AbstractThe need for remediation of poly‐ and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) is growing as a result of more regulatory attention to this new class of contaminants with diminishing water quality standards being promulgated, commonly in the parts per trillion range. PFASs comprise >3,000 individual compounds, but the focus of analyses and regulations has generally been PFASs termed perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs), which are all extremely persistent, can be highly mobile, and are increasingly being reported to bioaccumulate, with understanding of their toxicology evolving. However, there are thousands of polyfluorinated “PFAA precursors”, which can transform in the environment and in higher organisms to create PFAAs as persistent daughter products.Some PFASs can travel miles from their point of release, as they are mobile and persistent, potentially creating large plumes. The use of a conceptual site model (CSM) to define risks posed by specific PFASs to potential receptors is considered essential. Granular activated carbon (GAC) is commonly used as part of interim remedial measures to treat PFASs present in water. Many alternative treatment technologies are being adapted for PFASs or ingenious solutions developed. The diversity of PFASs commonly associated with use of multiple PFASs in commercial products is not commonly assessed. Remedial technologies, which are adsorptive or destructive, are considered for both soils and waters with challenges to their commercial application outlined. Biological approaches to treat PFASs report biotransformation which creates persistent PFAAs, no PFASs can biodegrade. Water treatment technologies applied ex situ could be used in a treatment train approach, for example, to concentrate PFASs and then destroy them on‐site. Dynamic groundwater recirculation can greatly enhance contaminant mass removal via groundwater pumping. This review of technologies for remediation of PFASs describes that: GAC may be effective for removal of long‐chain PFAAs, but does not perform well on short‐chain PFAAs and its use for removal of precursors is reported to be less effective; Anion‐exchange resins can remove a wider array of long‐ and short‐chain PFAAs, but struggle to treat the shortest chain PFAAs and removal of most PFAA precursors has not been evaluated; Ozofractionation has been applied for PFASs at full scale and shown to be effective for removal of total PFASs; Chemical oxidation has been demonstrated to be potentially applicable for some PFAAs, but when applied in situ there is concern over the formation of shorter chain PFAAs and ongoing rebound from sorbed precursors; Electrochemical oxidation is evolving as a destructive technology for many PFASs, but can create undesirable by‐products such as perchlorate and bromate; Sonolysis has been demonstrated as a potential destructive technology in the laboratory but there are significant challenges when considering scale up; Soils stabilization approaches are evolving and have been used at full scale but performance need to be assessed using appropriate testing regimes; Thermal technologies to treat PFAS‐impacted soils show promise but elevated temperatures (potentially >500 °C) may be required for treatment. There are a plethora of technologies evolving to manage PFASs but development is in its early stage, so there are opportunities for much ingenuity.