Cited by 549Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials

Adsorption of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in groundwater by granular activated carbons: Roles of hydrophobicity of PFAS and carbon characteristics

Park, Minkyu, Wu, Shimin, Lopez, Israel J., Chang, Joseph Y., Karanfil, Tanju, Snyder, Shane A.·2020·Water Research

Abstract

The adsorption breakthrough behavior of nine perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in groundwaters by four bituminous coal-based granular activated carbons (F400, Carbsorb 40, HPC and CMR400) was studied using rapid small-scale column tests (RSSCTs). The half breakthrough bed volume (BV 50 ), an indicator of apparent adsorption capacity, correlated with the hydrophobicity of PFAS at a given pH (i.e., Log D ow ) for F400, indicating that hydrophobic interaction is important for apparent adsorption capacity of PFAS in groundwater with low dissolved organic concentrations (DOC 254 -1 m -1 ). Higher empty bed contact time (EBCT) caused steeper PFAS breakthrough curves with respect to throughput, but did not affect apparent adsorption capacity. Three different sizes of F400 (0.13, 0.17, and 0.20 mm) exhibited similar breakthrough profiles of PFAS, indicating that the intraparticle diffusivity was independent of adsorbent diameter in the given conditions. Among the tested carbons, the positively charged adsorbents (F400, HPC, and CMR400) showed higher apparent adsorption capacities for hydrophilic (Log D ow at pH 7 ow at pH 7 between 0 and 1) than the negatively charged adsorbent (Carbsorb 40). In addition, activated carbons with higher micropore surface areas exhibited higher apparent adsorption capacities of hydrophilic and marginally hydrophobic PFAS among the positively-charged activated carbons, whereas the mesoporous carbon (HPC) exhibited an increasingly larger adsorption capacit…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.watres.2019.115364

Cites

3 of 3 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
Park, M., Wu, S., Lopez, I. J., Chang, J. Y., Karanfil, T., & Snyder, S. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Clemson University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Park, Minkyu
  • Snyder, Shane A.
Venue
Water Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
170
Pages
115364
ISSN
0043-1354 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2994162989
Cited by
549
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 118 · 2025: 115 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 18
FWCI
14.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Water Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
Keywords
perfluorinated compounds, PFAS adsorption, groundwater remediation, granular activated carbon, hydrophobicity, octanol-water partition coefficient, adsorption capacity, micropore surface area, mesoporous carbon, pore blocking, intraparticle diffusion, dissolved organic carbon, specific UV absorbance, breakthrough curves
MeSH terms
Adsorption, Charcoal, Fluorocarbons, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Water Purification, Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions, Groundwater

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