Cited by 224Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts

Australia-wide assessment of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in landfill leachates

Gallen, C., Drage, D., Eaglesham, G., Grant, S., Bowman, M., Mueller, J.F.·2017·Journal of Hazardous Materials

Abstract

Leachate from 27 landfills was analysed for nine perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Five PFASs were detected ubiquitously, with perfluorohexanoate (PFHxA) the predominant PFAS (mean 1700ng/L; range 73-25,000ng/L). Despite the complexity of landfill-specific factors, some general trends in PFAS concentrations were observed. Mean concentrations of eight PFASs were higher in operating landfills (or landfill cells) accepting primarily municipal waste, compared to closed municipal landfills. Landfills accepting primarily construction and demolition wastes produced leachate that had higher mean PFAS concentrations than municipal landfills. Younger landfills appeared to have a higher burden of waste containing PFASs (or their precursors), as significant relationships (p<0.05) were observed between selected PFAS concentrations and landfill age. Increasing pH and total organic carbon (TOC) in leachate were associated with increased concentrations of several PFASs. Eight landfills discharged leachate to wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Estimated masses of PFASs discharged reached a maximum of 62g annually (PFHxA), with a national estimate reaching 31kg (PFHxA) annually. The practise of treating leachate at WWTPs allows redistribution of PFASs between the solid and liquid waste streams, although the contribution of leachate to the total load of PFASs entering WWTPs is minor compared to domestic waste water sources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.02.006

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gallen, C., Drage, D., Eaglesham, G., Grant, S., Bowman, M., & Mueller, J. F.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Australian Government (AU)
Corresponding author
Gallen, C.
Venue
Journal of Hazardous Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
331
Pages
132-141
ISSN
0304-3894 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2591469160
Cited by
224
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
FWCI
6.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Hazardous Materials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Thanh Hue Nguyen
  • The Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences
  • The University of Queensland
  • Queensland Department of Health
  • Australian Government Department of the Environment
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Landfill Environmental Impact Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Keywords
perfluorinated compounds, PFAS, landfill leachate, municipal solid waste landfill, construction and demolition waste, landfill age, leachate pH, total organic carbon, wastewater treatment plants, PFAS precursors, environmental contamination

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