.svg){kind=small}
Why PFAS destruction is moving up the agenda
In recent years, we’ve seen rising demand for PFAS destruction services – but the associated costs have been climbing just as sharply. Regulatory pressure has accelerated, corporate sustainability teams are setting more ambitious targets, and public awareness of PFAS-related risks has expanded. Against that backdrop, more organisations are finally moving from discussion to remediation.
For now, incineration remains the dominant option for permanent PFAS destruction. In most projects I’ve encountered, frontline treatment technologies focus on separating or concentrating PFAS on site, before the resulting waste is shipped to approved plants for high-temperature destruction. It’s an established route, but not an inexpensive one.
A 300 percent cost increase reframes remediation decisions
Destruction costs are rising sharply in certain regions. In the Nordics, for instance, several operators are reporting increases of roughly 300 percent for PFAS-related incineration. That scale of escalation changes the economics of remediation programmes.
Residual waste volumes are becoming the real cost driver
One response — and the one we’ve been working with most closely here at SELPAXT — involves looking harder at the residual waste volumes produced during treatment. Our surfactant-ligand assisted membrane filtration (SAMF) technology condenses all types of PFAS — ultra-short, short-chain and long-chain — leaving a residual waste ratio as low as 0.1 percent. When replicated across full-scale systems, this materially reduces the amount of waste that ends up requiring off-site destruction, reducing associated incineration costs.
The hidden economics in RO concentrate streams
The comparison with reverse osmosis (RO) is illustrative: RO tends to leave operators with far greater concentrate volumes, which then inherit the same destruction obligations and associated costs. That’s not a criticism of RO itself — it remains a useful treatment step — but it highlights where the economic pressure is accumulating.
Treatment integration is emerging as the low-risk option
A popular solution to this challenge lies in system integration. Facilities are using SELPAXT to complement existing treatment trains, particularly to manage RO waste streams. This is a pragmatic approach that enhances existing performance, reduces waste volumes and contains OPEX as destruction pricing moves upward.
Volume reduction as short-term protection against long-term risk
With increasing PFAS regulation on the horizon and limited market capacity for PFAS destruction, the economics of remediation will continue to evolve. However, reducing the volume of PFAS waste is one of the most practical ways organisations can secure short-term cost savings while also insulating themselves against future price increases.
-----------------
Want to learn more? Download the SELPAXT white paper, or contact Stefan to continue the conversation: stefan.wall-qvist@chromafora.com
