Back to Capabilities
PFAS thermal destruction
PFAS thermal destruction, validated in pilot and on a NATO test bed.
PFAS does not degrade, it moves. Thermal destruction is one of the few routes that breaks the carbon-fluorine bond instead of relocating the problem. Nelson operates mobile high-temperature systems and is a NATO PFAS test bed selection for PFAS-impacted military soil.
NATO
Test bed selection for military PFAS
Pilot-validated
High-temperature destruction
Mobile
Treatment at the impacted site
The problem
Separation is not destruction.
Most PFAS responses concentrate the contaminant rather than eliminate it. Granular activated carbon, ion exchange, and foam fractionation all produce a loaded medium or a concentrate that still contains the PFAS, and that residual becomes someone's disposal problem and someone's future liability.
Thermal destruction targets the carbon-fluorine bond itself. Sustained high temperature with controlled residence time and engineered gas handling is the route with a defensible end state, which is why regulators and defence programs are testing it rather than the separation technologies alone.
Where we are
Honest about the stage this work is at.
Nelson's PFAS destruction work is pilot-validated. It is not presented as three decades of routine production, which is the language we reserve for hydrocarbon remediation.
The programme has been selected as a NATO test bed for PFAS-impacted military-base soil, which is the standard that matters: an independent defence organisation putting the technology in front of its own contamination and its own scrutiny.
Where it applies
PFAS thermal destruction is considered when:
The source is AFFFFire-training areas, hangars, crash sites, and airport aprons carry decades of aqueous film-forming foam. The impacted soil volume is usually well defined and well suited to on-site treatment.
Landfill is closed to youPFAS disposal routes are narrowing across jurisdictions. Where landfill or off-site handling is restricted, on-site destruction is often the only remedy that actually ends the file.
A separation train has left a residualLoaded carbon, spent resin, and fractionation concentrate all need a destruction step. Thermal treatment is where those streams stop being deferred liability.
The site is remote or securedMilitary and northern sites frequently cannot move material off site at all. Mobile plants treat where the contamination is.
The end state has to be defensibleDestruction efficiency, temperature, and residence time are measured through the run and reported, rather than inferred from a disposal manifest.
Project evidence
PFAS work and evidence.
NATO PFAS test bedSelected as a NATO PFAS test bed selection for PFAS-impacted military-base soil. Mobile high-temperature destruction sized to AFFF-driven contamination profiles.
PFAS destruction technologies comparedHow thermal destruction, granular activated carbon, ion exchange, and foam fractionation differ on end state, residual, and cost.
PFAS on military bases across North AmericaWhere AFFF-driven PFAS contamination sits on defence sites, drawn from public agency records.
The Hub
PFAS contamination map
Known and emerging PFAS sites across North America, with regulatory criteria and deadlines for every state and province.
Open the map
We'll reply within 1 business day.
Frequently asked
Can PFAS be destroyed thermally?
Yes. Sustained high temperature with controlled residence time and engineered gas handling breaks the carbon-fluorine bond, which is the bond that makes PFAS persistent. Temperature alone is not enough; the destruction chain, including secondary combustion and gas cleaning, is what determines the result.
How is thermal destruction different from granular activated carbon?
Granular activated carbon and ion exchange remove PFAS from water by holding it on a medium. The PFAS still exists, now concentrated on spent carbon or resin that must be managed. Thermal destruction is applied to end the molecule rather than to relocate it, and is often used to treat the residual those separation steps produce.
What about PFOA and PFOS specifically?
PFOA and PFOS are the two legacy compounds most often driving cleanup criteria, and both are long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids that resist biological and chemical treatment. They are the primary targets in AFFF-impacted soil, alongside precursors that convert to them over time.
Is Nelson's PFAS destruction commercially proven?
It is pilot-validated and being run as a NATO test bed for PFAS-impacted military soil. Nelson deliberately separates this from its hydrocarbon remediation record, which spans more than 30 years of production work.
Can PFAS-impacted soil be treated on site?
That is the intent of a mobile system. Treating on site avoids transporting PFAS-impacted material through jurisdictions that increasingly restrict its movement and disposal.
Related
PFAS remediation services
PFAS remediation, the long read
PFAS destruction technologies compared
NATO PFAS test bed
PFAS regulatory tracker
Thermal remediation overview
PFAS contamination map