What can we do about 'forever chemicals' in Oklahoma's drinking water?

Yahoo

31-01-2025

For over 80 years, chemical makers have made and profited off the sale of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl synthetic chemicals, better known as PFAS.
Industry documents released through litigation show that manufacturers had sufficient information to know of dangers as early as 1961, but continued to make products containing them for decades.
Because the chemicals are essentially indestructible and do not fully degrade, they are referred to as toxic 'forever chemicals.'
A growing body of scientific research has found links between PFAS exposure and a wide range of health problems, including a weaker immune system, cancer, increased cholesterol levels, pregnancy-induced hypertension, liver damage, reduced fertility in men and women, and increased risk of thyroid disease.
Although the Environmental Protection Agency has taken some preliminary steps to limit PFAS in drinking water, the contamination crisis continues to grow partly due to the toxins' staying power in the environment and the inadequacy of U.S. chemical regulations.
When one PFAS came under scrutiny, companies created new ones that they claimed were safer, but were still chemically similar.
We now have thousands of PFAS that need investigation, but the American regulatory system treats chemicals as innocent until proven guilty. As a result, thousands of chemicals that haven't even been tested for toxicity have entered the market.
In 2024 at least 11 states enacted laws to restrict the use of PFAS in everyday consumer goods, professional firefighting foams, and biosolids utilized as fertilizer on farmland.
In the upcoming 2025 Oklahoma legislative session, two Senate bills — 268 and 271 — have been filed to address PFAS contamination.
Senate Bill 268 seeks to ban the application of biosolids as fertilizer on farmland.
For decades, farmers across America have been encouraged by the federal government and state officials to spread municipal sewage on millions of acres of farmland as fertilizer.
But sludge isn't a green plant food. It harbors a mishmash of all kinds of dangerous substances that leach into soil, plants, water, and even the food we eat. Most concerning, sludge is a huge conveyor of PFAS.
More: Other countries are ahead of us in restricting harmful food additives | Opinion
Oklahoma has one of the most extensive biosolid fertilizer programs in the nation, as more than 80% of the state's wastewater sludge ends up on crop fields.
SB 271 aims to shield 'passive recipients' of PFAS from any legal liability. This would include farmers who unwittingly used sewage sludge as a fertilizer.
Unfortunately, neither bill speaks to eliminating PFAS chemicals from their upstream sources.
The effluent from industrial facilities that use PFAS in their manufacturing processes is discharged to wastewater treatment plants and then those PFAS toxins are released into the environment. Removing PFAS from wastewater can be extremely expensive, with costs ranging from millions to billions of dollars depending on the volume of wastewater and the specific technology used.
Neither bill considers what might be exorbitant future costs for treatment and remediation.
After application of biosolids on agricultural land has been banned, PFAS will still have to be removed from wastewater and then be disposed of, destroyed or stored.
Beyond the cost of removal, Senate Bill 268 ignores other emerging costs, such as funding for state regulators to research and identify potentially impacted farms or food products and financial assistance and medical monitoring for impacted farm families.
Will there be money available for farmers to receive income replacement if their farm production is impacted, and if there are even land acquisitions in some cases?
The EPA estimates the compliance cost just for water system monitoring or capital improvements to reduce PFAS in drinking water to be approximately $1.5 billion annually.
Then you have the economic impact on local governments,'passive receivers' of substances containing PFAS that are ubiquitous in the water supply, wastewater treatment process, stormwater, biosolids management, and solid waste streams, if they become responsible for cleaning up the environmental contamination and for mitigation.
If local governments are forced to bear the brunt of the financial burden, an increase in water rates in communities across the nation is a near certainty. These will be most harshly felt by low-income households and disadvantaged communities who will not only be disproportionately impacted by increased costs for their water bills but risk exposure to emerging contaminants.
States and taxpayers didn't cause the contamination, but they will largely shoulder the burden of testing and monitoring, delivering clean water to communities, cleaning up contaminated sites, and covering health care costs.
PFAS may be an invisible part of your environment now, but soon its environmental and health effects will be apparent to all.
Mike Altshuler is a retired educator and environmental activist who lives in Edmond.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Chemical pollution a danger to Oklahomans' health | Opinion