4.7 Article

Electrochemical treatment of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) in groundwater impacted by aqueous film forming foams (AFFFs)

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Volume 295, Issue -, Pages 170-175

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.04.024

Keywords

PFOS; PFOA; Perfluorinated; Electrochemical

Funding

  1. Air Force Civil Engineering Center (BAA Project) [689]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Laboratory experiments were performed to evaluate the use of electrochemical treatment for the decomposition of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), as well as other perfluoroallcyl acids (PFAAs), in aqueous film forming foam (AFFF)-impacted groundwater collected from a former firefighter training area and PFAA-spiked synthetic groundwater. Using a commercially-produced Ti/RuO2 anode in a divided electrochemical cell, PFOA and PFOS decomposition was evaluated as a function of current density (0-20 mA/cm(2)). Decomposition of both PFOA and PFOS increased with increasing current density, although the decomposition of PFOS did not increase as the current density was increased above 2.5 mA/cm(2). At a current density of 10 mA/cm(2), the first-order rate constants, normalized for current density and treatment volume, for electrochemical treatment of both PFOA and PFOS were 46 x 10(-5) and 70 x 10(-5) [(min(-1)) (mA/cm(2))(-1)(L)], respectively. Defluorination was confirmed for both PFOA and PFOS, with 58% and 98% recovery as fluoride, respectively (based upon the mass of PFOA and PFOS degraded). Treatment of other PFAAs present in the groundwater also was observed, with shorter chain PFAAs generally being more recalcitrant. Results highlight the potential for electrochemical treatment of PFAAs, particularly PFOA and PFOS, in AFFF-impacted groundwater. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available