{"id":37174,"date":"2025-12-10T18:21:31","date_gmt":"2025-12-10T17:21:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.vtei.cz\/?p=37174"},"modified":"2026-02-12T13:00:36","modified_gmt":"2026-02-12T12:00:36","slug":"pfas-in-surface-waters-in-the-czech-republic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.vtei.cz\/en\/2025\/12\/pfas-in-surface-waters-in-the-czech-republic\/","title":{"rendered":"Current status of monitoring selected PFAS in surface waters in the Czech Republic"},"content":{"rendered":"

ABSTRACT<\/h2>\n

Per- and polyfluorinated compounds (PFAS), a group of fluorinated compounds of anthropogenic origin, have been classified as a persistent organic substances of significant concern due to their chemical properties, widespread use in a number of industrial sectors, environmental spread, long term bioaccumulation potential, and resulting risk to human health. This article brings an overview of current knowledge about the occurrence of PFAS in the environment, mainly in surface, ground, and drinking water and about the methods of their removal from contaminated water. Furthermore, the legislative requirements regarding PFAS at the level of the EU and Czech Republic are summarised here, including the list of compounds according to the Directive of the European Parliament and the Council 2020\/2184 and the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council 2008\/105\/EC.
\nThe article also includes an overview of analytical methods for determination of PFAS, including trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), and the determination of total organic fluorine. The methods are generally based on liquid chromatography coupled with mass detection. Differences are primarily in sample pre-treatment. The main attention is focused on a summary of relevant data PFAS monitoring in surface water from all Czech Republic territory. Until 2022, only perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and (except for the Odra and Oh\u0159e basins) perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) were consistently monitored in surface waters in the Czech Republic. Detection limits of methods used in individual basins were different; therefore, an objective summary of relevant data about PFAS monitoring in the Czech Republic is impossible. Methodologies enabling determination with higher sensitivity and, in particular, a wider range of monitored substances are gradually being introduced with the expansion of analytical possibilities. From 2023, monitoring of substances from PFAS group compounds was introduced in individual basins on a wider scale, including pilot monitoring, which is presented in this article.<\/p>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/h2>\n

The\u00a0history of\u00a0per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS), the\u00a0so-called \u201cforever\u201d chemicals, began\u00a0in\u00a01938, when the\u00a0chemist Roy J. Plunkett, an\u00a0employee of\u00a0DuPont, accidentally discovered polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) during the\u00a0manufacture of\u00a0Freon. This new fluorinated plastic was patented by Kinetic Chemicals in\u00a01941 (U.S. Patent 2,230,654) [1], and in\u00a01945 the\u00a0trademark Teflon was registered [2]. More than\u00a07,000,000 compounds fall within\u00a0the\u00a0PFAS group. In\u00a0order to unify and harmonise communication on PFAS among scientific, regulatory and industrial communities, recommended names, acronyms, structural formulae and CAS Registry Numbers have been proposed [3]. The\u00a0OECD has identified more than\u00a04,700 compounds on the\u00a0basis of\u00a0their CAS numbers [4]. PTFE, however, is not a\u00a0fully typical compound. PFAS include PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonic acid) and PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), which were first detected in\u00a0the\u00a01950s during the\u00a0production of\u00a0Teflon.<\/p>\n

Current state of\u00a0knowledge<\/h3>\n

PFAS have attracted considerable attention over the\u00a0past 10 to 15 years. Thanks to their lyophobic and hydrophobic nature, they have found wide use in\u00a0a\u00a0range of\u00a0sectors, for example in\u00a0the\u00a0textile and leather industries, in\u00a0fire-fighting foams, surface protection agents, household products, food-contact packaging, the\u00a0photographic industry, aviation hydraulic fluids, electroplating, and as surfactants in\u00a0pesticides and other agricultural chemicals [5]. In\u00a0the\u00a01990s, these substances were identified at low concentrations in\u00a0all parts of\u00a0the\u00a0environmental (water, soil, air, plants, living organisms) thanks to the\u00a0development of\u00a0analytical methods for their determination and advances in\u00a0instrumentation, particularly the\u00a0emergence of\u00a0liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry [3, 6].<\/p>\n

Due to the\u00a0significant expansion of\u00a0PFAS production, there has also been an\u00a0increase since 2000 in\u00a0publications addressing this group of\u00a0substances, their sources and fate in\u00a0the\u00a0environment, and their harmful effects. In\u00a02020, nearly 1,000\u00a0publications dealing with this issue were published [6].<\/p>\n

The\u00a0toxicity of\u00a0PFAS to humans and their impact on ecosystems currently receive extraordinary attention. An\u00a0increasing number of\u00a0substances from this group are being monitored regularly, and concentrations considered safe are decreasing. There is a\u00a0need to gain\u00a0a\u00a0better understanding of\u00a0the\u00a0fate and impacts of\u00a0these persistent chemicals on the\u00a0environment, as it can\u00a0be assumed that the\u00a0burden on surface and groundwater by these substances is underestimated [7]. A\u00a0publication by the\u00a0authors of\u00a0the\u00a0current article [8] addresses a\u00a0range of\u00a0existing information on the\u00a0applications, environmental release, and remediation technologies of\u00a0per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.<\/p>\n

In\u00a0connection with the\u00a0regulation and restriction of\u00a0PFAS use, attention should also be paid to alternative substances, the\u00a0monohydrogen-substituted perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (H-PFAS), which are also found in\u00a0surface waters. In\u00a0the\u00a0Netherlands, a\u00a0UHPLC-MS\/MS method was developed, validated, and applied for the\u00a0determination of\u00a0these contaminants in\u00a0surface water samples [9].<\/p>\n

Very little information is currently available on the\u00a0PFOA substitute known as GenX. Despite its lower bioaccumulative potential, this alternative substance may still pose a\u00a0risk to both the\u00a0environment and human\u00a0health [10].<\/p>\n

Given the\u00a0global distribution of\u00a0these chemicals, studies have been conducted to monitor their presence in\u00a0developing countries in\u00a0water samples and other samples from the\u00a0abiotic environment and biota. PFAS were identified in\u00a072 % of\u00a0the\u00a0samples [11, 12].<\/p>\n

PFAS clearly represent a\u00a0global problem. Levels of\u00a0four selected perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAA) \u2013 perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) \u2013 have been tested in\u00a0various global environmental media, namely rainwater, soils, and surface waters. Among other findings, it has been shown that PFOS levels in\u00a0rainwater in\u00a0some inland areas of\u00a0the\u00a0European\u00a0Union often exceed the\u00a0environmental quality standard for surface waters. It is therefore crucial that the\u00a0use of\u00a0these substances is restricted as rapidly as possible [13, 14].<\/p>\n

Current efforts by the\u00a0European\u00a0Commission to initiate discussions on the\u00a0largest proposal to restrict PFAS in\u00a0history reflect the\u00a0poor global situation regarding PFAS accumulation in\u00a0the\u00a0environment and their health impacts. However, a\u00a0comprehensive analysis is still lacking. Interest in\u00a0the\u00a0issue has been successfully raised, with the\u00a0focus of\u00a0research gradually shifting towards ecological questions. The\u00a0involvement of\u00a0developing countries, however, is limited, despite the\u00a0fact that PFAS exposure in\u00a0these regions is extremely high. It is therefore necessary to pursue globally interconnected and multidisciplinary approaches to address issues related to PFAS [15]. Other studies also provide a\u00a0critical review of\u00a0the\u00a0global occurrence and distribution of\u00a0these persistent chemicals in\u00a0waters, including wastewater [16, 17].<\/p>\n

In\u00a0Sweden, PFAS have been detected in\u00a0both raw and drinking water, as well as in\u00a0groundwater [18, 19].<\/p>\n

In\u00a0the\u00a0Czech Republic, PFAS were tested in\u00a0tap water. In\u00a0192 drinking water samples from across the\u00a0country, 28 PFAS were analysed using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry following solid-phase extraction. It was found that the\u00a0occurrence of\u00a0PFAS in\u00a0drinking water in\u00a0the\u00a0Czech Republic is very low compared with other European\u00a0studies. Approximately 1 % of\u00a0the\u00a0analysed samples could present a\u00a0potential health risk [20, 21]. In\u00a0seven locations on the\u00a0Svitava and Svratka rivers in\u00a0the\u00a0Brno urban\u00a0development, the\u00a0occurrence of\u00a0perfluorinated substances in\u00a0water and fish blood plasma was monitored. Concentrations of\u00a0PFHxS, FHUEA, FOSA, and N-methyl FOSA were below the\u00a0detection limits. The\u00a0main\u00a0component in\u00a0fish blood was PFOS, followed by PFNA and PFOA. In\u00a0water, the\u00a0primary detected compound was PFOA, followed by PFOS and PFNA. A\u00a0significant correlation was observed between PFOA concentrations in\u00a0blood plasma and in\u00a0water (r\u202f=\u202f0.74) [22]. Arnika has also monitored the\u00a0occurrence of\u00a0PFAS together with brominated flame retardants in\u00a0Prague and its surroundings. High concentrations were measured in\u00a0the\u00a0Kopaninsk\u00fd stream. The\u00a0values were significantly higher than\u00a0those commonly found in\u00a0surface waters in\u00a0Europe. In\u00a0this case, the\u00a0source of\u00a0pollution may be V\u00e1clav Havel Airport [23].<\/p>\n

As early as 2010, contamination of\u00a0the\u00a0Rhine river was monitored. Seventy-five water samples were collected along the\u00a0entire course of\u00a0the\u00a0Rhine river, from Lake Constance to the\u00a0North Sea, including several major tributaries such as the\u00a0Neckar, Main, and Ruhr rivers, and waters from the\u00a0Rhine\u2013Meuse delta, specifically the\u00a0Meuse and Scheldt rivers. The\u00a0aim was to identify possible sources of\u00a0contamination [24].<\/p>\n

PFAS were also monitored in\u00a0the\u00a0Danube river basin. A\u00a0total of\u00a082 PFAS and 72 other suspected compounds were identified in\u00a095 samples. Many of\u00a0the\u00a0substances detected are not currently regulated [25].<\/p>\n

With the\u00a0increasing information on toxicity and population exposure, concerns arose regarding the\u00a0impact on human\u00a0health. Several studies have been conducted examining the\u00a0relationship between PFAS concentrations in\u00a0blood serum and in\u00a0drinking water [26, 27]. PFAS have also been detected in\u00a0breast milk and infant formula [28].<\/p>\n

Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), which belongs to the ultrashort-chain subgroup of PFAAs, is included in the revised European Commission directives. It is a highly persistent compound, with concentrations in parts of the environment (soil, water, air, plants, plant-based foods, and human serum) increasing significantly. TFA is a transformation product of many PFAS and is also released into the environment from industrial TFA production. Studies on the occurrence of TFA in the environment, including surface waters, show that over the past 20 years its concentrations in all parts of the environment have increased severalfold and are currently many times higher than those of other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Data on the toxicity and ecotoxicity of TFA are limited, but it is nevertheless clear that there is a potential global risk of its irreversible accumulation [29, 30].<\/p>\n

Removal of PFAS from wastewater<\/h3>\n

One of the key tasks is to identify a suitable sorbent for removing PFAS from contaminated water. Biochar appears to be a cost-effective and environmentally friendly adsorbent for the elimination of PFAS [31]. Other potential methods for removing not only perfluorinated substances include ozonation, granular activated carbon, and membrane processes using reverse osmosis. However, PFAS were not removed by ozonization; these chemicals were effectively eliminated using physical methods, such as adsorption on activated carbon and processes based on reverse osmosis membranes [32]. Several magnetic materials, including iron oxides, ferrites, and magnetic carbon composites, also appear to be effective adsorbents for the removal of PFAS from water. These substances have demonstrated considerable potential for use in various environmental remediation applications, as well as in the treatment of PFAS-contaminated water [33]. Mixed-matrix membrane technology removes more than 99 % of PFAS from wastewater [34]. A concise summary of the occurrence, transformation, and removal of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) was prepared by Lenka et\u202fal. [35]. They also highlight that information on PFAS is particularly scarce for developing countries. Another study provides a comprehensive review of PFAS sources and their remediation [36].<\/p>\n

Another study focused on the\u00a0fate and transport of\u00a0PFAS and inorganic fluoride in\u00a0a\u00a0municipal WWTP operating a\u00a0sewage sludge incinerator (SSI). A\u00a0robust statistical analysis characterised concentrations and mass flows across all primary influents and effluents of\u00a0the\u00a0WWTP and SSI, including emissions from thermal treatment into the\u00a0air. A\u00a0PFAS removal efficiency of\u00a051 % indicates that the\u00a0SSI can\u00a0only partially eliminate PFAS [37]. An\u00a0overview of\u00a0the\u00a0current state of\u00a0research on treatment technologies suitable for the\u00a0removal of\u00a0PFAS from the\u00a0environment, particularly from water, is provided in\u00a0the\u00a0publication Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Treatment Technologies [38].<\/p>\n

PFAS Legislation at the EU and Czech Republic levels<\/h3>\n

Legislative instruments are the primary means of limiting perfluorinated organic compounds in the environment. One of the first measures was the inclusion of selected perfluorinated organic compounds on the list of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention [39]. Under Article\u202f3 of the Convention, parties and organisations (signatories) are required to prohibit and\/or adopt the legal and administrative measures necessary to eliminate: the production and use of the chemicals listed in Annex\u202fA; the import and export of the chemicals listed in Annex\u202fA; and to restrict the production and use of the chemicals listed in Annex\u202fB of the Convention. The Annex\u202fA list (Elimination) of the Stockholm Convention includes perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), its salts, and related compounds that may potentially degrade to PFHxS, as well as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts, and related compounds that may potentially degrade to PFOA. In the case of PFOA, certain uses or products are subject to specific exemptions, including applications in the photographic industry, some medical uses, the textile industry (production of protective clothing for environments where there is a risk of adverse effects on human health), and in fire-fighting foams for the suppression of flammable liquid vapours and the extinguishing of flammable liquid fires (Class\u202fB fires). However, by 2025 at the latest, the use of fire-fighting foams containing or potentially containing PFOA, its salts, and PFOA-related compounds must be restricted to locations where all releases can be fully captured. The Annex\u202fB list (Restriction) of the Stockholm Convention includes\u00a0perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), its salts, and perfluorooctane sulfonyl fluoride. Use is permitted in\u00a0electroplating processes within\u00a0closed systems, in\u00a0fire-fighting foams for the\u00a0suppression of\u00a0flammable liquid vapours and the\u00a0extinguishing of\u00a0flammable liquid fires (Class\u202fB fires), and in\u00a0insect baits containing the\u00a0active substance sulfluramid (CAS\u202fno.\u202f4151\u201150\u20112) for the\u00a0control of\u00a0ants of\u00a0the\u00a0genera Atta spp. and Acromyrmex spp., strictly for agricultural purposes.<\/p>\n

Another measure is Regulation (EU) 2019\/1021\u00a0 of the European Parliament and of the Council [40], which sets restrictive conditions for the use or placing on the market of products containing perfluorinated substances within the European Union. According to Article\u202f3 of this Regulation, the manufacture, placing on the market, and use of the substances listed in Annex\u202fI \u2013 whether as such, in mixtures, or in articles \u2013 are prohibited. In the case of PFOS, its salts, and related substances that degrade to PFAS, these substances may be present in mixtures or articles only as unintentional trace contaminants (Article\u202f4, paragraph\u202f1(b)), in quantities specified in Annex\u202fI to the Regulation. This annex has been amended several times for PFOS to tighten the limits on unintentional contamination. The use of PFOS in hexavalent chromium (Cr6+<\/sup>) electroplating processes in\u00a0closed systems was permitted until 7\u00a0September\u202f2025. A\u00a0Member State could apply for an\u00a0exemption for the\u00a0above purpose by 7\u00a0September\u202f2024, which could be granted for a\u00a0maximum period of\u00a0five years. Under an\u00a0exemption pursuant to Regulation 2019\/1021, the\u00a0manufacture, placing on the\u00a0market, and use of\u00a0PFOA, its salts, and PFOA-related compounds could be authorised for the\u00a0following purposes:<\/p>\n

\n
    \n
  1. photolithographic production and etching processes in\u00a0semiconductor manufacturing, until 4\u00a0July\u202f2025;
    \n
    \n<\/li>\n
  2. photographic coatings applied to films, until 4\u00a0July\u202f2025;
    \n
    \n<\/li>\n
  3. oil- and water-resistant textiles for the\u00a0protection of\u00a0workers against hazardous liquids posing a\u00a0risk to their health and safety, until 4\u00a0July\u202f2023;
    \n
    \n<\/li>\n
  4. invasive and implantable medical devices, until 4 July\u202f2025
    \n
    \n<\/li>\n
  5. the\u00a0manufacture of\u00a0polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) for the\u00a0production of:\n