Cited by 96Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFluoride Effects and RemovalPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in river discharge: Modeling loads upstream and downstream of a PFAS manufacturing plant in the Cape Fear watershed, North Carolina

Open access
Pétré, M.-A., Salk, K.R., Stapleton, H.M., Ferguson, P.L., Tait, G., Obenour, D.R., Knappe, D.R.U., Genereux, D.P.·2022·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

The Cape Fear River is an important source of drinking water in North Carolina, and many drinking water intakes in the watershed are affected by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). We quantified PFAS concentrations and loads in river water upstream and downstream of a PFAS manufacturing plant that has been producing PFAS since 1980. River samples collected from September 2018 to February 2021 were analyzed for 13 PFAS at the upstream station and 43–57 PFAS downstream near Wilmington. Frequent PFAS sampling (daily to weekly) was conducted close to gauging stations (critical to load estimation), and near major drinking water intakes (relevant to human exposure). Perfluoroalkyl acids dominated upstream while fluoroethers associated with the plant made up about 47% on average of the detected PFAS downstream. Near Wilmington, Σ43PFAS concentration averaged 143 ng/L (range 40–377) and Σ43PFAS load averaged 3440 g/day (range 459–17,300), with 17–88% originating from the PFAS plant. LOADEST was a useful tool in quantifying individual and total quantified PFAS loads downstream, however, its use was limited at the upstream station where PFAS levels in the river were affected by variable inputs from a wastewater treatment plant. Long-term monitoring of PFAS concentrations is warranted, especially at the downstream station. Results suggest a slight downward trend in PFAS levels downstream, as indicated by a decrease in flow-weighted mean concentrations and the best-fitting LOADEST model. However, despite the cessation of PFAS process wastewater discharge from the plant in November 2017, and the phase-out of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in North America, both fluoroethers and legacy PFAS continue to reach the river in significant quantities, reflecting groundwater discharge to the river and other continuing inputs. Persistence of PFAS in surface water and drinking water supplies suggests that up to 1.5 million people in the Cape Fear watershed might be exposed.

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.scitotenv.2022.154763

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • Evaluation of PFAS loads from different sources in a stream can be challenging in systems with wastewater treatment plant effluent inputs that produce subdaily fluctuations in load and systems underlain by heavily pumped fractured rock aquifers.

    “Evaluation of PFAS loads from different sources in a stream can be challenging in systems with wastewater treatment plant effluent inputs that produce subdaily fluctuations in load 12 and systems underlain by heavily pumped fractured rock aquifers.11”

    From Using a Time-of-Travel Sampling Approach to Quantify Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Stream Loading and Source Inputs in a Mixed-Source, Urban Catchment (2024) · cites this paper as [12]

    Section 3.3 (page unavailable) reports that PFAS input from a wastewater treatment plant varied across sampling days and that this variability complicated load estimation. It does not establish subdaily fluctuations. The fractured-rock-aquifer clause carries a different citation and is not attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • PFAS are emerging contaminants previously measured in North Carolina surface waters downstream from various sources: wastewater treatment plants, urban development, and fields where municipal biosolids were applied.

    “PFAS are emerging contaminants previously measured in North Carolina surface waters downstream from various sources: wastewater treatment plants, urban development, and fields where municipal biosolids were applied.30”

    From Integrating Contaminant Source Indicators, Water Quality Measures, and Ecotoxicity to Characterize Contaminant Mixtures and Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Variability in an Urban Watershed (2025) · cites this paper as [30]

    Section 3.1.1 reports PFAS in the Haw River downstream of a wastewater treatment plant and in Cane Creek, where runoff from areas treated with PFAS-contaminated biosolids is suggested as a possible source. The Introduction discusses PFAS in urban watersheds, but the paper does not identify urban development as a distinct source in the North Carolina waters it measured or specify that the biosolids were municipal. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The targeted PFAS compounds are commonly found in textiles, firefighting foams, or consumer products.

    “The targeted compounds are commonly found in textiles, firefighting foams, or consumer products,30 and have been considered for state and federal United States drinking water regulations.31”

    From Integrating Contaminant Source Indicators, Water Quality Measures, and Ecotoxicity to Characterize Contaminant Mixtures and Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Variability in an Urban Watershed (2025) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Introduction identifies industries, wastewater treatment plants, and military bases as PFAS sources in surface water, while §3.1.2 lists the PFAS compounds targeted in the river samples. Neither those passages nor searches for textiles, firefighting foams, and consumer products establish that the targeted compounds are commonly found in those products. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pétré, M.-A., Salk, K. R., Stapleton, H. M., Ferguson, P. L., Tait, G., Obenour, D. R., Knappe, D. R. U., & Genereux, D. P.
Affiliations
  • Geological Survey of Finland (FI)
  • Duke University (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
Corresponding author
Pétré, M.-A.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-07
Volume
831
Pages
154763
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4220666820
Cited by
96
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 3
FWCI
6.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EarthArXiv (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Duke University
  • North Carolina State University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fluoride Effects and Removal
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Keywords
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, Cape Fear River, drinking water consumption, perfluoroalkyl acids, legacy PFAS, groundwater discharge, LOADEST, PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid, human exposure
MeSH terms
Manufacturing and Industrial Facilities, Fluorocarbons, Humans, North Carolina, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Alkanesulfonic Acids, Drinking Water

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