Rapid evidence assessment of PFAS incineration and alternative remediation methods: summary
Published 24 September 2025
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2025
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rapid-evidence-assessment-of-pfas-incineration-and-alternative-remediation-methods/rapid-evidence-assessment-of-pfas-incineration-and-alternative-remediation-methods-summary
1. Chief Scientist’s Group report summary
This review assessed the effectiveness, feasibility, and environmental suitability of current and emerging technologies for treating per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), with a focus on high-temperature incineration (HTI). It examined the operating conditions needed for effective PFAS destruction, the risks of producing products of incomplete combustion (PICs), and the potential of alternative treatment methods.
The findings provide a strong evidence base to support the Environment Agency in managing PFAS waste and will help guide more effective, sustainable treatment strategies in response to increasing waste volumes, tighter regulations, and growing international concern about PFAS.
1.1 Background
PFAS are a large and chemically diverse group of synthetic fluorinated chemicals used in industrial processes and consumer products for their resistance to heat, water, and chemicals. These same properties make them extremely persistent in the environment. Some PFAS are highly mobile and can spread far from their source, while others bioaccumulate in people and wildlife, where they may pose risks to health and ecosystems.
Because of their widespread use and persistence, PFAS are recognised as contaminants of concern. They are technically difficult and costly to remediate, which has drawn growing international regulatory attention and created demand for treatment options that are scalable, effective, and environmentally responsible.
In England, PFAS waste is mainly managed through landfilling, wastewater treatment, or incineration. Landfilling and wastewater treatment do not break PFAS down, allowing them to persist and potentially re-enter the environment. HTI is the only option that can destroy PFAS at scale, but it must operate under strict conditions to be effective. With tighter restrictions on PFAS use and increasing scrutiny of incineration, it is important to assess current incineration capacity and explore more sustainable alternatives.
1.2 Approach
A rapid evidence review was carried out using structured searches of academic and grey literature. Studies were screened by title, abstract, and full text. Data was extracted on incineration conditions, PFAS destruction efficiency, emissions, and PIC formation. The review also assessed alternative destruction and sequestration methods, comparing their feasibility, scalability, and performance.
1.3 Results
HTI can achieve near-complete mineralisation and destruction efficiencies above 99.99% for PFAS in firefighting foams when operated at 1,100°C with a 2–3 second residence time, sufficient turbulence, and balanced stoichiometry. Suboptimal conditions such as lower temperatures, short residence times, oxygen-deficient zones, or lack of hydrogen sources, can result in the formation of PICs, including potent greenhouse gases. Monitoring practices vary worldwide, and long-term data from real-world facilities is limited.
Emerging destructive technologies including mechanochemical degradation, hydrothermal alkaline treatment, sonolysis, plasma treatment, electrochemical oxidation, supercritical water oxidation, and pyrolysis show promise for PFAS destruction across different waste streams. However, they face challenges with cost, scalability, and long-term reliability. Sequestration methods, such as activated carbon and ion exchange, are widely used to remove PFAS from water and treat localised contamination. These do not destroy PFAS and instead generate PFAS-rich residuals that must be carefully managed to prevent re-release into the environment.
1.4 Conclusions
HTI remains the only proven method for large-scale PFAS destruction, but it must operate under strict conditions to ensure effectiveness. Further research is needed to optimise performance and improve oversight. Although alternative destructive technologies are not yet fully commercialised, combining them with sequestration in a “treatment train” may offer the most practical and sustainable way forward.
1.5 Publication details
This summary relates to information from the following project:
- Title: Rapid evidence assessment of PFAS incineration and alternative remediation methods
- Project manager: George Mackeown, Chief Scientist’s Group
This project was delivered by the Environment Agency’s Chief Scientist’s Group, which provides scientific knowledge, tools and techniques to enable us to protect and manage the environment as effectively as possible.
Enquiries: research@environment-agency.gov.uk.
© Environment Agency