News

Stay up to date – with the latest developments, innovations, and projects from pro aqua.

Removing PFAS from Wastewater: Target Treatment of Industrial Water Streams

August 5, 2026

Marina Wendler

Removing PFAS from wastewater is one of the most demanding tasks in modern water treatment. While consumers primarily know PFAS from cookware, carpets, outdoor apparel, or drinking water, the main technical burden often lies elsewhere: in industrial wastewater, landfill leachate, contaminated groundwater, historical firefighting foam contamination, production sites, concentrates from filtration plants, and other contaminated process streams.

For companies, plant operators, and remediation managers, PFAS is no longer merely a communication topic. It is an operational, liability, cost, and technology issue. Regulatory pressure is increasing, limit values are becoming more specific, monitoring is being expanded, and PFAS emissions are becoming increasingly visible. The EU has mandated harmonized monitoring of PFAS in drinking water since January 2026.[i] At the same time, the European Commission points out that the Industrial Emissions Directive foresees stricter PFAS monitoring, including reporting obligations for PFOA, PFHxS, and their salts starting in 2028.[ii]

This has consequences: What may not have been in analytical focus in the past is measured today. What is measured must be evaluated. And what exceeds limit values or internal target parameters must be treated.

Removing PFAS from Wastewater: Why Separation Alone Is Not Enough

At first glance, removing PFAS from wastewater sounds like a classic water treatment task. Pollutant in, select process, pollutant out. With PFAS, the reality is significantly more complex.

PFAS are chemically extremely stable. The carbon-fluorine bond is among the strongest bonds in organic chemistry.Many PFAS are persistent, some mobile, some bioaccumulative, and some toxicologically particularly relevant. The German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) describes that PFAS in the environment are fully eliminated neither by bacteria nor by water, air, or light, and can spread into water and sediment after being released.

For exactly this reason, it is insufficient in many cases to merely filter PFAS out of a water stream. Activated carbon, ion exchangers, nanofiltration, or reverse osmosis can be very effective, but they frequently shift the problem into a secondary medium: loaded activated carbon, resins, membrane concentrates, sludges, regenerates, or brine. The pollutant is not gone then. It is concentrated, packaged smaller, and waiting for the next technical decision.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies granular activated carbon, anion exchange resins, reverse osmosis, and nanofiltration as Best Available Technologies technologies for PFAS in drinking water[iii]. At the same time, the EPA points out that currently available technologies separate PFAS from drinking water and generate PFAS-containing materials that subsequently must be treated, disposed of, or otherwise managed.

For industrial applications, precisely this point is crucial. The actual question is not only: How do we lower the PFAS level in the effluent? But rather: What happens to the PFAS-containing residue?

Typical B2B Scenarios: Where PFAS-Contaminated Water Streams Arise

PFAS can occur in very different technical contexts. Sites where PFAS are produced, processed, used, stored, released, or introduced via waste are particularly relevant.

These include industrial facilities using PFAS, electroplating, textile and paper industries, electronics, surface treatment, chemical manufacturing, landfills, airports, firefighting and fire training sites, refineries, military sites, municipal or industrial wastewater treatment plants with corresponding inflows, as well as remediation projects for contaminated groundwater.

The EPA describes industrial PFAS-containing liquid waste stemming, among other things, from the production of PFAS, the manufacturing of PFAS-containing products, accidental releases, as well as AFFF water-foam mixtures from fire extinguishing agents[iv]. Furthermore, wastewater from primary PFAS manufacturers or secondary industrial PFAS users as well as wastewater treatment plants with industrial PFAS inflows can be contaminated.

Especially with wastewater treatment plants and landfill leachate, a specific conflict of objectives arises. Conventional biological wastewater treatment is not designed to destroy PFAS. The EPA notes that conventional wastewater treatment technologies generally cannot effectively destroy or control PFAS and may in some cases even increase measurable PFAA concentrations when precursor compounds are transformed during the process[v].

For operators, this means: PFAS must be understood as early in the process as possible. Anyone who measures only at the effluent often sees only the result of a complex input mix. A source differentiation is far more sensible: Which sub-streams contain PFAS? What concentrations are present? Which PFAS species dominate? Are precursor compounds present? Which matrix substances influence the treatment? How high are conductivity, chloride, sulfate, organic carbon, pH value, temperature, hardness, and solid content?

Without these data, PFAS treatment quickly turns into a blind flight accompanied by laboratory bills.

Why PFAS Remediation Usually Requires a Process Concept

A single process is rarely the complete solution. In many projects, a multi-stage approach makes sense: first measure, then pre-clean, then concentrate, then treat, then polish and monitor.

The Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council categorizes PFAS treatment technologies fundamentally by function: immobilize, separate and concentrate, or destroy. At the same time, it emphasizes that many existing processes are inadequate for PFAS and that new technologies or innovative combinations of existing technologies are frequently required[vi].

A typical concept can look like this: First, the water stream is analytically characterized. After that, solids, iron, organic loads, or interfering matrix components are removed. Subsequently, PFAS can be separated and concentrated from large water volumes using activated carbon, ion exchangers, membrane processes, or foam fractionation. The treated main stream is monitored and polished if necessary. The PFAS-rich sub-stream or concentrate is treated separately.

Precisely here arises the technical interface for destructive processes. The higher the PFAS concentration and the smaller the volume stream to be treated, the more interesting processes become that do not merely separate, but can degrade PFAS molecules.

BDD Electrolysis: Degrade PFAS Instead of Merely Separating Them

Electrochemical oxidation using boron-doped diamond electrodes, in short BDD electrolysis, is an approach for treating PFAS-contaminated liquids. In this process, the water stream is routed through an electrochemical cell. Highly reactive oxidative species that can attack organic molecules are generated at the BDD anode. With PFAS, this is particularly demanding because the molecules are extremely stable. Exactly for this reason, the process is compelling: It aims not at storage, but at chemical degradation[vii]. Exactly for this reason, the process is compelling: It aims not at storage, but at chemical degradation.

Our partner WSP describes electrochemical oxidation with durable BDD electrodes as a process for destroying PFAS in liquids. According to WSP, BDD electrodes can generate oxidizing radicals that break down PFAS molecules into shorter molecules and ultimately lead to carbon dioxide and fluoride.

According to WSP, this technology becomes particularly relevant at elevated PFAS concentrations, such as in industrial wastewater, groundwater, and landfill leachate. For lower PFAS concentrations in the ppt range, WSP recommends concentration via processes such as ion exchangers, foam fractionation, or reverse osmosis first, followed by treatment of the concentrated PFAS liquid stream[viii].

This is also important for practical categorization: BDD electrolysis is not a magic "everything in, everything clean" box. Technically sensible, BDD is primarily useful where the process is properly designed: matching concentration, suitable matrix, controlled conductivity, sufficient mass transfer, defined current, appropriate residence time, temperature control, gas management, byproduct management, and analytical control.

Role of pro aqua: BDD Cells as Technical Core Components

pro aqua develops and produces boron-doped diamond electrodes and BDD cells for various water treatment applications. The internal product and technology positioning describes BDD cells as standard and specialized cells that generate oxidizing species and can be used for applications ranging from drinking water to wastewater and process water treatment, up to electrochemically-activated water production. The pro aqua BDD cells are available in different cell types and sizes and can be engineered technically depending on the application[ix].

For PFAS projects, this role is particularly relevant because the electrode is not merely a component, but shapes the electrochemical process. Electrode area, electrode gap, current density, flow rate, material selection, temperature, conductivity, and hydraulic integration influence whether a process works in the laboratory, remains stable at pilot scale, and becomes technically scalable later.

BDD Electrolysis as Part of a Realistic PFAS Strategy

The strength of BDD electrolysis lies where PFAS are not intended to be merely shifted, but degraded within a defined liquid stream. Concentrated sub-streams, regenerates, membrane concentrates, landfill leachate, industrial wastewater, or contaminated groundwater with relevant concentrations are particularly interesting.

In many cases, BDD will not operate alone, but will be combined with pretreatment and post-treatment. Pre-filtration protects the cell. Concentration processes reduce the volume stream. Electro-oxidation treats the PFAS-rich stream. Downstream processes can reduce byproducts, residual oxidants, or remaining trace substances. Monitoring ensures that the process works not only in the brochure, but also in reality.

Precisely in this lies technical integrity: Not every water is the same. Not every PFAS behaves the same. Not every matrix is suitable. But where the boundary conditions fit, BDD electrolysis can be an important building block for destroying PFAS-contaminated liquid streams.

Conclusion: Removing PFAS from Wastewater Means Mastering the Entire Pollutant Stream

Removing PFAS from wastewater is not a simple filtration question. It is a system task. Anyone who only separates PFAS must subsequently deal with loaded media, concentrates, or residues. Anyone who wants to degrade PFAS needs suitable water streams, robust technology, sound analytics, and a realistic process concept.

For industry, landfills, remediation projects, and operators of technical facilities, PFAS will continue to gain importance in the coming years. Monitoring is becoming more precise, regulations are becoming more concrete, and the demand for destructive processes is becoming more urgent.BDD electrolysis with boron-doped diamond electrodes is a serious technological approach for this.Not as a magic bullet, but as a precise building block for treating highly contaminated or pre-concentrated PFAS water streams.

Would you like to learn more about this topic? Feel free to read the following articles: