PFAS compounds persist as major environmental challenge in 2025.

These “forever chemicals” do not degrade in the environment. We all know by now that these chemicals if left untreated, build up in our bodies over our lifespan, and have been associated with serious health concerns like cancer and immune system impacts.

According to the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are present in just about anything around us, from our water, to our food, the air that we breath, and our day to day materials such as personal care products, packaging, even biosolids.

This is particularly challenging for landfill operators dealing with leachate, or any facility that needs to dispose of wastewater. So what should environmental professionals do to combat this situation?

To fulfill your role as an environmental professional, you need to know which technologies really work in raw leachate (and not in the idealized laboratory conditions.)

This is why we have created this technology roundup.

Since the type of leachate varies from landfill to landfill, the performance of different treatment processes are evaluated based on data gathered from operational treatment systems on site.

We evaluate performance for removal of a range of PFAS compounds, operational reliability under changing conditions, as well as the cost implications on your bottom line.

The following sections provide a straightforward review of today’s PFAS treatment options as they are implemented (or not) today, as opposed to marketing promises surround pfas remediation.

Our focus has been to have information that will allow you to make informed decisions based on your particular operation and regulatory requirements.

Quick Comparison: PFAS Treatment & Destruction Technology Performance in 2025.

Technology	Removal Efficiency	Effectiveness for Leachate	Operational Maturity	Cost Efficiency	Regulatory Acceptance
LEEF System’s Foam Fractionation	99.99%	Excellent	High	High	Strong
GAC	90-95%	Fair	High	Low	Moderate
Ion Exchange	95-98%	Fair to Good	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate
Reverse Osmosis	95-99%	Good (limited)	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate (limited)
Electrochemical Oxidation	90-99%	Limited Data	Low	Low	Limited
Plasma Arc	99%+ (lab only)	Experimental	Very Low	Very Low	Minimal
SCWO	99%+ (lab only)	Experimental	Very Low	Very Low	Minimal
Incineration	Variable	Poor	High	Moderate	Declining
Biological Methods	Inconclusive	Not Applicable	Research Only	Unknown	None

What’s Changed Since 2023: The Evolving PFAS Landscape

Since 2023, the PFAS treatment landscape has completely changed. If you are managing landfill leachate, you know first-hand these critical changes, which impact your treatment decisions:

Stricter Regulatory Standards

Now, across multiple states, there are stricter regulatory standards that are measured in parts per trillion, which require more sophisticated removal technologies than ever before.

“Parts per trillion” (ppt) is a very tiny concentration measurement (1 nanogram per liter or 10^-12) when referring to PFAS regulations.

This is similar to one drop in 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

PFAS compounds affect health at extremely low concentrations, are now detectable in the laboratory, and can bioaccumulate in organisms; therefore, regulatory limits exist at this microscopic level.

Incineration Methods Face Increasing Scrutiny

Incineration methods are increasingly coming under fire as the research shows worries over incomplete destruction and potentially toxic byproducts.

Now, many facilities are reconsidering this approach that was once common.

Commercial-Scale Foam Fractionation Systems

From pilot testing to proven field performance, commercial-scale foam fractionation systems have emerged as a leading solution for treating complex waste streams containing multiple PFAS compounds. Their ability to selectively separate and concentrate PFAS makes them increasingly attractive for landfill leachate applications.

Concentration Rather than Transfer

Instead of transfer of contamination, the preferred strategy has become concentration of contamination, minimizing the volume of material requiring specialized disposal. Modern separation technologies, like the LEEF System (explained below), are capable of concentrating PFAS residuals up to 100,000x and 10,000x the daily influent volume, such that downstream handling and destruction is much more efficient and cost-effective.

Total Cost of Ownership

Now total cost of ownership, including operational expenses, is driving technology selection more than initial capital expenses. Media replacement, energy consumption and long-term operation costs are evaluated before making decisions. In the case of the LEEF System, it has a 20+ year expected lifetime, low energy, minimal use of consumables, and minimal operator interaction, making long-term cost drastically less.

What NOT to Do in 2025

In the evolving PFAS treatment environment, there are some approaches that have shown to be ineffective or counterproductive.

• Dilution

Not only is dilution not an effective option, most regulations do not permit dilution as a method to meet PFAS concentration limits.

• Neglecting Total Cost Analysis

Only focusing on immediate expense can result in much more expensive lifetime costs. In other words, taking action now is more cost effective.

• Ignoring Short-Chain Compounds

Neglecting short-chain compounds doesn’t make them magically disappear. Don’t make the mistake of only treating long-chain compounds.

• Deferring Action

Regulatory requirements are continuing to tighten, so deferring action and continuing to treat reactively is becoming more important. POTWs cutting off leachate with high PFAS levels is a major emerging threat to landfill operators, putting their disposal outlets at risk of being lost, revenue halted, and operating costs increased.

The current focus has clearly moved to evidence-based solutions with verifiable performance in a landfill environment as opposed to just laboratory promises.

All of these developments are a major step forward in how our industry approach PFAS challenges.

Separation Technologies: Removing PFAS from Wastewater

 

Foam Fractionation – The LEEF System

Leading PFAS Treatment Technology in 2025

The LEEF System has demonstrated itself to be highly effective and scalable PFAS remediation solution for landfill leachate, achieving non-detect levels for many regulated long-chain compounds and significantly reducing select short-chain PFAS.

Core Technology:

Engineered for landfill leachate treatment, high efficiency capture and on-site management strategies with advanced PFAS separation and stabilization system.

Performance Metrics:

• Removal Efficiency: 99.99% for targeted PFAS compounds in tested landfill leachate.
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Excellent
• Operational Maturity: High
• Cost Efficiency: High
• Regulatory Acceptance: Strong

This patented technology is the first operational fixed-plant system of its kind in United States (installed at Bethlehem Landfill) that combines advanced foam fractionation coupled with specially designed multi stage filtration for the challenging landfill leachate matrix.

The LEEF System stands out from other PFAS separation systems because its unique multi-stage fractionation process is optimized.

This precisely engineered sequence is how the system operates:

• Collection and Pre-Treatment
  Leachate is first collected in a holding tank and pumped to the remediation site where it enters the LEEF System, into a day tank sized according to site-specific needs.
  
  
• Advanced Fractionation Technology
  The key stage is made up of specialized fractionators that inject precisely calibrated fine air bubbles into the leachate.
  
  Due to their surfactant-like nature, PFAS compounds are surface-active molecules, which have a high affinity to air-water interfaces. Since they are surfactants, they are drawn to these interfaces, adsorbed to small air bubbles, and as they reach the surface, they form a concentrated foam (known as foamate).
  
  Such a mechanism utilizes the intrinsic chemical features of PFAS molecules to accumulate on air water interfaces without the addition of chemical additives under standard condition.
  
  
• Progressive Concentration
  PFAS compounds are then successively concentrated by fractionation, until the final foamate which is continuously removed by skimming and accumulated in additional tanks as a concentrate.
  
  
• Final Treatment and Volume Reduction
  Final treatment and volume reduction is accomplished by concentrating PFAS-loaded residuals to only 1/10,000th to 1/100,000th of the daily influent flow, an unprecedented level of waste volume reduction.

LEEF System Advantages in PFAS Treatment

The LEEF System has a processing capacity of up to 100,000 gallons of raw leachate per day, and is advantageous to landfill operators in several important ways:

Environmentally Responsible

The system consumes low energy and in most cases, no chemical additives are required (additives are used only for some short chain PFAS or high scaling environments).

The LEEF System concentrates PFAS for proper disposal without producing harmful byproducts, unlike many destructive technologies.

• Modular Design

Due to the modular units, systems can be based on flow rates and contaminant levels for phased implementation and expansion.

• Operational Efficiency

The LEEF System requires low energy and minimal maintenance, which leads to lower operational costs. It is also designed for remote operation and operators have praised it as being very easy to use.

• Comprehensive Air Quality Management

The LEEF System does not only treat the water, but it also actively monitors its air quality. An integrated air scrubber captures possible smells and other air pollutants and treats them, causing less risk to the on-site people.

Though not being required in every jurisdiction, some states mandate air treatment as a component of PFAS remediation plans. The Water and Carbon Group installed the air management system at Bethlehem Landfill well in advance- not because there was any requirement in that regard. During treatment, potential pollutants and odors are captured by an integrated air scrubber which supports environmental compliance beyond simply water treatment.

• Proven Performance

Foam fractionation is a tried and field-proven technology due to years of successful use in treatment of PFAS to below the limits of detection (LOD), at several full-scale landfill sites.

The LEEF System is proven to perform consistently in other successful installations among active landfills, making it the best solution to PFAS remediation.

• Regulatory Alignment

Regulatory agencies in key regions have reviewed the technology and found it to be supportive to the permitting process.

The LEEF System’s track record of field performance is what truly sets it apart.
It has demonstrated its effectiveness by continuously operating at commercial scale, treating millions of gallons of complex landfill leachate to the increasingly high standards imposed on the final discharge by the EPA and state regulatory agencies.

See the LEEF System^® in Action!

Be like Bethlehem. 
Eliminate PFAS today.

Book Demo

Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)

The conventional approach to PFAS treatment is Granular Activated Carbon, which is mainly used in drinking water applications.

Core Technology: Surface adsorption of PFAS molecules to carbon media.

Performance Metrics:

• Removal Efficiency: 90-95%
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Fair
• Operational Maturity: High
• Cost Efficiency: Low
• Regulatory Acceptance: Moderate

This technology is based on adsorption mechanisms where PFAS molecules are adsorbed on the carbon surfaces out of the water stream.

GAC is adequate for treatment of municipal water with little contamination, but its application to landfill leachate has significant operational constraints, such as:

Key Limitations

• Competitive Adsorption

High organic content in leachate causes competitive adsorption for binding sites (in other words: the binding of ions and molecules).

This drastically reduces PFAS removal efficiency, and makes it difficult to separate the PFAS from leachate.

• Frequent Media Replacement

Since complex wastewaters require frequent carbon replacement, there are ongoing operational costs and secondary waste streams that must be disposed of

• Limited Short-Chain Effectiveness

GAC is not very effective on short chain PFAS compounds and leaves facilities exposed to regulatory compliance issues as these compounds come under further regulatory scrutiny.

Now, GAC is used only as a supplementary treatment step rather than as a sole solution to the problem of landfill leachate.

Ion Exchange Resins

Ion exchange technology consists of specialized resins that have positively charged functional group that attracts negatively charged PFAS molecule through electrostatic interaction.

Core Technology: Electrostatic binding of PFAS to positively charged resin sites.

Performance Metrics:

• Removal Efficiency: 95-98%
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Fair to Good
• Operational Maturity: Moderate
• Cost Efficiency: Moderate
• Regulatory Acceptance: Moderate

Key Limitations

Although this technology offers some improvements compared with GAC, especially for short chain compounds, it also possesses its own limitations for leachate treatment, such as:

• Fouling Vulnerability
  Complex wastewaters quickly foul the resin and the resin performance is quickly compromised, therefore requiring frequent regeneration cycles that impedes operational efficiency.
  
• Disposal Challenges
  Spent resins with concentrated PFAS constitute an additional waste to manage and is an additional associated cost.
  
• Inconsistent Performance
  The performance of the treatment is inconsistent with the composition of leachate, especially in relation to pH fluctuations and competing ions.

Ion exchange is not suitable for landfill application, requiring extensive pre-treatment and working best within multi technology systems rather than stand alone.

The technology is not effective in the manner demonstrated by integrated fractionation systems, such as the LEEF System for treating variable high strength leachate.

Reverse Osmosis (RO)

Reverse osmosis (RO) is a technology based on the membrane that removes contaminants under pressure to push water through a semipermeable membrane to separate PFASs compounds with the treated effluent.

Core Technology: High-pressure membrane filtration which rejects PFAS compounds on size and charge properties.

Performance Metrics:

• Removal Efficiency: 95–99%
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Good (with limitations)
• Operational Maturity: Moderate
• Cost Efficiency: Moderate
• Regulatory Acceptance: Moderate (when paired with proper concentrate management)

Key Limitations

Even though RO has the potential of being very effective in the removal of both long and short chain PFAS compounds, its use in recovering landfill leachate often limits it because of:

• A high consumption of energy

Grounded maintenance of the needed pressures in membrane separation is energy intensive particularly in the case of landfill leachate proceeded by high strength wastes.

• Membrane Fouling

There are elevated quantities of suspended solids, organic matters and scaling agents in leachate which make membranes more susceptible to fouling, thus should be cleaned or changed regularly and therefore raising the maintenance costs.

• Concentrate Management

RO systems create a PFAS-laden concentrate ( reject stream ) which must further be treated or disposed of in an equally secure and in many cases a much more expensive way – shifting the problem but not solving it.

• Capital and operating cost

RO systems have high costs of capital investment and pre-treatment systems are required to avoid premature membrane damages at a high cost of ownership.

Destruction Technologies: Breaking Down PFAS Compounds

 

Electrochemical Oxidation (EO)

One of several emerging technologies that will destroy PFAS at the molecular level is electrochemical oxidation (EO).

EO doesn’t capture or concentrate the compounds, but rather breaks them down using powerful oxidants such as hydroxyl or sulfate radicals created by an electric current.

Core Technology
Electrochemically generated oxidants (e.g., hydroxyl and sulfate radicals) and direct electron transfer for the destruction of PFAS.

Performance Metrics

• Removal Efficiency: 90–99% (under optimized conditions)
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Limited Data
• Operational Maturity: Low
• Cost Efficiency: Low
• Regulatory Acceptance: Limited

The appeal of EO is that it has the ability to completely degrade PFAS, not creating another waste stream.

Under carefully controlled conditions, the process has achieved greater than 90% reduction of targeted compounds in lab and pilot settings.

However, in real life, particularly with demanding waste streams, such as landfill leachate, EO still runs into hurdles:

Key Limitations

• Energy Use

It has a high operating cost due to the high electrical demand.

• Scaling Challenges

EO hasn’t been proven at commercial scale for complex wastewater treatment.

• Interference from Leachate Matrix

Organic content and other constituents that are present in the matrix can effectively suppress the oxidants, which in turn reduces PFAS breakdown.

• Byproduct Concerns

Sometimes a partial degradation produces shorter chained PFAS, which may still have regulatory or environmental concerns.

While EO has promise as part of future PFAS treatment technologies, it is largely still in the pilot phase for use on leachate in 2025.

Compared to the more field proven technology such as the LEEF System, EO still has to make good ground on reliability, scalability and cost efficiency.

Plasma Arc Destruction

An ultra-high temperature plasma field (often over 5000 °C) is used in plasma arc technology to destroy PFAS compounds.

The idea is simple: add enough thermal energy to crack the nearly indestructible carbon fluorine bonds that provide PFAS’s persistence.

Core Technology
Ionized gas (plasma) at extreme temperatures (5,000°C+) to split the carbon fluorine bonds through thermal destruction of PFAS.

Performance Metrics

• Removal Efficiency: 99%+ (lab only)
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Experimental
• Operational Maturity: Very Low
• Cost Efficiency: Very Low
• Regulatory Acceptance: Minimal

In laboratory settings, plasma systems have nearly destroyed PFAS. Several startups have built prototype units, and the theory is strong.

However, the promise has proven difficult to translate into such real-world performance.

Key Limitations

• Intense Energy Demand

Sustaining very high plasma temperatures requires very large input of energy, and ultimately leads to high operational costs.

• Engineering Complexity

It can become quite complicated. The plasma arc destruction systems are designed to be complex, with complex thermal control.

• Scalability Issues

Most plasma units are small scale and have low throughput. When trying to implement them at a larger scale, it’s unclear whether they can be cost-effective.

• Lack of Field Data

Very few plasma arc destruction systems have been tested (or proven) on actual landfill leachate.

Currently, plasma arc destruction in PFAS treatment remains largely experimental in recent years. Real world application, especially of leachate, a complex matrix which is currently a work in progress despite the fact that the science is compelling.

Thermal & Hybrid Approaches

Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)

In supercritical water oxidation (SCWO), water is heated and pressurized to pressures and temperatures above its critical point of 374°C and 218 atm where it becomes both a gas and a liquid.

Core Technology
PFAS in water heated above its supercritical point is destroyed via thermal-oxidative mechanisms that allow rapid breakdown via oxidative reactions.

Performance Metrics

• Removal Efficiency: 99%+ (lab only)
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Experimental
• Operational Maturity: Very Low
• Cost Efficiency: Very Low
• Regulatory Acceptance: Minimal

In this state, PFAS compounds can be rapidly broken down by intense oxidative reactions with the help of added oxidants.

PFAS destruction efficiencies greater than 99.99% have been demonstrated in laboratory environments, making SCWO one of the most effective technologies in purely technical terms.

However, there are barriers when implementing SCWO outside the lab:

Key Limitations

• Extreme Operating Conditions
  Systems operating in such extreme conditions demand special materials and safety systems in order to withstand high temperatures and pressures.
  
  
• Technical Complexity
  SCWO is a process that features high technical complexity including sophisticated process controls and need of skilled operators.
  
  
• Scaling Challenges
  Most installations have remained at the pilot stage with little demonstration at a full-scale installation in a landfill.
  
  
• Capital Investment
  The upfront costs are very high for most landfill operations to get into.

Although SCWO has high potential performance, it is not yet within reach for routine landfill leachate treatment in 2025.

Incineration (Legacy Method)

Previously, incineration was a common method for treating PFAS contaminated waste, especially concentrated residuals from separation systems.

Core Technology
Combustion of PFAS containing waste (often used for concentrated residuals from separation systems).

Performance Metrics

• Removal Efficiency: 70-90%
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Poor
• Operational Maturity: High
• Cost Efficiency: Moderate
• Regulatory Acceptance: Declining

In recent years, its role in PFAS treatment has diminished significantly due to a growing list of concerns:

Key Limitations

• Incomplete Destruction:
  Not all PFAS compounds may be broken down to the point where they are destroyed at typical incineration temperatures.
  
  
• Stack Emissions:
  Facilities burning fluorinated materials have emitted PFAS byproducts.
  
  
• Tightening Regulations:
  Incineration of PFAS is now limited in several states, and may soon be federally regulated as well.
  
  
• Public Pushback:
  Air pollution concerns in the public have resulted in strong opposition to incinerator projects.

Today, incineration is becoming less of a solution and more of a transitional or outmoded solution.

In general, most landfill operators are moving away from it towards more reliable and environmentally responsible options.

Biological & Experimental Methods

Enzymatic and Microbial Degradation

On the experimental frontier, scientists are investigating biological methods to break PFAS down, things like engineered enzymes or specialized microbial consortia.

Core Technology
Biological degradation of PFAS compounds by use of enzymes or microbial communities under specific conditions.

Performance Metrics

• Removal Efficiency: Inconclusive
• General Effectiveness for Leachate: Not Applicable
• Operational Maturity: Research Only
• Cost Efficiency: Unknown
• Regulatory Acceptance: None

Some scientists have a handful of studies suggesting that some organisms can break down some PFAS compounds, at least in part, under ideal lab conditions.

While these approaches have been limited to the research phase, they still have several critical limitations, such as:

Key Limitations

• Early-Stage Development
  Most biological systems are not yet field ready, but are in early-stage development.
• Limited Scope
  Processes as of today are focused on a limited scope of PFAS chemistries.
• Environmental Sensitivity
  The conditions necessary for biological activity do not match real world leachate composition.
• Slow Degradation Rates
  Such chemical breakdown occurs too slowly for practical use, even under favorable conditions.

Although biological degradation could potentially contribute to the solution in the long term, it is not a viable solution for landfill operators currently facing PFAS issues.

It is still a scientific pursuit, not a treatment solution, at this time.

Need Help Navigating PFAS Treatment Options?

Choosing the best PFAS treatment technology is a complex process dependent on the PFAS compounds that exist in your facility’s leachate as well as your regulatory needs.

The Water and Carbon Group specializes in bringing clarity to this complex problem.

We Can Help You in Your Decision Process:

• Comprehensive Treatability Studies

We will bring a smaller scale version of the LEEF System to your site using a treatment trailer. It allows us to do an onsite study of your actual leachate in real world conditions, then provide a clear path to full-scale implementation with the performance data.

• Technology Evaluation

We’ll evaluate the LEEF System’s foam fractionation performance against your specific compliance needs.

• Implementation Planning

We’ll design a plan to minimize disruption to your existing operations.

• Ongoing Monitoring Optimization

We’ll be monitoring the performance and make optimizations to the treatment processes as conditions change. We also continue to service the system with troubleshooting support and can supply a trained operator to keep the system operating at peak performance.

With our team of environmental engineers who are specialists in PFAS we take special care of every facility to help you comply with both state and federal regulatory requirements, providing you with the best solutions that will protect the environment, your business and your bottom line.