A review of the emerging treatment technologies for PFAS contaminated soils
Abstract
Contamination of soils with poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has become a challenging issue due to the adverse effects of these substances on both the environment and public health. PFAS have strong chemical structures and their bonding with soil makes them challenging to eliminate from soil environments. Traditional methods of soil remediation have not been successful in their reduction or removal from the environment. This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of existing and emerging technologies for remediating PFAS contaminated soils with guidance on which approach to use in different contexts. The functions of all remediation technologies, their suitability, limitations, and the scale applied from laboratory to the field are presented as a baseline for understanding the research need for treatment in soil environments. To date, the immobilization method has been a significant part of the remediation solution for PFAS contaminated soils, although its long-term efficiency still needs further investigation. Soil washing and thermal treatment techniques have been tested at the field scale, but they are expensive and energy-intensive due to the use of a large volume of washing solvent and the high melting point of PFAS, respectively; both methods need a large initial investment for their installation. Other remediation technologies, such as chemical oxidation, ball milling, and electron beams, have been progressed in the laboratory. However, additional research…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The scope of several reviews on the occurrences of PFAS and remediation technologies was limited to solid matrices.
“The scope of several reviews on the occurrences of PFAS and remediation technologies was limited to solid matrices (Bolan et al., 2021; Garg et al., 2020; Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020; Pan et al., 2021).”
From Per and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as a contaminant of emerging concern in surface water: A transboundary review of their occurrences and toxicity effects (2021) · cites this paper as Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020
Adsorption is perhaps the most economically viable PFAS capture method, through soil amendments such as granular activated carbon.
“Adsorption is perhaps the most economically viable PFAS capture method through soil amendments such as granular activated carbon (Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020
Many studies and reviews have focused on methods to remove PFAS from wastewater treatment systems and polluted soils, including adsorption, chemical oxidation, biological and physical degradation, and filtration.
“many studies and reviews have focused on methods to remove PFAS from wastewater treatment systems and polluted soils, including through adsorption, chemical oxidation, biological and physical degradation, and filtration (Lenka et al., 2021; Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020; Wanninayake, 2021).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020
Sorption and oxidation-reduction processes can be promoted through soil amendments such as granular activated carbon and biochar or metals.
“These processes can be promoted through soil amendments such as granular activated carbon and biochar (Biswal et al., 2022; Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020) or metals (Douna and Yousefi, 2023; Valencia et al., 2019).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 80 · Cited by 352
- Authors
- Mahinroosta, R., & Senevirathna, L.
- Affiliations
- Charles Sturt University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Mahinroosta, Reza
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-02
- Volume
- 255
- Pages
- 109896
- ISSN
- 0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2997007895
- Cited by
- 352
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2026: 58 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 20
- FWCI
- 2.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
- Keywords
- PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, soil contamination, soil remediation, soil washing, heat treatment, chemical oxidation, ball milling, electron beam treatment, cost-effectiveness
- MeSH terms
- Fluorocarbons, Soil, Soil Pollutants, Environmental Restoration and Remediation
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
