Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in construction and demolition debris (CDD): discerning sources and fate during waste management

Yalan Liu; Ashley Lin; Jake Thompson; John A Bowden; Timothy G Townsend

doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.134567

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in construction and demolition debris (CDD): discerning sources and fate during waste management

J Hazard Mater. 2024 Jul 5:472:134567. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.134567. Epub 2024 May 10.

Authors

Yalan Liu¹, Ashley Lin², Jake Thompson², John A Bowden³, Timothy G Townsend⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatics Engineering, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA; Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 116450, Gainesville, FL 32611-6450, USA.
² Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 116450, Gainesville, FL 32611-6450, USA.
³ Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 116450, Gainesville, FL 32611-6450, USA; Department of Department of Physiological Sciences, University of Florida, 1333 Center Drive, Basic Science Building, Room 324, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
⁴ Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 116450, Gainesville, FL 32611-6450, USA. Electronic address: ttown@ufl.edu.

PMID: 38735190
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.134567

Abstract

As regulatory frameworks for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) evolve, the solid waste community seeks to manage PFAS risks effectively. Despite extensive research on PFAS in municipal solid waste (MSW) and wastewater sludge, there is limited information on a major global waste stream which seldom gleans regulatory oversight - construction and demolition debris (CDD). This study sampled a CDD processing facility to provide material-specific information on the PFAS profile within CDD. The bulk CDD accepted by this facility was separated into major categories, representatively sampled, then characterized for total available PFAS (∑₉₂PFAS). As reprocessed CDD is ultimately recycled or landfilled, often unencapsulated or in unlined landfills, the PFAS leaching potential was also examined using two leaching procedures. Among the categories assessed for total PFAS, carpeting, carpet padding, and gypsum drywall showed elevated concentrations compared to other components, with most of the PFAS mass contributed by precursor species. However, materials with the highest total PFAS, such as carpeting, did not necessarily exhibit the highest leaching, and leachate was predominantly composed of terminal species rather than precursors. Extrapolating these findings with national CDD generation and management data inventories suggests that despite MSW having higher total available PFAS concentrations, the leachability of PFAS from landfilled CDD is comparable, raising legitimate concerns with CDD disposal practices, particularly in unlined CDD landfills.

Keywords: Drywall; Landfilling; Leaching risk; Waste management; Wood.