In a world where the water we drink is increasingly under threat from industrial pollutants, one group of chemicals stands out for their notorious persistence and potential health hazards. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as 'forever chemicals', are a group of synthetic chemicals used in a wide variety of common applications, from the linings of fast-food boxes and non-stick cookware to fire-fighting foams and other purposes.
These chemicals have been linked to a variety of health problems, including liver and immune-system damage and some cancers. As a result, states across the U.S. are grappling with the challenge of keeping these 'forever chemicals' out of their water supplies. However, this is not a task that comes without significant costs.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently finalized a landmark drinking water standard that establishes health-protective legal limits for six PFAS in tap water. This includes a 4 parts per trillion (ppt) limit on PFOA and PFOS, two of the most notorious PFAS. These new enforceable standards are expected to save thousands of lives, prevent tens of thousands of serious illnesses, and improve drinking water quality for millions of people.
However, the cost of implementing these standards is not insignificant. Water utilities have taken issue with the rule, arguing that treatment systems are expensive to install and that customers will end up paying more for water. The American Water Works Association, an industry group, has said that the EPA's rule has big problems, including an underestimated cost and a potential increase in customer water bills.
Despite these challenges, the Biden administration is committed to tackling PFAS contamination in drinking water. The EPA has announced a $1.18 billion fund to compensate thousands of public water systems for PFAS pollution. This fund is a step towards addressing the financial burden of cleaning up PFAS contamination, but it is clear that more will be needed.
The struggle to keep 'forever chemicals' out of the water is not a battle that states can afford to lose. The health risks associated with PFAS are too great to ignore. However, it is also a battle that will not be cheap. States will need to invest in new treatment systems, monitor for PFAS contamination, and potentially compensate for past contamination. But the cost of not doing so could be even greater.
Comments