Read time: 4 minutes

We’re excited to launch our Ask the PFAS expert series, where we tackle some of the most pressing questions around PFAS testing, containment, and contamination control. In this first instalment, we sit down with Simon Roberts, a SCIEX application scientist, to share practical insights and expert advice.

From setting up new or expanded methods in manufacturing environments to exploring green technologies for PFAS containment and strategies for avoiding background contamination, Simon offers clear, actionable guidance for laboratories and manufacturers navigating this complex landscape.

Watch the full video to learn more, and don’t forget to send us your questions for future sessions-we’re here to help you stay ahead in PFAS analysis.

Let’s dive into the first set of questions

1. Do you have any advice for setting up new or expanded methods and procedures for fast testing in a manufacturing environment?

Great question! The manufacturing environment adds some unique challenges, so let’s break it down.

PFAS testing is an ongoing process because the list of compounds we need to monitor is constantly growing. For well-documented compounds, setup can be simple: check out SCIEX technical notes, which include optimised values for many PFAS. In these cases, it’s almost plug-and-play. And if you need help, our support team can provide lists and guidance.

However, manufacturing environments often involve proprietary or less-documented PFAS. In these cases:

• Start with pure standards – Optimising with mixtures is possible, but it’s tricky. Pure standards make the process far more reliable.
• Expect exceptions – Most PFAS behave similarly, but some require adjustments to source conditions like temperature and voltage.
• Plan for flexibility – Sometimes you’ll need to go back to the drawing board to fine-tune your method.

If you hit a roadblock, reach out to us. We can help you optimise efficiently and effectively.

Pro tip: If you’re using QTOF or high-resolution instruments and acquiring in full scan mode, you might not need to set up new methods at all. Your existing data could already contain the information you need, allowing you to retrospectively analyse newly identified compounds.

2. What is the best containment in terms of green technology for PFAS considering the persistence of PFAS?

This is the billion-dollar question-maybe even trillion! Whoever cracks the code on cost-effective, low-carbon PFAS containment will set a new gold standard.

Right now, the most common approach is using carbon or activated carbon, because PFAS bind well to these materials. But here’s the challenge: while this works for legacy PFAS, emerging compounds and short-chain PFAS don’t behave the same way. That means we’re turning to more expensive solutions like ion exchange or destruction technologies.

The reality is that PFAS cleanup currently has a huge carbon footprint. Every nanogram per litre you remove from water or sediments comes at a significant financial and environmental cost. It’s a delicate balance—reducing contamination without creating new environmental impacts.

For now, running water through a carbon filter remains the simplest option. But the hope is that in five years, we’ll look back and see how basic that was compared to the advanced, sustainable technologies we’ll have developed.

3. How do you avoid background contamination of PFAS?

Avoiding PFAS contamination isn’t just about the initial setup—it’s an ongoing challenge. Getting your system clean is great; keeping it clean over time is where the real work begins.

Start by identifying potential contamination sources: water, methanol, ammonium acetate, and anything that touches your samples. Then, build redundancy into your supply chain. Don’t rely on a single “perfect” lot of methanol or water—vendors change processes, and that can throw off your results. Having backup suppliers for all critical reagents is essential.

Controlling contamination in your workflows matters too. Here are some practical steps:

• Clean up reagents – For example, run ammonium acetate through SPE before use.
• Use delay columns – These help reduce contamination impact.
• Leverage specialised kits – Tools like the SCIEX PFAS kit can help keep your instrument clean.

And if you still can’t eliminate the source? Sometimes contamination comes from the building itself. In those rare cases, the only solution may be relocating to a different lab.

A big thank you to Simon Roberts for sharing such valuable insights in this first edition of our Ask the PFAS expert series. From method setup to green containment strategies and contamination control, these tips are designed to help you stay ahead in PFAS testing.

Have more questions? We’d love to hear them! Send your queries to our PFAS experts and we’ll feature them in future Q&A sessions.

You can also connect with Simon and our team on LinkedIn – we’re always happy to chat and help you optimise your workflows.

Stay tuned for the next instalment in the series!