Investigation on removal of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS) using water treatment sludge and biochar

被引:14
|
作者
Nguyen M.D. [1 ]
Sivaram A.K. [2 ,3 ]
Megharaj M. [2 ,3 ]
Webb L. [4 ]
Adhikari S. [1 ]
Thomas M. [5 ]
Surapaneni A. [6 ,7 ]
Moon E.M. [1 ,8 ]
Milne N.A. [1 ]
机构
[1] School of Engineering, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, 3216, VIC
[2] Global Centre for Environmental Remediation (GCER), College of Engineering, Science and Environment, The University of Newcastle, ATC Building, University Drive, Callaghan, 2308, NSW
[3] Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE), The University of Newcastle, ATC Building, University Drive, Callaghan, 2308, NSW
[4] School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Waurn Ponds, 3216, VIC
[5] Barwon Water, Geelong, 3220, VIC
[6] South East Water, Frankston, 3199, VIC
[7] ARC Training Centre for the Transformation of Australia's Biosolids Resource, College of STEM, RMIT University
[8] ARC Centre of Excellence for Enabling Eco-Efficient Beneficiation of Minerals, School of Engineering, Deakin University
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Adsorption; Biochar; PFAS; Water treatment sludge;
D O I
10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139412
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This work assessed the adsorption performance of three common PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS and PFHxS) on two water treatment sludges (WTS) and two biochars (commercial biomass biochar and semi-pilot scale biosolids biochar). Of the two WTS samples included in this study, one was sourced from poly-aluminium chloride (PAC) and the other from alum (Al2(SO4)3). The results of experiments using a single PFAS for adsorption reinforced established trends in affinity - the shorter-chained PFHxS was less adsorbed than PFOS, and the sulphates (PFOS) were more readily adsorbed than the acid (PFOA). Interestingly, PAC WTS, showed an excellent adsorption affinity for the shorter chained PFHxS (58.8%), than the alum WTS and biosolids biochar at 22.6% and 41.74%, respectively. The results also showed that the alum WTS was less effective at adsorption than the PAC WTS despite having a larger surface area. Taken together, the results suggest that the hydrophobicity of the sorbent and the chemistry of the coagulant were critical factors for understanding PFAS adsorption on WTS, while other factors, such as the concentration of aluminium and iron in the WTS could not explain the trends seen. For the biochar samples, the surface area and hydrophobicity are believed to be the main drivers in the different performances. Adsorption from the solution containing multiple PFAS was also investigated with PAC WTS and biosolids biochar, demonstrating comparable performance on overall adsorption. However, the PAC WTS performed better with the short-chain PFHxS than the biosolids biochar. While both PAC WTS and biosolids biochar are promising candidates for adsorption, the study highlights the need to explore further the mechanisms behind PFAS adsorption, which could be a highly variable source to understand better the potential for WTS to be utilized as a PFAS adsorbent. © 2023 The Authors
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Electrochemical destruction and mobilization of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) in saturated soil
    Hou, Jie
    Li, Guoao
    Liu, Mingrui
    Chen, Liang
    Yao, Ye
    Fallgren, Paul H.
    Jin, Song
    CHEMOSPHERE, 2022, 287
  • [22] Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) in Surface Water From the Langat River, Peninsular Malaysia
    Zainuddin, Khairunnisa
    Zakaria, Mohamad Pauzi
    Al-Odaini, Najat Ahmed
    Bakhtiari, Alireza Riyahi
    Latif, Puziah Abdul
    ENVIRONMENTAL FORENSICS, 2012, 13 (01) : 82 - 92
  • [23] A Robust Method for Routine Analysis of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) in Various Edible Crop Matrices
    Xiang, Lei
    Sun, Teng-Fei
    Chen, Lei
    Xiao, Tao
    Cai, Quan-Ying
    Li, Hui
    He, De-Chun
    Wong, Ming-Hung
    Li, Yan-Wen
    Mo, Ce-Hui
    FOOD ANALYTICAL METHODS, 2017, 10 (07) : 2518 - 2528
  • [24] Enhanced Removal of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) in Constructed Wetlands: Iron Cycling and Microbial Mechanisms
    Kang, Yan
    Guo, Zizhang
    Ma, Haoqin
    Wu, Haiming
    Zhang, Jian
    ACS ES&T WATER, 2023, 3 (02): : 287 - 297
  • [25] Human Exposure Pathways and Pollution Control Technology of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS)
    Wang Yuan
    Zhang Pengyi
    PROGRESS IN CHEMISTRY, 2010, 22 (01) : 210 - 219
  • [26] Toxicity Effects of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) on Two Green Microalgae Species
    Mojiri, Amin
    Vishkaei, Mansoureh Nazari
    Ansari, Hanieh Khoshnevis
    Vakili, Mohammadtaghi
    Farraji, Hossein
    Kasmuri, Norhafezah
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES, 2023, 24 (03)
  • [27] Association of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) with Uric Acid among Adults with Elevated Community Exposure to PFOA
    Steenland, Kyle
    Tinker, Sarah
    Shankar, Anoop
    Ducatman, Alan
    ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES, 2010, 118 (02) : 229 - 233
  • [28] Defluorination of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) by Acidimicrobium sp. Strain A6
    Huang, Shan
    Jaffe, Peter R.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2019, 53 (19) : 11410 - 11419
  • [29] Method development and initial results of testing for perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in waterproof sunscreens
    Keawmanee, Sasipin
    Boontanon, Suwanna Kitpati
    Boontanon, Narin
    ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH, 2015, 20 (02) : 127 - 132
  • [30] Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) but not perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) showed DNA damage in comet assay on Paramecium caudatum
    Kawamoto, Kosuke
    Oashi, Takahiro
    Oami, Kazunori
    Liu, Wei
    Jin, Yihe
    Saito, Norimitsu
    Sato, Itaru
    Tsuda, Shuji
    JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2010, 35 (06): : 835 - 841