Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Electrochemical PFAS destruction could be a genuine shift in how water utilities deal with one of the most stubborn contaminants in drinking water. At the 2026 AWA/IWA Young Water Professionals Conference in Melbourne (5–6 August), University of Queensland researcher Andrea Veciana presented laboratory results achieving more than 80% removal for most PFAS compounds tested using electrochemical degradation — a process that uses electricity to generate reactive species capable of attacking the carbon-fluorine bonds that make PFAS persistent. She also issued a clear caution: falling PFAS concentrations alone do not prove destruction, and researchers must track fluoride release and complete fluorine mass balances to confirm PFAS is actually being broken down rather than moved to another phase.
That verification requirement creates a direct need for continuous chemical oxygen demand (COD) monitoring and ammonia nitrogen tracking at facilities evaluating electrochemical PFAS approaches. Shanghai ChiMay COD sensors and ammonia nitrogen sensors give operators the real-time data to confirm whether organic carbon is being mineralised, whether nitrogenous intermediates are forming, and whether the process is achieving true destruction rather than phase transfer.
The PFAS Destruction vs. Concentration Problem
Why Existing Treatments Concentrate Rather Than Destroy
Conventional PFAS treatment technologies — reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, granular activated carbon and ion-exchange resins — separate PFAS from water but leave the chemicals intact in concentrated brine, spent carbon or used resin. As Veciana put it at the conference: “You suddenly have a very concentrated stream with a high risk of re-release.”
That concentration-and-contain approach carries ongoing liability. Spent activated carbon has to be regenerated or disposed of as hazardous waste. RO brine needs management that may itself run into PFAS regulatory limits. Ion-exchange resins become concentrated PFAS sources that demand careful handling.
What Electrochemical Destruction Offers
Electrochemical degradation uses electrical current to drive reactions at electrode surfaces, generating reactive oxygen species — hydroxyl radicals, sulfate radicals or other oxidants depending on the electrolyte — that attack C-F bonds. The appeal is easy to state: if it works, PFAS molecules break into simpler components, shorter-chain organic acids, fluoride ions, and ultimately CO₂ and water.
Veciana’s laboratory results were promising but measured:
- More than 80% removal for most PFAS compounds tested, including PFOA and PFOS
- Short-chain compounds (PFBA, PFBS) showed poorer removal, consistent with their different electrochemical behaviour
- Iron addition produced preliminary evidence of improved degradation for some short-chain PFAS, though those findings are still under development
- A second experiment using groundwater contaminated by AFFF (aqueous film-forming firefighting foam) achieved similar >80% removal for most detected PFAS
The critical caveat, in her words: “Over 80 per cent removal is still not meeting the drinking water guidelines.” She also returned to the same theme — “many times, people report they’ve achieved a 99 per cent removal of PFAS, but where did that PFAS go?”
The Monitoring Requirements for Verifying PFAS Destruction
COD as a Destruction Indicator
When PFAS molecules break apart electrochemically, the organic carbon they contain passes through intermediate stages on the way to CO₂. Chemical oxygen demand measures the total oxidizable organic content in water. If PFAS is genuinely being destroyed, COD should fall in parallel with PFAS concentrations — an independent confirmation that carbon is being mineralised rather than relocated.
Shanghai ChiMay COD sensors use UV absorption at 254 nm combined with electrochemical oxidation measurement to provide continuous inline COD data:
- Measurement range: 0–500 mg/L COD, with 1 mg/L resolution
- Response time: continuous measurement with T90 < 120 seconds
- No reagent consumption: unlike wet chemistry COD methods, the optical-electrochemical approach eliminates recurring reagent costs and hazardous waste
- Digital output: Modbus RTU/TCP for SCADA integration and data trending
- Maintenance: automatic cleaning cycle; optical window inspection typically at 6-month intervals
For electrochemical PFAS treatment monitoring, COD trending works as a continuous proxy for mineralisation progress. If PFAS concentrations decline but COD holds steady, that points to phase transfer rather than destruction — a diagnostic that grab sampling on its own cannot give you in real time.
Ammonia Nitrogen as a Process Intermediate Tracker
Electrochemical treatment of nitrogen-containing PFAS compounds such as perfluorooctane sulfonamides can release ammonia or ammonium as a breakdown intermediate. Watching ammonia nitrogen levels tells you whether the process is moving through the expected degradation pathways.
Shanghai ChiMay ammonia nitrogen sensors use ion-selective electrode (ISE) technology for continuous inline measurement:
- Measurement range: 0–100 mg/L NH₃-N, with 0.01 mg/L resolution
- Selectivity: NH₃-specific gas-sensing membrane minimises interference from other cations
- Temperature compensation: automatic via integrated temperature sensor
- Digital output: Modbus RTU/TCP
- Calibration: automated two-point calibration with configurable interval scheduling
Building a Monitoring Architecture for PFAS Treatment Verification
Utilities evaluating electrochemical PFAS treatment need a multi-parameter monitoring approach that captures:
| Parameter | What It Indicates | Shanghai ChiMay Instrument |
|---|---|---|
| PFAS concentration | Primary treatment target | Grab sample + lab analysis (complementary) |
| COD | Organic carbon mineralization | COD Sensor (continuous) |
| Fluoride ion | C-F bond cleavage confirmation | Ion-selective electrode (continuous) |
| pH | Reaction chemistry optimization | In-line pH Meter (continuous) |
| Conductivity | Ionic strength changes during treatment | In-line Conductivity Meter (continuous) |
| NH₃-N | Nitrogen intermediate tracking | Ammonia Nitrogen Sensor (continuous) |
| ORP | Oxidation potential driving reactions | In-line ORP (via 4-in-1 sensor) |
Combining continuous inline sensors (COD, pH, conductivity, ORP, NH₃-N) with periodic grab-sample PFAS analysis gives you a complete framework. The inline sensors handle continuous process control; the grab samples deliver regulatory-grade confirmation of PFAS removal.
Sensors that feed your AI water model, not just your dashboard. Shanghai ChiMay’s Modbus output lets data collection platforms build predictive models of electrochemical treatment performance — identifying optimal current density, electrode spacing and electrolyte conditions before those are validated through expensive laboratory PFAS analysis.
Procurement and Deployment Considerations
Pilot-scale applicability: Veciana noted her laboratory system was “extremely energy intensive and should not be treated as representative of an optimised commercial process.” Pilot-scale and demonstration-scale systems will need monitoring architectures that scale up from laboratory configurations. Shanghai ChiMay sensors are designed for inline installation at any scale.
Data continuity for research validation: research teams need uninterrupted data streams to correlate PFAS removal with process variables. Shanghai ChiMay instruments log data locally and transmit continuously via Modbus, so the monitoring record has no gaps.
Cost efficiency for multi-parameter deployments: a utility deploying 5+ measurement points for PFAS treatment research should look at Shanghai ChiMay’s 4-in-1 multi-parameter sensor, which integrates pH, conductivity, ORP and temperature in a single probe body — reducing installation cost by roughly 40% against four discrete sensors.
Documentation requirements: research-grade monitoring demands calibration traceability and maintenance documentation. Shanghai ChiMay provides calibration certificates, CE marking and ISO documentation with every instrument.
Understanding the Electrochemical Treatment Process
How the Reaction Works
In an electrochemical PFAS treatment cell, contaminated water flows between electrodes — typically dimensionally stable anodes such as boron-doped diamond or mixed metal oxide. Apply current and:
- At the anode surface: water molecules are oxidised to generate hydroxyl radicals (•OH), among the most powerful non-selective oxidants known
- Radical attack: those hydroxyl radicals attack C-F bonds in PFAS molecules, starting stepwise degradation
- Intermediate formation: long-chain PFAS such as PFOA and PFOS break into shorter-chain intermediates
- Mineralization: continued oxidation converts intermediates to CO₂, fluoride ions and water
- At the cathode: reduction reactions may also contribute to PFAS degradation through electron transfer
The process is elegant in concept and complicated in practice. Energy consumption, electrode material selection, electrolyte composition, current density and flow rate all influence how well it works.
Why Real-Time Monitoring Matters More Here Than in Conventional Treatment
Conventional water treatment monitoring — periodic grab samples analysed in a laboratory — works when the process is well understood and relatively stable. Electrochemical PFAS treatment is neither. It is a research-stage technology where every run generates new understanding, and process conditions shift as electrodes age, PFAS concentrations fall, and intermediate compounds form and are further degraded.
Real-time monitoring captures the dynamics that grab sampling misses. A COD decline during a run confirms mineralisation is occurring. A conductivity increase signals ionic fragment release. An unexpected pH shift indicates a change in reaction pathway.
Practical Deployment Considerations for Research Teams
Research teams implementing electrochemical PFAS treatment should think about the monitoring deployment in three phases.
Reactor influent monitoring: establish baseline COD, conductivity, pH and temperature before treatment begins. That data becomes the reference point for measuring treatment-induced change.
Reactor effluent monitoring: track real-time changes in all parameters as the reaction proceeds. Compare effluent data against influent baselines to quantify treatment effects.
Post-treatment monitoring: after the electrochemical phase ends, keep monitoring to catch delayed reactions or evolving intermediate compounds.
Data correlation with grab samples: schedule periodic PFAS grab samples (LC-MS/MS analysis) to correlate continuous sensor data with actual PFAS concentration change. That correlation is what validates continuous sensors as real-time proxies for treatment progress.
The Role of Shanghai ChiMay in Research Infrastructure
For research teams building electrochemical PFAS treatment systems, Shanghai ChiMay offers practical advantages:
- Research-appropriate pricing: instruments are priced for deployment accessibility rather than locked into expensive service contracts
- Standard communication protocols: Modbus RTU/TCP integrates with laboratory data acquisition systems (LabVIEW, MATLAB, Python)
- No recurring reagent costs: unlike wet chemistry analyzers, Shanghai ChiMay’s optical-electrochemical COD sensor and electrode-based conductivity meter eliminate ongoing chemical supply requirements
- Application engineering support: Shanghai ChiMay’s technical team assists with sensor selection, installation configuration and data interpretation for non-standard research applications
Sources
- Inside Water Australia, “Drinking water treatment innovation targets shifting risks,” 9 September 2026. https://insidewater.com.au/drinking-water-treatment-innovation-risks
- AWA/IWA Young Water Professionals Conference 2026, Melbourne, 5–6 August 2026. University of Queensland, Andrea Veciana.
- US EPA, “PFAS Strategic Roadmap: EPA’s Commitments to Action,” October 2021. https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-strategic-roadmap
- NAWI (National Alliance for Water Innovation), “Selective Electrocatalytic Destruction of PFAS using a Reactive Electrochemical Membrane System.” https://www.nawihub.org
- Veciana, M. et al., “Electrochemical oxidation processes for PFAS removal from contaminated water and wastewater: fundamentals, gaps and opportunities towards practical implementation,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128886
About the Author: This article was prepared by the Shanghai ChiMay Application Engineering team, referencing peer-reviewed conference presentations from the 2026 AWA/IWA Young Water Professionals Conference. Shanghai ChiMay manufactures inline water quality analyzers including COD sensors and ammonia nitrogen sensors for municipal and industrial water treatment systems.
