New Filtration Technology Could Be Gamechanger In Removal of PFAS 'Forever Chemicals'

Bruce66423 shares a report from the Guardian: New filtration technology developed by Rice University may absorb some Pfas "forever chemicals" at 100 times the rate than previously possible, which could dramatically improve pollution control and speed remediations. Researchers also say they have also found a way to destroy Pfas, though both technologies face a steep challenge in being deployed on an industrial scale. A new peer-reviewed paper details a layered double hydroxide (LDH) material made from copper and aluminum that absorbs long-chain Pfas up to 100 times faster than commonly used filtration systems.

[...] [Michael Wong, director of Rice's Water Institute, a Pfas research center] said Rice's non-thermal process works by soaking up and concentrating Pfas at high levels, which makes it possible to destroy them without high temperatures. The LDH material Rice developed is a variation of similar materials previously used, but researchers replaced some aluminum atoms with copper atoms. The LDH material is positively charged and the long-chain Pfas are negatively charged, which causes the material to attract and absorb the chemicals, Wong said. [...]

Pfas are virtually indestructible because their carbon atoms are bonded with fluoride, but Rice found that the bonds could be broken if the chemicals in the material were heated to 400-500C -- a relatively low temperature. The fluoride gets trapped in the LDH material and is bonded to calcium. The leftover calcium-fluoride material is safe and can be disposed of in a landfill, Wong said. The process works with some long-chain Pfas that are among the most common water pollutants, and it also absorbed some smaller Pfas that are commonplace.

Wong said he is confident the material can be used to absorb a broad array of Pfas, especially if they are negatively charged. Most new Pfas elimination systems fail to work at an industrial scale. Wong said the new material has an advantage because its absorption rate is so strong, it can be used repeatedly and it is in a "drop in material," meaning it can be used with existing filtration infrastructure. That eliminates one of the major cost barriers.

"Gamechanger"

[RitchCraft]

Gamechanger! How many freaking times a week do you see this? Why wasn't this ever the word of the year at some point?

Re:

[RitchCraft]

I was a Marine for 6 years and a high school teacher for 18 years. In those years I served helping to make the world a better place.

Cool.

[Lando242]

Can't wait to never hear about this again.

Re:

[gtall]

Under pressure.

Missing the most critical aspect

[Firethorn]

It might be 100 times better at concentrating the PFAS, and better at disposing of it, but the critical question is whether or not it's 100 times cheaper than the alternatives to disposing of the PFAS, along with the legislative will to actually force the filtering for cleaning the stuff up.
Well, even 10% cheaper would be enough if the will exists. The cheaper cleaning it up is, the easier that sell is.
Just look at Flint Michigan for how cheap water companies and municipalities can be.

Re: Trump and MAGAs will fix it now

[YetanotherUID]

We should thank god our government is actively combatting this by loading up all the chemtrails with artificial testosterone to counteract this oh-so-real menace!

Re:

[bussdriver]

This is the kind of conspiracy we need to promote!

Reason and science don't work but this kind of BS does. Should have said COVID causes permanent ED problems or a % end up with penis shrinkage... add to the vaccine a risk of side effect of penis enlargement... testimonials from some weak tiny men very very happen with their COVID shot.

Sadly, it would work quite well in the USA.

Re:

[zeeky boogy doog]

Based on reported data (attributable to the fact that that monstrosity of a virus does a tap dance on your circulatory system too, because your blood vessels are lined with cells that have... *drum roll*... ACE2 receptors), covid actually does cause ED. It usually resolves, eventually, just like long covid symptoms usually do.

Re:

[bussdriver]

That is why I brought it up!
But we don't help things by supporting it with actual science and say it's true, it's fact, or high confidence supported theory etc. Science is bad, reason is bad, facts are bad... An analogy could be having Mr. Brain Worm's endorsement making one question the veracity of it.

Re:

[Mostly a lurker]

I agree that the economics of the process are key to whether it can be widely implemented. TFA does include some limited discussion. The point it makes that the new filters can be retrofitted to existing filtration systems to make them more effective, rather than requiring totally new systems to be built sounds potentially interesting, but there is not even an estimate of the cost of wide-scale adoption.

Re:

[Aighearach]

No, you cannot retrofit existing filtration systems to support the "low" temperature of 500C. I hope that helps.

Re:

[cunniff]

500C was not the filtration temperature. 500C is the temperature at which a separate catalyzed reaction can break the fluorine bonds. Right in the summary: "Rice's non-thermal process works by soaking up and concentrating Pfas at high levels" and "Pfas are virtually indestructible because their carbon atoms are bonded with fluoride, but Rice found that the bonds could be broken if the chemicals in the material were heated to 400-500C"

Re:

[gtall]

No, the critical question is whether it can be made to be 100 times cheaper than the alternatives of the PDAS IN THE FUTURE.

What about R&D do you not understand? What? You think new materials spring forth immaculately from the Lab yelling "I'm Here! Yea!!!"

Re:

[thisendup]

But it doesn't need to be 100 times cheaper. Even at the same cost, it would work 100 times faster (I'm guessing that means it can filter more gallons/minute than the current filters). So it would be a win at any cost less than or equal to that of the current filters (and perhaps even at a higher cost if speed of filtration is a factor).

MetterBetteridge

[greytree]

This is a MetterBetteridge Headline.

i.e. A headline that should have been a question and the answer is No.

400C is low?

[Anne Thwacks]

40C is hot where I live.

These people need to get out of the lab occasionally!

Re:

[jabuzz]

The melting point of steel ranges from 1370ÂC to 1540ÂC, depending heavily on the alloy composition. In that context, 400-500ÂC is indeed a low temperature. Historically, the way to destroy PFAS was to heat them to several thousand Kelvin so yes that's a low temperature.

Removal? Moval!

[aglider]

That is we are thinking to bring pfas from one place and move them somewhere else.

Re:Removal? Moval!

[piojo]

Nah. The paper says it's first absorbed, then the filter media is defluorinated with heat in the presence of calcium carbonate, and the fluorine compounds break down and form CaF2, which is a harmless salt. (It wouldn't be great to eat a lot of, but fluoride salts are what we use in dental treatments.)

I wonder if it's a problem that the defluorination was done in under argon? That doesn't seem like something that would be done at a water treatment plant.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Odds are it will mostly be shipped someplace for processing, but you could reasonably do it on site. Argon isn't exactly exotic, it's a fairly common welding gas.

Those lab people... (I was one)

[NarlyBitHead]

So, nothing else in water is negatively charged - and going to 'get there first'?

Need a bigger boat

[BrendaEM]

A few lab experiments are not going undo years of dumping. Only prevention can prevent environmental destruction.

Toothpaste additive

[chas.williams]

Calcium fluoride seems like an ideal toothpaste additive.