Six Things to Know About ‘Forever Chemicals’
Six Things to Know About ‘Forever Chemicals’ - The New York Times
Supported by
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Six Things to Know About ‘Forever Chemicals’
The federal government is ordering the removal of PFAS, a class of chemicals that poses serious health risks, from drinking water systems across the country.
Almost half the tap water in the United States contains PFAS, a class of chemicals linked to serious health problems. On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that, for the first time, municipal utilities will have to detect and remove PFAS from drinking water.
Here’s what you need to know.
What are PFAS?
In 1938 a young chemist working on refrigerants for Dupont accidentally discovered a new compound that was remarkably resistant to water and grease, a finding that would lead to the creation of the Teflon brand of nonstick cookware.
Today there are nearly 15,000 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which collectively go by the acronym PFAS, according to a database maintained by the E.P.A.
The common link is that they have a special bond of carbon and fluoride atoms, making them incredibly strong and resistant to heat, water, oil and dirt. For that reason, PFAS is used for everyday items as varied as microwave popcorn bags, water-repellent clothing and stain-resistant carpets. PFAS are also in firefighting foam, cosmetics, shampoos, toys and even dental floss.
Where are PFAS?
Everywhere, including drinking water. The indestructible nature that makes PFAS useful in some products also makes them harmful. The chemicals are virtually indestructible and do not fully degrade, accumulating in the environment and the human body.
The chemicals are so ubiquitous that they can be found in the blood of almost every person in the country. One recent government study detected PFAS chemicals in nearly half of the nation’s tap water. A global study of more than 45,000 water samples around the world found that about 31 percent of tested groundwater samples that weren’t near any obvious source of contamination had PFAS levels considered harmful to human health.
What does PFAS do to the body?
According to the E.P.A., exposure to PFAS can cause damage to the liver and immune system and also has been linked to low birth weight, birth defects and developmental delays as well as increased risk of some prostate, kidney and testicular cancers. New research published in the past year found links between PFAS exposure and a delay in the onset of puberty in girls, leading to a higher incidence of breast cancer, renal disease and thyroid disease; a decrease in bone density in teenagers, potentially leading to osteoporosis; and an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes in women.
Why didn’t the E.P.A. regulate PFAS in water sooner?
Many environmental advocates argue that PFAS contamination should have been dealt with long ago.
“For generations, PFAS chemicals slid off every federal environmental law like a fried egg off a Teflon pan,” said Ken Cook, president and co-founder of the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit advocacy group.
Activists blame chemical companies, which for decades hid evidence of the dangers of PFAS, according to lawsuits and a peer-reviewed study, published in the Annals of Global Health, of previously secret industry documents.
The new E.P.A. rule requires utilities to reduce PFAS in drinking water to near-zero levels.
How can I get rid of PFAS?
Not easily. In homes, filters attached to faucets or in pitchers generally do not remove PFAS substances. Under-sink reverse-osmosis systems have been shown to remove most but not all PFAS in studies performed by scientists at Duke University and North Carolina State University.
Municipal water systems can install one of several technologies including carbon filtration or a reverse-osmosis water filters that can reduce levels of the chemicals.
Now that limits have been set, when will PFAS disappear from tap water?
It could take years. Under the rule, a water system has three years to monitor and report its PFAS levels. Then, if the levels exceed the E.P.A.’s new standard, the utility will have another two years to purchase and install filtration technology.
But trade groups and local governments are expected to mount legal challenges against the regulation, potentially delaying it even before a court makes a final ruling. And if former President Donald J. Trump were to retake the White House in November, his administration could also reverse or weaken the rule.
Lisa Friedman is a Times reporter who writes about how governments are addressing climate change and the effects of those policies on communities. More about Lisa Friedman
Learn More About Climate Change
Have questions about climate change?
Our F.A.Q. will tackle your climate questions, big and small.
“Buying Time,” a new series from The New York Times, looks at the
risky ways humans are starting to manipulate nature to fight climate change.
Big brands like Procter & Gamble and Nestlé say a new generation of recycling plants will help them meet environmental goals,
but the technology is struggling to deliver.
The Italian energy giant Eni sees future profits from
collecting carbon dioxide and pumping it into natural gas fields that have been exhausted.
New satellite-based research reveals how land along the East Coast is slumping into the ocean,
compounding the danger from global sea level rise. A major culprit: the overpumping of groundwater.
Did you know the ♻ symbol
doesn’t mean something is actually recyclable? Read on about how we got here, and what can be done.