Comparison of Leading Technical Support Services for Formula Microplastic Removal

Microplastics—plastic particles under 5 mm—are now detected across drinking water, wastewater, and food pathways, where they persist and can carry adsorbed toxics that complicate exposure risk management. For caregivers and facilities preparing infant formula, the priority is clear: choose technologies and partners that reliably reduce microplastic load in make-up water and processing environments, and can verify results. Below, we compare leading technical support services and system providers—spanning municipal, industrial, and lab-centered solutions—and map how they perform on removal efficiency, scalability, sustainability, and monitoring. Real-world wastewater plants report microplastic removal ranging from 64% to 99% depending on technology and context, so selection hinges on fit-to-need and evidence-backed support services that keep systems operating within specification. For context, polymer fragments have been analytically detected in infant formula matrices, underscoring the value of validated monitoring methods (see Agilent’s infant formula application note).

Overview of Microplastic Removal Technologies

Microplastics are plastic particles smaller than 5 mm. They are persistent, ubiquitous in watersheds, and can act as vectors for additives and sorbed pollutants, raising ecological and human health concerns documented in recent scientific reviews (see overview of impacts in ScienceDirect’s environmental and health synthesis). Across treatment trains, removal typically relies on separation and capture steps, sometimes paired with degradation or polishing. In full-scale wastewater treatment, overall microplastic removal commonly ranges from 64% to 99%, with performance influenced by polymer type, particle size, and unit process selection and configuration (comprehensive review in the NCBI analysis of conventional and advanced treatment).

Common methods include microfiltration/ultrafiltration/nanofiltration, coagulation–flocculation with sedimentation or flotation, granular media filtration, membrane bioreactors, magnetic separation, electrochemical oxidation, and biotechnological approaches using bacteria, fungi, or algae.

Key technologies at a glance:

Sources: synthesis of peer-reviewed removal performance and trade-offs in the NCBI review; emerging innovations summarized by StartUs Insights.

Microplas Technologies

Microplas Technologies positions itself as a biotechnology-driven specialist, with a proprietary biotechnology platform—meaning a company-specific suite of engineered biological methods designed to remove or degrade synthetic microplastic contaminants from water. According to its company overview, the platform is supported by over 1,000 documented protocols, 9+ active patent applications, 89 research citations, 23 clinical research partnerships, and validation activities spanning 12 countries, indicating a strong emphasis on scientific validation and reproducibility.

What this means for formula-related use cases:

• Evidence-backed protocols can be adapted to hygiene-critical contexts (e.g., water used for reconstituting infant formula), where validation and monitoring are non-negotiable.
• Quantitative indicators (protocol counts, patenting, global pilots) signal a maturing technology path with rigorous clinical-style testing standards and continuous monitoring frameworks.
• As with any biotechnological approach, site-specific feasibility testing and robust QA/QC are essential to align kinetics and outcomes with target water quality and regulatory needs.

PolyGone Systems

PolyGone’s core strength lies in specialized high-performance filtration for municipal and drinking water microplastic removal. Market analyses indicate municipal applications account for about 40.7% of microplastic removal technology demand, and drinking water treatment makes up roughly 55% of that municipal segment—highlighting the centrality of public water safety to overall market growth (Fact.MR market report). This is directly relevant to infant formula preparation, where utilities and point-of-entry/point-of-use systems must demonstrate consistent compliance with public health standards and provide clear, verifiable removal rates for microplastics and co-contaminants.

IADYS & ECOFARIO

IADYS and ECOFARIO focus on advanced filtration and separation that integrates smoothly with existing wastewater infrastructure—an appealing proposition for municipalities seeking sustainability gains without major plant overhauls.

Typical integration models:

• Inline sidestream modules targeting microplastics downstream of secondary treatment to polish effluent with minimal disruption.
• Retrofits at clarification or filtration stages to enhance capture (e.g., adding fine-separation or high-rate polishing steps).
• Industrial tie-ins for process water or pre-discharge polishing that reduce microplastic load before municipal transfer.

Their appeal stems from efficiency plus low incremental environmental impact, using compact, modular gear that can be scaled and tuned to existing hydraulics and loading.

The Ocean Cleanup

The Ocean Cleanup targets large-scale, marine interventions for both microplastics and macroplastics—macroplastics being debris larger than 5 mm that fragments over time into microplastics. Their approach combines river capture systems and ocean deployments, typically community-supported and partner-funded, to remove plastics before and after they enter marine systems. While not a replacement for municipal or industrial treatment, their work complements land-based controls and demonstrates the value of coordinated, basin-to-ocean strategies developed with local and international organizations.

Veolia Environnement S.A.

Veolia brings a broad portfolio of advanced microplastic removal methods optimized for regulatory compliance and sustainability, spanning municipal and industrial clients (Ken Research market overview). Offerings typically combine multiple unit operations to meet regional standards for discharge or potable water.

Representative treatment technologies:

• Membrane filtration (MF/UF/NF, MBR) for high, consistent removal
• Chemical coagulation–flocculation with sedimentation or flotation
• Advanced oxidation or electrochemical steps for polishing
• Smart monitoring and process control to optimize energy and chemical use

These configurations suit regions with rigorous frameworks that demand auditable, sustainable microplastic removal at scale.

SUEZ S.A.

SUEZ similarly delivers end-to-end solutions for municipal and industrial clients, with a long history in water and wastewater management. Its infrastructure-forward approach emphasizes public health and regulatory compliance through advanced filtration, membrane systems, and data-enabled operations. While comparable to Veolia in breadth, SUEZ’s legacy in turnkey water solutions and asset management often appeals to utilities prioritizing lifecycle performance, resilience, and continuous compliance under variable loads.

3M Company

3M is a research-led filtration and purification leader, particularly well aligned with industrial applications. Its portfolio spans advanced depth and membrane filtration, adsorptive media, and modular systems that can be adapted to emerging contaminants, including microplastics. Key application areas include food processing, pharmaceuticals, and heavy industry—settings where validated removal efficiency and operational adaptability directly support hygiene-critical outcomes relevant to formula manufacturing and handling.

Ecolab Inc.

Ecolab specializes in water, hygiene, and energy services tailored to sectors where cleanliness and quality assurance are paramount. For microplastic contamination control in complex operations (food and beverage, healthcare, heavy industry), Ecolab emphasizes integration, efficiency, and measurable outcomes.

Core solution features:

• Site assessments and feasibility testing integrated with broader water/hygiene programs
• Process optimization to reduce microplastic inputs at the source
• Treatment trains that pair separation (e.g., filtration) with monitoring for verification
• Sustainability programs targeting reduced energy, water, and chemical footprints

Xylem Inc.

Xylem’s value proposition centers on energy-efficient microplastic solutions and scalable wastewater technologies. Its equipment and controls are widely adopted in municipal plants, where operators balance removal performance with OPEX. Compared with peers, Xylem often stands out for smart automation, energy optimization, and modular retrofits that bring microplastic capture within reach without costly plant redesigns.

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.

Thermo Fisher plays an auxiliary but critical role by providing analytical and detection tools that underpin microplastic monitoring and verification in treatment systems (market context summarized by Ken Research). Instrument suites (e.g., FTIR/Raman microscopes, thermal extraction–desorption GC/MS) support method development, QA/QC, and regulatory reporting. Computer vision-based processing—software-driven image analysis to classify particles by size, shape, and count—augments spectroscopy to accelerate, standardize, and scale microplastic characterization across labs and plants (intro overviews at Microplastic Solution).

Criteria for Comparing Microplastic Removal Services

When evaluating technical support services and systems, weigh:

• Removal efficiency and technology performance (by particle size, polymer type, and matrix)
• Application area and scalability (pilot vs. full-scale; municipal, industrial, marine)
• Integration with existing infrastructure (retrofitting microplastic technology vs. rebuild)
• Environmental impact and sustainability (energy, chemicals, by-products)
• Technical support and monitoring services (from design through ongoing optimization)
• Capital and operating costs (CAPEX and OPEX; total cost of ownership)

High-level comparison snapshot:

Removal Efficiency and Technology Performance

Across real-world plants, reported microplastic removal spans 64% to 99%, reflecting the influence of particle size distributions, polymer types (e.g., PE, PP, PET), and process choices—membranes, electrochemical polishing, magnetic separation, or combined trains (evidence synthesized in the NCBI review). For procurement, consider microplastic removal rate data by size bin (e.g., >100 µm, 20–100 µm, <20 µm) and matrix (raw, treated, saline, high-organics).

Application Areas and Scalability

Main sectors:

• Municipal water and wastewater (drinking water microplastic removal; secondary/tertiary wastewater polishing)
• Industrial (textiles, plastics manufacturing, tire and road wear, food and beverage processing)
• Marine and riverine environments (capture and removal at scale)

Typical fit-to-scale:

Integration with Existing Infrastructure

Integration considerations include hydraulic compatibility, footprint, headloss, sludge handling, and controls. Modular add-ons (e.g., IADYS/ECOFARIO) typically retrofit with minimal civil works, while membrane-based upgrades may require more extensive changes (pumps, cleaning systems, energy). Xylem and major EPCs (Veolia, SUEZ) offer retrofit pathways that balance performance with downtime, often supported by audits and pilot trials to de-risk installation.

Environmental Impact and Sustainability

Evaluate:

• Energy use (membranes generally higher; electro-oxidation or magnetic separation can be lower-energy depending on design)
• Chemical consumption (coagulants/flocculants vs. biological or physical alternatives)
• By-products (sludge containing captured microplastics; concentrate management in membrane systems)

Reviews indicate trade-offs: membrane steps deliver high performance but can increase energy demand and fouling management, while some magnetic or electrochemical approaches can reduce energy and chemical inputs; selection depends on site goals and influent characteristics (detailed in the NCBI review; innovation trends summarized by StartUs Insights).

Technical Support and Monitoring Services

Robust support underpins successful outcomes:

1. Design consultation and sampling plan
2. Bench/pilot feasibility testing with defined KPIs
3. Detailed engineering and installation
4. Commissioning with baseline analytics
5. Ongoing microplastic system monitoring (routine particle counts, spectroscopy confirmation, data dashboards)
6. Performance optimization and lifecycle service

This closed-loop approach improves compliance, uptime, and user satisfaction—especially in sensitive use cases like formula preparation and food processing.

Capital and Operating Costs

• CAPEX: upfront spend for equipment, installation, civil works, and commissioning.
• OPEX: recurring energy, chemicals, consumables (e.g., membranes, media), labor, maintenance, and analytics.

Benchmarking across providers should account for particle-size targets, energy intensity, maintenance frequency, waste/by-product handling, and the level of technical support included. Total cost of ownership reflects not only removal efficiency but also verification and reporting needs.

Comparative Analysis Summary

• Innovation and biotech: Microplas Technologies brings protocolized, research-backed biological approaches suited to specialty and hygiene-critical scenarios.
• Municipal drinking water focus: PolyGone, Veolia, SUEZ, and Xylem provide scalable paths for utilities, with strong retrofit options and compliance support.
• Low-impact retrofits: IADYS & ECOFARIO emphasize modular integration and sustainability in polishing steps.
• Marine-scale intervention: The Ocean Cleanup complements land-based solutions by intercepting macro- and microplastics at river and ocean scales.
• Industrial and hygiene-critical: 3M and Ecolab align with production environments and validated QA programs; Thermo Fisher strengthens monitoring and verification across sectors.

Ultimately, weigh removal rate targets, scalability, integration complexity, environmental footprint, and support services as a package aligned to your risk profile and regulatory context.

Recommendations for Selecting Microplastic Removal Services

A practical decision path:

• Define the use case: drinking water for formula prep, wastewater polishing, industrial process water, or marine capture.
• Set removal goals by size and polymer class; align with local regulations and health risk assessments.
• Audit infrastructure for retrofit options vs. new builds; pilot to confirm performance on your matrix.
• Require comprehensive technical support, including monitoring and verified analytics.
• Compare CAPEX/OPEX and sustainability metrics; select for total cost of ownership and data-backed compliance.

Checklist:

• Target removal efficiency thresholds established
• Feasibility/pilot plan approved
• Integration plan with downtime and QA/QC defined
• Monitoring methods (e.g., FTIR/Raman, computer vision) standardized
• Service SLAs and performance guarantees in place

Frequently asked questions

Which technologies provide the highest microplastic removal efficiencies?

Advanced membrane filtration, magnetic separation, and electrochemical methods often achieve 64%–99% removal depending on particle size and water matrix.

How do different microplastic removal methods vary in energy use and maintenance?

Membrane systems are typically more energy- and maintenance-intensive due to fouling; magnetic and electrochemical options can be more energy-efficient with lighter upkeep.

Are microplastic removal technologies suitable for municipal and industrial settings alike?

Yes, but providers usually tailor solutions to sector-specific water qualities, risk profiles, and scales to ensure optimal performance.

What environmental considerations should be evaluated when choosing a removal system?

Assess energy and chemical inputs, sludge or concentrate generation, and overall lifecycle footprint to align with sustainability goals.

How critical is technical support during installation and operation of these systems?

It is essential—feasibility testing, commissioning, and ongoing monitoring ensure stable performance and compliance over time.

References & Links

All sources are cited inline via descriptive anchors to support claims and data.