Cutting Costly PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ from US Water Supply
TL/DR –
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued new standards for PFAS levels in drinking water, requiring water systems to conduct testing within three years and install treatment systems within five years if contaminants are detected. This could prove costly and challenging for state officials and utilities. PFAS chemicals, which are found in a wide range of products and don’t break down naturally, have been linked to health issues such as cancer, fertility reduction, metabolic disorders and immune system damage.
Michigan’s Fight Against Harmful PFAS
Michigan has heavily invested to reduce resident exposure to harmful “forever chemicals” PFAS. The state’s cities have also spent millions to eliminate contaminated drinking water or connect to cleaner sources. However, this is now about to change on a national scale.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released new guidelines last month for PFAS levels in drinking water. Water systems have three years to conduct tests and an additional two to install treatment systems if contaminants are discovered. State officials and utilities warn that these requirements will be challenging and costly to meet.
PFAS: A National Concern
Widespread PFAS chemicals are found in many everyday products and industrial applications and don’t break down naturally. Consequently, they linger in human bodies and the environment indefinitely. Exposure to these chemicals can increase cancer risks, decrease fertility, cause metabolic disorders and damage the immune system.
Thus far, 11 states have set drinking water limits for PFAS or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Other states have pending regulations or levels requiring public notice. Although the federal rule builds on these efforts, it also sets stricter limits than state-issued rules.
The EPA estimates that 6-10% of water systems nationwide will need to take measures to reduce PFAS contamination. This comes at a cost averaging $1.5 billion per year over an 80-year span.
State Regulations and the EPA
Public health advocates deem the EPA’s rule an essential step to ensure all Americans have access to safe water. Still, state regulators and water suppliers worry about the strict thresholds and timeframes imposed by the federal government. Despite the Biden administration’s billions in funding for water supply cleanup, experts project the costs will far exceed the available funding.
According to an estimate on behalf of the American Water Works Association, the national cost of cleaning contaminated water could reach nearly $4 billion each year.
Stricter Measures, Greater Challenges
State officials from New Jersey, Washington and Michigan anticipate a difficult road ahead meeting stricter federal thresholds. The stringent new limits could dramatically increase the number of water systems that fall out of compliance. Despite the challenges, some states have begun testing for PFAS under state standards passed by regulators in 2021.
Meanwhile, states without their own standards have taken other steps to mitigate residents’ exposure. Missouri, for example, has been testing water systems for PFAS for more than a decade. However, some state officials express concern that the federal limits are so strict that they’re near the detection threshold.
Future Expenses
The National Infrastructure Bill of 2021 includes $5 billion over five years to assist communities in treating PFAS and other emerging contaminants. In addition to suing chemical manufacturers for more cleanup funding, state regulators and utilities encourage state leaders to adopt a broader approach to the PFAS problem. This includes pollution prevention at the source, industrial operation regulation and limiting products containing the chemicals.
Facing the expenses of PFAS problem resolution, some advocates remind officials of the public health costs of inaction. “People will ultimately be consuming less of these chemicals and getting sick less often,” said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, a public health advocacy nonprofit.
—
Read More Health & Wellness News ; US News