Logo
  • The School
  • Nomad City
  • Calendar
  • People
  • Shop

info@theschool.city

InstagramXFacebook
PFAS

PFAS

What is PFAS?

Where is PFAS?

Test PFAS in water, soil, eggs…

PFAS test voor grond (aarde en zand) - PFAS testen: De beste manier om PFAS in uw omgeving te detecteren.

Binnen enkele dagen na bestelling ontvangt u van ons een speciale brievenbus verpakking voor monstername en transport van grond.

www.pfastest.nu

PFAS test voor grond (aarde en zand) - PFAS testen: De beste manier om PFAS in uw omgeving te detecteren.

Natural Solutions

Hemp Plant vs PFOS

Experiment succesvol om hennepplanten te gebruiken om PFAS uit vervuilde grond te halen

Een ondernemer uit Lokeren is erin geslaagd om met hennepplanten PFOS uit de bovenste laag van de bodem te halen.

www.vrt.be

Experiment succesvol om hennepplanten te gebruiken om PFAS uit vervuilde grond te halen
Dankzij hennep spectaculair minder PFAS van blusschuim in bodem bij brandweerschool in Ranst

De terreinen van Campus Vesta in Ranst kennen een historische vervuiling met PFAS. Op de site krijgen brandweerlieden uit de hele provincie hun opleiding. Vroeger gebeurde dat met blusschuim dat vol PFAS zat. "Campus Vesta was dan ook een symbolisch belangrijke testsite voor ons project met hennep", zegt Frederik Verstraete, CEO van C-Biotech.

www.vrt.be

Dankzij hennep spectaculair minder PFAS van blusschuim in bodem bij brandweerschool in Ranst

Pro’s

‣
Phytoremediation Potential:

Hemp plants have been shown to have phytoremediation capabilities, meaning they can absorb and accumulate contaminants from soil through their root systems. This natural process can help remove PFOS and other pollutants from polluted soil, reducing environmental contamination.

‣
Low Cost:

Phytoremediation using hemp plants is often more cost-effective than traditional remediation methods such as excavation and soil replacement. Hemp plants are relatively inexpensive to grow and require minimal maintenance, making them a cost-effective option for soil remediation projects.

‣
Environmentally Friendly:

Phytoremediation with hemp plants is an environmentally friendly approach to soil remediation, as it does not involve the use of harsh chemicals or heavy machinery. This reduces the carbon footprint and minimizes disturbance to the surrounding ecosystem.

‣
Soil Improvement:

In addition to removing contaminants, hemp plants can also improve soil quality by enhancing soil structure, increasing organic matter content, and promoting microbial activity. This can lead to long-term benefits for soil health and fertility.

‣
Versatility:

Hemp plants are versatile and adaptable to a wide range of environmental conditions, including contaminated soils. They can thrive in various climates and soil types, making them suitable for phytoremediation projects in diverse geographic regions.

Con’s

‣
Slow Process:

Phytoremediation using hemp plants is generally a slow process, as it takes time for the plants to absorb and accumulate contaminants from the soil. Depending on the level of contamination and site conditions, remediation efforts may take several growing seasons to achieve significant results.

‣
Limited Effectiveness:

While hemp plants can absorb PFOS and other contaminants from soil, their effectiveness may be limited in highly contaminated or complex soil environments. Factors such as soil pH, moisture levels, and the presence of other pollutants can influence the efficiency of phytoremediation.

‣
Potential Biomass Disposal Issues:

After phytoremediation, the harvested hemp biomass may contain high levels of contaminants, including PFOS. Proper disposal of the contaminated biomass is essential to prevent recontamination of the environment and ensure human and environmental safety.

‣
Regulatory Considerations:

Phytoremediation projects involving hemp plants may be subject to regulatory requirements and permits, depending on the jurisdiction and site-specific conditions. Compliance with regulations governing the cultivation, harvesting, and disposal of hemp biomass is necessary to avoid legal issues.

‣
Risk of Contaminant Uptake:

There is some concern that hemp plants used for phytoremediation may accumulate PFOS and other contaminants in their tissues, potentially posing risks to human health and the environment if not properly managed. Monitoring and testing of plant tissue and soil are essential to assess the effectiveness and safety of phytoremediation efforts.

Water Filtration

1. Activated Carbon Filtration (GAC - Granular Activated Carbon)

How it works: PFAS molecules adsorb onto the surface of activated carbon particles.

image

Pro’s

  • Effective for long-chain PFAS (like PFOA, PFOS).
  • Widely available and relatively low-cost.
  • Suitable for point-of-use (e.g., under-sink) and large-scale municipal systems.

Con’s

  • Less effective for short-chain PFAS.
  • Requires regular replacement to remain effective.
  • Disposal of used carbon can be problematic (contains concentrated PFAS).

2. Ion Exchange Resins

How it works: PFAS are removed by swapping places with other ions on a synthetic resin.

image

Pro’s

  • Highly effective for both long- and short-chain PFAS.
  • Longer lifespan than activated carbon.
  • Faster treatment rates.

Con’s

  • Higher initial cost than carbon filters.
  • Requires professional maintenance and disposal.
  • Resins must be tailored to specific PFAS types.

3. Reverse Osmosis (RO)

How it works: Water is forced through a semi-permeable membrane that blocks PFAS.

image

Pro’s

  • Removes a wide range of contaminants, including PFAS.
  • Effective for both long- and short-chain PFAS.
  • Ideal for home use (under-sink systems).

Con’s

  • High water waste (can waste 3–4 liters per liter of filtered water).
  • Slower flow rate.
  • More expensive and requires regular maintenance.
  • Also removes healthy minerals (can be re-added)

4. Nanofiltration

How it works: Similar to RO but slightly larger pore size, allowing smaller molecules to pass.

image

Pro’s

  • Good at removing larger PFAS molecules.
  • Lower pressure requirements than RO (less energy use).

Con’s

  • Less effective for short-chain PFAS.
  • Still produces wastewater.
  • Higher cost than other methods.

5. Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs)

How it works: Uses strong oxidants (e.g., ozone, hydrogen peroxide, UV) to break PFAS bonds.

image

Pro’s

  • Can destroy PFAS rather than just capture them.
  • Potential for complete degradation with optimization.

Con’s

  • Not yet consistently effective across all PFAS types.
  • Complex, energy-intensive, and expensive.
  • Still under development for large-scale drinking water use.

6. Electrochemical Oxidation / Plasma Treatment

How it works: Uses electricity or plasma to break PFAS molecules apart.

image
  • Capable of destroying PFAS.
  • Promising results in lab and pilot tests.
  • Not yet widely available.
  • Expensive and energy-intensive.
  • Often used in combination with other treatments.

Nomad City Application

image
image
https://www.resonantwater.nl/nl/waterfilter/34-mineraal-stenen-aqualine.html

At Nomad City we are currently using a Berkey waterfilter to filter our rainwater so we can use it as drinkwater. We use two filters in the Big Berkey system (8,5 liter). We refill the system about four times a week, which adds up to 34 liters a week and 1768 liters a year. This means that each filter is processing about 884 liters a year.

Berkey claims there filters can process 3000 Gallon (VS) = 11356,2354 Liter before they need to be replaced (

USA Berkey Filters The Science Behind Berkey Water Filtration: How Does It Work? - USA Berkey FiltersUSA Berkey Filters The Science Behind Berkey Water Filtration: How Does It Work? - USA Berkey Filters
). But how frequently the filters need to be replaced also depends on how much water passes through the filters, as well as the contaminant quantity in the water. In their testing Berkey is using laboratory water that is already pretty clean.

Berkey has had some criticism in the past for being overconfident about the performance of their filters. (

Berkey Filter: Here's the TruthBerkey Filter: Here's the Truth
). After reading lots of articles and looking at independent test results I found out that their filters are indeed very good but they claim their filters last longer than what they actually tested them for.

According to the stats above we would need to replace our filters every 12 years. But we are not using clean tap water in our system but rainwater which is a little ‘dirtier’ and thus more intense for the system. I am also not 100% convinced that their filters maintain their good performance throughout 3000 gallons. Therefore we decided to replace our filters every three years to be extra sure we have clean drinking water.

These filter systems can also remove healthy minerals from our water. Therefore we added mineral stones in the bottom container of our Big Berkey that are able to re-mineralize the water.

At Nomad City we are constantly researching this topic and looking for improvements.