet.