Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34225046›Full record

ArticleJournal of environmental management2021

Investigation of an immobilization process for PFAS contaminated soils.

Edwin Barth, John McKernan, Diana Bless, Kavitha Dasu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of environmental management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The PFAS roadmap-Navigating a path together to improved management.Sustainability science and technology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Applied soil ecology : a section of Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Edwin BarthU.S. EPA. Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, 26 MLK Dr, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA. Electronic address: barth.ed@epa.gov.
John McKernanU.S. EPA. Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, 26 MLK Dr, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA. Electronic address: mckernan.john@epa.gov.
Diana BlessU.S. EPA. Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response, 26 MLK Dr, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA. Electronic address: bless.diana@epa.gov.
Kavitha DasuBattelle Memorial Institute, 505 King Ave, Columbus, OH, 43201, USA. Electronic address: dasu@battelle.org.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A two-phased bench-scale study was conducted to evaluate various sorbents for possible use as chemical stabilizing agents, along with cement solidification, for possible use in an in-situ solidification/stabilization (immobilization) treatment process for per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) contaminated soils. The first phase involved sorption experiments for six selected PFAS compounds diluted in a water solution, using five selected sorbents: granular activated carbon (GAC), activated carbon-clay blend, modified clay, biochar, iron (Fe)-amended biochar, and Ottawa sand as a control media. The second phase involved chemical stabilization treatment (via sorption), using the most effective sorbent identified in the first phase, followed by solidification of two soils from PFAS-contaminated sites. Physical solidification was achieved by adding cement as a binding agent. Results from the first phase (sorption experiments) indicated that GAC was slightly more successful than the other sorbents in sorption performance for a 3000 μg/L solution containing a mixture of the six selected PFAS analytes (500 μg/L concentration each of shorter- and longer-chain alkyl acids), and was the only sorbent used in the second phase of this study. While the GAC, activated carbon-clay blend, and modified clay sorbents showed similar sorption performance for the longer chain analytes tested, both the activated carbon-clay blend and modified clay, exhibited slightly less sorptive capacity than GAC for the shorter-chain alkyl acids. Immobilization effectiveness was evaluated by soil leachability testing using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 1312, Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) on the samples collected from two PFAS-contaminated sites. For the majority of the PFAS soil analytes, the addition of GAC sorbent (chemical stabilization) substantially reduced the leachability of PFAS compounds from the contaminated soil samples, and the addition of cement as a physical binding agent (solidification) further decreased leachability for a few of the PFAS compounds. Overall immobilization of PFAS analytes that were detectable in the leachate from two PFAS contaminated soils ranged from 87.1% to 99.9%. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider that the laboratory testing results presented here may have application to further pilot or limited field-scale studies within a broader suite of PFAS-contaminated site treatment options that are currently available for treating PFAS contaminated soils.

Indexed as

FluorocarbonsSoil PollutantsClayEnvironmental PollutionSoilClayFluorocarbonsSoilSoil PollutantsImmobilizationLeaching. carbonPFASPFOAPFOSRemediation

Identifiers

PMID34225046
PMCPMC8682492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.