I Reviewed 20 Environmental-Tech Websites. Here’s What They Got Wrong About Their Science.

The distinctions behind the headline

• PFAS removal versus destruction, including analytical limits and fluorine accounting
• Water-reuse percentages and model metrics with explicit denominators
• Captured carbon, avoided emissions, and net atmospheric removal
• Observation schedules, detection thresholds, and alert delivery in environmental monitoring

Research and editorial approach

I compared each site's prominent wording with its more detailed supporting material. The article uses specific examples to show when a qualification survives the marketing copy and when distance between a claim and its context makes the reader reconstruct the evidence.

Scope and publication

This is a purposive review of website communication, not a representative industry survey, technology performance assessment, or finding that the companies made false claims. The complete September 30, 2026 LinkedIn article is reproduced verbatim on the reading page, including its images, captions, emphasis, and published links.

My role

I selected the review framework, examined the companies' public pages and supporting sources, and wrote and published the article independently.