Cited by 187Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchAdvanced oxidation water treatmentEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials

Recent Advances on PFAS Degradation via Thermal and Nonthermal Methods

Open access
Verma, Sanny, Lee, Tae, Sahle-Demessie, Endalkachew, Ateia, Mohamed, Nadagouda, Mallikarjuna N.·2023·Chemical Engineering Journal Advances

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a set of synthetic chemicals which contain several carbon-fluorine (C-F) bonds and have been in production for the past eight decades. PFAS have been used in several industrial and consumer products including nonstick pans, food packaging, firefighting foams, and carpeting. PFAS require proper investigations worldwide due to their omnipresence in the biotic environment and the resulting pollution to drinking water sources. These harmful chemicals have been associated with adverse health effects such as liver damage, cancer, low fertility, hormone subjugation, and thyroid illness. In addition, these fluorinated compounds show high chemical, thermal, biological, hydrolytic, photochemical, and oxidative stability. Therefore, effective treatment processes are required for the removal and degradation of PFAS from wastewater, drinking water, and groundwater. Previous review papers have provided excellent summaries on PFAS treatment technologies, but the focus has been on the elimination efficiency without providing mechanistic understanding of removal/degradation pathways. The present review summarizes a comprehensive examination of various thermal and non-thermal PFAS destruction technologies. It includes sonochemical/ultrasound degradation, microwave hydrothermal treatment, subcritical or supercritical treatment, electrical discharge plasma technology, thermal destruction methods/incinerations, low/high-temperature thermal desorption process, vapor energy generator (VEG) technology and mechanochemical destruction. The background, degradation mechanisms/pathways, and advances of each remediation process are discussed in detail in this review.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ceja.2022.100421

Cites

113 of 113 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bioremediation appears to be a successful solution for PFAS removal from the environment.

    “Along with physicochemical techniques [27], bioremediation appears to be a successful solution for PFAS removal from the environment [73,74].”

    From The EU’s Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Ban: A Case of Policy over Science (2023) · cites this paper as [73]

    The Introduction says biological degradation of PFAS has been studied, but contrasts it with physicochemical methods and says it is challenged by the persistent carbon–fluorine bond. It does not present bioremediation as a successful solution for environmental PFAS removal. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [79]Chang J, Thermal plasma solid waste and water treatments: a critical review, Int. J. Plasma Environ. Sci. Technol. 3 (2) (2009) 67– 84.
  2. [114]Ok YS, Rinklebe J, Hou D, Tsang DC, Tack FM, Soil and Groundwater Remediation Technologies: a practical guide, CRC Press, 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verma, S., Lee, T., Sahle-Demessie, E., Ateia, M., & Nadagouda, M. N.
Affiliations
Environmental Protection Agency (US)
Corresponding author
Nadagouda, Mallikarjuna N.
Venue
Chemical Engineering Journal Advances
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-03
Volume
13
Pages
100421
ISSN
2666-8211 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4310519160
Cited by
187
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 17
FWCI
11.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Chemical Engineering Journal Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Advanced oxidation water treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
Keywords
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS degradation, thermal destruction, sonochemical degradation, microwave hydrothermal treatment, plasma technology, incineration, thermal desorption, degradation mechanism, drinking water treatment, groundwater remediation, wastewater treatment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review