Elsevier

Chemosphere

Volume 282, November 2021, 131025
Chemosphere

Review
Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substance remediation from soil and sorbents: A review of adsorption behaviour and ultrasonic treatment

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131025Get rights and content

Highlights

  • PFAS sorb to surfaces mainly due to hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions.

  • PFAS adsorption is also affected by pore/particle size, and PFAS concentration.

  • Soil/sorbent washing is viable for PFAS impacted sorbent/soil regeneration.

  • Ultrasound enhances desorption due to higher temperatures and more mass transfer.

  • Particle erosion can be controlled by adjusting particle size, power and frequency.

Abstract

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are xenobiotics, present at variable concentrations in soils and groundwater worldwide. Some of the current remediation techniques being researched or applied for PFAS-impacted soils involve solidification-stabilisation, soil washing, excavation and disposal to landfill, on site or in situ smouldering, thermal desorption, ball milling and incineration. Given the large volumes of soil requiring treatment, there is a need for a more environmentally friendly technique to remove and treat PFASs from soils. Sorbents such as granular/powdered activated carbon, ion exchange resins and silicas are used in water treatment to remove PFAS. In this work, PFAS adsorption mechanisms and the effect of pore size, pH and organic matter on adsorption efficacy are discussed. Then, adsorption of PFAS to soils and sorbents is considered when assessing the viability of remediation techniques. Sonication-aided treatment was predicted to be an effective removal technique for PFAS from a solid phase, and the effect of varying frequency, power and particle size on the effectiveness of the desorption process is discussed. Causes and mitigation strategies for possible cavitation-induced particle erosion during ultrasound washing are also identified. Following soil remediation, degrading the extracted PFAS using sonolysis in a water-organic solvent mixture is discussed. The implications for future soil remediation and sorbent regeneration based on the findings in this study are given.

Introduction

Per and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of anthropogenic chemical compounds, containing the perfluoroalkyl moiety CnF2n+1 (Buck et al., 2011). Polyfluorinated PFAS also contain non-fluorinated carbon chain regions, such as –CH2-CH2-, which are known as fluorotelomers (Buck et al., 2011). PFAS are amphiphilic, meaning they express both hydrophilic and hydrophobic properties due to the presence of a charged functional group and a perfluorinated alkyl chain, respectively (Fujii et al., 2007). These unique properties make PFAS useful for several commercial applications, such as in aqueous film fire-fighting foams (AFFFs), waterproof clothes, and non-stick frying pans (Zhang et al., 2019). PFAS have been manufactured and utilised for more than 60 years (Giesy and Kannan, 2002) and to date, over 4700 PFAS compounds have been developed (OECD, 2018); as a result, they have become ubiquitous in the environment, worldwide (Lau et al., 2007; Pelch et al., 2019; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b). PFAS have even been found in snow samples taken from regions as remote as the Greenland Arctic (Butt et al., 2010). Only three PFAS and their precursors are currently subject to international regulations, with perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) being designated under the Stockholm Convention as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) (Stockholm Convention, 2009, Stockholm Convention, 2019) and perfluorohexanesulphonic acid (PFHxS) proposed for inclusion.

Perfluorinated PFAS resist biological and chemical degradation, and some bioaccumulate in mammal and plant species (Hale et al., 2017). Some PFAS are now understood to cause deterioration of health in humans, contributing to the development of several cancers, thyroid disease, hypertension, high cholesterol, reduced immunity and liver damage (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2018). Human exposure to PFAS can occur by ingesting contaminated water, ingesting food grown using contaminated soil, and by using equipment produced using PFAS (U.S. EPA, 2018). The majority of Americans have been exposed to PFAS and have detectable levels of them in their blood (ASTDR, 2017). Hence, PFAS remediation for both soil and drinking water is of immediate concern.

PFOS and PFOA, types of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAA) (Steenland et al., 2010), are the two main PFAS considered in the literature, since they bio-accumulate and are toxic to sea-life and mammals (Hale et al., 2017), and because they are amongst the most commonly found perfluorinated environmental contaminants (Zareitalabad et al., 2013). Production of PFOS and PFOA was phased out in the US by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Wang et al., 2014), and all PFAS are being phased out in the European Union (EU) by 2030, with action beginning by 2025 (Lerner, 2019). However, PFOA and PFOS are still manufactured outside the U.S, and products containing PFAS such as non-stick pans are still imported into the US (U.S. EPA, 2018) and the EU, with little control over small quantities and novel PFAS (KEMI (Swedish Chemicals Agency), 2015). Hence, pollution will likely continue until a worldwide ban is enacted. Attempts have been made to develop more environmentally friendly alternative PFAS, however these have unknown safety implications (Sunderland et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2014), and can act as precursors to short chain PFAS by breakdown in the environment (Cheremisinoff, 2016).

Remediation of PFAS-impacted matrices can require separation (removal of PFAS from the water or soil to another matrix) followed by destruction. Water treatment focuses on bringing PFAS levels below safe thresholds and soil remediation on PFAS removal or fixation (Arias Espana et al., 2015; Banks et al., 2020; Horst et al., 2018; Kucharzyk et al., 2017; Mahinroosta and Senevirathna, 2020; Merino et al., 2016; Rahman et al., 2014; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b; Sörengård et al., 2021; Vecitis et al., 2009). Soil remediation approaches includes techniques such as incineration (Meng et al., 2017), use of electron beams, excavation and disposal to landfill, on site or in situ smouldering, thermal desorption, ball milling (Senevirathna et al., 2020), soil washing and soil stabilisation (Duchesne et al., 2018; Hale et al., 2017; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b). To maintain the soil structure, soil washing is usually associated with adsorptive and destructive technologies to treat PFAS in wash water (Senevirathna et al., 2020). Separative technologies for wastewater streams include sorbents such as ion exchange (IX) resins (Appleman et al., 2014; Deng et al., 2010; Horst et al., 2018; Rahman et al., 2014; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b), silicas (Jentoft, 2013; Johnson et al., 2007; Punyapalakul et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2010) and activated carbon (Chen et al., 2017; Hansen et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2013) [either granular (GAC) (Du et al., 2015; Senevirathna et al., 2010) or powdered (PAC) (Qu et al., 2009; Yu and Hu, 2011)], all of which must be regenerated or destroyed, and result in another PFAS waste stream to be treated (Eschauzier et al., 2012, Rahman et al., 2014, Yu et al., 2009, Yu et al., 2012, Zhang et al., 2019, Zhao et al., 2011). Similarly, other separation techniques such as foam fractionation (Horst et al., 2018; KEMI (Swedish Chemicals Agency), 2015), and membrane separation (Hopkins et al., 2018; Merino et al., 2016; Rahman et al., 2014), also produce a concentrated PFAS stream that requires a destructive stage. Many destructive PFAS remediation technologies for water/liquid PFAS solutions are reviewed elsewhere (Arias Espana et al., 2015; Banks et al., 2020; Horst et al., 2018; Kucharzyk et al., 2017; Merino et al., 2016; Rahman et al., 2014; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b; Vecitis et al., 2009) however, few seem environmentally beneficial. Sonolysis (the use of ultrasonic waves to break down a substance) via high frequency ultrasound (>100 kHz) is a very promising technique (Cao et al., 2020; Ross et al., 2018a, 2018b) for complete PFAS mineralisation, without production of a short chain PFAS waste stream (Wood et al., 2020). Consideration of soil treatment or sorbent regeneration must be done in the context of a subsequent treatment technology and, if possible, concurrent treatment and destruction options.

Complete PFAS remediation is challenged by their strong carbon-fluorine bonds (3M, 1999; KEMI (Swedish Chemicals Agency), 2015) and proclivity to stick to surfaces (Lath et al., 2019; Tang et al., 2010). Little is known regarding the fundamental surface chemistry of PFAS and the effectiveness of solvent washing to regenerate solid matrices contaminated by PFAS. This work aims to give an overview of PFAS adsorption characteristics and what this means for separation and destructive treatment consisting of solvent washing, or alternatively, a combination of solvent washing and ultrasound technology.

Section snippets

Treatment of PFAS-impacted soils

Traditional non-destructive PFAS remediation methods from soil include soil stabilisation, thermal desorption and soil washing. Thermal desorption involves heating in- or ex-situ (Vidonish et al., 2016), and is effective from 70% up to 99% removal of multiple PFAS (including PFSA's, FOSA's, and PFCA's) from soil. However, it requires high temperatures ~450–550 °C, is energy-intensive and the vaporised contaminants require post-treatment (Sörengård et al., 2020). Soil stabilisation involves

Self-assembly of amphiphiles and adsorption

Amphiphiles like PFAS are capable of self-assembling to form colloid-like structures in solution and on surfaces in quantities exceeding the critical micelle concentration (CMC) (Krafft and Riess, 2015; Milovanovic et al., 2017) and hemi-micelle concentration respectively (Gladysz et al., 2004). These structures have a hydrophilic outer layer and a hydrophobic core. The diameter of the structures formed by hydrocarbon surfactants can vary from 5 to 100 nm (Milovanovic et al., 2017), depending

Fundamentals of sonochemistry

Ultrasonic cavitation utilises sound waves with frequencies above the audible range of human hearing (>18 kHz) to irradiate aqueous media, forming microbubbles (Mason and Lorimer, 2002). Through multiple compression and expansion pressure cycles, these bubbles reach a critical size of at least twice their initial radius, beyond which they collapse severely on compression, a phenomenon known as cavitation (Mason and Peters, 2002; Santos et al., 2009). Cavitation arises from gases trapped in

Conclusions

Some current PFAS soil remediation techniques destroy soil, and whilst a series of non-destructive techniques exist, methods that also mineralise PFAS are required. Adsorption of PFAS onto surfaces such as soils is relevant at environmental concentrations, so any potential treatment must disrupt this. The adsorption process for amphiphilic PFAS is thought to governed mainly by hydrophobic interactions between the adsorbent and the perfluoroalkyl chain on the PFAS molecule, with electrostatic

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported and funded by the Royal Academy of Engineering Industrial Fellowships Scheme - IFS1819\34 and Arcadis UK.

References (320)

  • J. Bridgwater et al.

    Particle attrition due to shearing-the effects of stress, strain and particle shape

    Chem. Eng. Sci.

    (2003)
  • P. Brocos et al.

    Application of the Extended Langmuir model to surface tension data of binary liquid mixtures

    Fluid Phase Equil.

    (2005)
  • E.A. Brujan

    The role of cavitation microjets in the therapeutic applications of ultrasound

    Ultrasound Med. Biol.

    (2004)
  • M.L. Brusseau

    Assessing the potential contributions of additional retention processes to PFAS retardation in the subsurface

    Sci. Total Environ.

    (2018)
  • C.M. Butt et al.

    Levels and trends of poly- and perfluorinated compounds in the arctic environment

    Sci. Total Environ.

    (2010)
  • B. Byanju et al.

    Effect of high-power sonication pretreatment on extraction and some physicochemical properties of proteins from chickpea, kidney bean, and soybean

    Int. J. Biol. Macromol.

    (2020)
  • T. Campbell et al.

    Sonochemical degradation of perfluorinated surfactants: power and multiple frequency effects

    Separ. Purif. Technol.

    (2015)
  • H. Cao et al.

    Sonochemical degradation of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances – a review

    Ultrason. Sonochem.

    (2020)
  • Y. Dai et al.

    Enhanced sorption of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) on carbon nanotube-filled electrospun nanofibrous membranes

    Chemosphere

    (2013)
  • S. Dalhatou et al.

    Competition in sonochemical degradation of Naphthol Blue Black: presence of an organic (nonylphenol) and a mineral (bicarbonate ions) matrix

    J. Environ. Chem. Eng.

    (2019)
  • S. Deng et al.

    Removal of perfluorooctane sulfonate from wastewater by anion exchange resins: effects of resin properties and solution chemistry

    Water Res.

    (2010)
  • S. Deng et al.

    Sorption mechanisms of perfluorinated compounds on carbon nanotubes

    Environ. Pollut.

    (2012)
  • S. Deng et al.

    Enhanced adsorption of perfluorooctane sulfonate and perfluorooctanoate by bamboo-derived granular activated carbon

    J. Hazard Mater.

    (2015)
  • Z. Du et al.

    Adsorption behavior and mechanism of perfluorinated compounds on various adsorbents-A review

    J. Hazard Mater.

    (2014)
  • Z. Du et al.

    Removal of perfluorinated carboxylates from washing wastewater of perfluorooctanesulfonyl fluoride using activated carbons and resins

    J. Hazard Mater.

    (2015)
  • M. Dular et al.

    High speed observation of damage created by a collapse of a single cavitation bubble

    Wear 418–

    (2019)
  • R. Farley et al.

    Effect of particle size upon the strength of powders

    Powder Technol.

    (1968)
  • M.D. Fernández Rodríguez et al.

    Soil pollution remediation

    Encycl. Toxicol. Third Ed.

    (2014)
  • E. Gagliano et al.

    Removal of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from water by adsorption: role of PFAS chain length, effect of organic matter and challenges in adsorbent regeneration

    Water Res.

    (2020)
  • C. Gallen et al.

    Occurrence and distribution of brominated flame retardants and perfluoroalkyl substances in Australian landfill leachate and biosolids

    J. Hazard Mater.

    (2016)
  • V. Gellrich et al.

    Behavior of perfluorinated compounds in soils during leaching experiments

    Chemosphere

    (2012)
  • V.L. Gole et al.

    Sono-chemical treatment of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl compounds in aqueous film-forming foams by use of a large-scale multi-transducer dual-frequency based acoustic reactor

    Ultrason. Sonochem.

    (2018)
  • B. Gomez-Ruiz et al.

    Efficient electrochemical degradation of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from the effluents of an industrial wastewater treatment plant

    Chem. Eng. J.

    (2017)
  • B. González et al.

    Density, dynamic viscosity, and derived properties of binary mixtures of methanol or ethanol with water, ethyl acetate, and methyl acetate at T = (293.15, 298.15, and 303.15) K

    J. Chem. Thermodyn.

    (2007)
  • W. Guo et al.

    Adsorption of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) on corn straw-derived biochar prepared at different pyrolytic temperatures

    J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng.

    (2017)
  • S.E. Hale et al.

    Sorbent amendment as a remediation strategy to reduce PFAS mobility and leaching in a contaminated sandy soil from a Norwegian firefighting training facility

    Chemosphere

    (2017)
  • 1999. The Science of Organic Fluorochemistry...
  • 2003. reportFinal Report - Laboratory- Scale Thermal Degradation of Perfluoro-Octanyl Sulfonate and Related, May...
  • Toxicological Profile for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances: Draft for Public Comment 852

    (2018)
  • C.M. Alder et al.

    Updating and further expanding GSK's solvent sustainability guide

    Green Chem.

    (2016)
  • A.V. Alves et al.

    Fluorinated surfactant adsorption on mineral surfaces: implications for PFAS fate and transport in the environment

    Surfaces

    (2020)
  • R.E. Apfel

    The role of impurities in cavitation-threshold determination

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1971)
  • A. Arkenbout et al.

    Hidden Emissions : A Story from the Netherlands

    (2018)
  • Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the

    (2017)
  • M. Ateia et al.

    Efficient PFAS removal by amine-functionalized sorbents: critical review of the current literature

    Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett.

    (2019)
  • M.J. Bentel et al.

    Defluorination of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) with hydrated electrons: structural dependence and implications to PFAS remediation and management

    Environ. Sci. Technol. acs.est.8b06648

    (2019)
  • F. Biscay et al.

    Surface tension of water-alcohol mixtures from Monte Carlo simulations

    J. Chem. Phys.

    (2011)
  • P. Borrelli et al.

    Land use and climate change impacts on global soil erosion by water (2015-2070)

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A

    (2020)
  • S. Brendel et al.

    Short-chain perfluoroalkyl acids: environmental concerns and a regulatory strategy under REACH

    Environ. Sci. Eur.

    (2018)
  • W.S. Brown et al.

    Activity Coefficients of Aqueous Methanol Solutions

    (1951)
  • Cited by (39)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text