Cancer-linked chemical found at five times safe level in drinking water reservoir
Cancer-linked chemicals have been discovered at five times the incoming safe level in a reservoir used to top up the tap water supply in the upmarket tourist haven of Leura in the Blue Mountains.
On Monday, Sydney Water confirmed to the Herald it had drained two drinking water reservoirs in recent weeks after discovering the so-called 'forever chemicals', also known as PFAS, at levels exceeding proposed new safety guidelines.
However, the agency moved to reassure customers that drinking water from the reservoirs was 'rarely used', and when it did provide 'very limited supply', it was blended with water from elsewhere, meaning tap water samples were safe.
Sydney Water only carried out widespread testing of its reservoirs across the Blue Mountains in April, following demands by community campaigner Jon Dee. The agency has known for nearly 12 months that the region is a contamination hotspot.
Dee was shocked to discover on Monday that the testing he called for had taken place and the results had been quietly published on Sydney Water's website.
Loading
'I've had to stumble on it myself, nobody has been told,' said Dee, who convenes the local STOP PFAS action group.
Dee raised concerns with authorities in March that monitoring did not appear to have taken place in Sydney Water's distribution network, which pipes treated drinking water from filtration plants to a series of storage reservoirs and then onto homes.
Dee said the levels in Leura reservoir were alarming and even higher than those that mobilised a multimillion-dollar government response at the nearby Cascade Water Filtration Plant last year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
2 days ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Patient care must not be compromised by bureaucratic benchmarks
Every three months, the residents of NSW are given a status update on the performance of their state's public health system. The quarterly Bureau of Health Information report paints a picture of how the system is functioning, from the number of ambulance call-outs to wait times in emergency and how long the average patient stays at hospital. Of particular interest since the pandemic – and covered exhaustively by the Herald – has been the elective surgery waitlist, which rose to record lengths when COVID-19 precautions caused the postponement of thousands of non-urgent operations. In the 2023 state election, NSW Labor ran on a platform of reducing the elective surgery waitlist, announcing a surgical taskforce to investigate ways to clear the list, sparing patients from the poor health outcomes that can come from waiting longer than recommended for life-changing operations, including hip and knee replacements, eye surgery, and cardiothoracic procedures. By the end of that year, the number of patients overdue for surgery had declined to pre-pandemic levels. But, as the Herald reported following the release of the latest BHI quarterly data in March, the number of patients overdue for elective surgery in NSW public hospitals tripled between the end of 2023 and the end of 2024. Loading While nowhere near the 18,000-person waitlist left after NSW's Delta lockdown in late 2021, such a sharp upward trend in the number of people waiting too long for operations has not been seen outside of periods of pandemic restrictions. Eye surgeries, joint replacements and tonsillectomies were the procedures with the largest backlogs. Doctors speaking about the release of those figures put the increase down to staff shortages and budget cuts. But, as Herald health editor Kate Aubusson reports today, doubts have been cast over whether the pressure to meet KPIs at some hospitals had led to surgeries being strategically categorised, so they did not appear as overdue on the books. Among the allegations made by doctors at Sydney's RPA and Westmead hospitals, which follow an ABC investigation into similar behaviour at Orange Hospital last month, are that hospitals have been effectively refusing patients because they will not be able to perform their surgery within the recommended timeframe, or changing the categories of patients.
The Age
2 days ago
- The Age
Patient care must not be compromised by bureaucratic benchmarks
Every three months, the residents of NSW are given a status update on the performance of their state's public health system. The quarterly Bureau of Health Information report paints a picture of how the system is functioning, from the number of ambulance call-outs to wait times in emergency and how long the average patient stays at hospital. Of particular interest since the pandemic – and covered exhaustively by the Herald – has been the elective surgery waitlist, which rose to record lengths when COVID-19 precautions caused the postponement of thousands of non-urgent operations. In the 2023 state election, NSW Labor ran on a platform of reducing the elective surgery waitlist, announcing a surgical taskforce to investigate ways to clear the list, sparing patients from the poor health outcomes that can come from waiting longer than recommended for life-changing operations, including hip and knee replacements, eye surgery, and cardiothoracic procedures. By the end of that year, the number of patients overdue for surgery had declined to pre-pandemic levels. But, as the Herald reported following the release of the latest BHI quarterly data in March, the number of patients overdue for elective surgery in NSW public hospitals tripled between the end of 2023 and the end of 2024. Loading While nowhere near the 18,000-person waitlist left after NSW's Delta lockdown in late 2021, such a sharp upward trend in the number of people waiting too long for operations has not been seen outside of periods of pandemic restrictions. Eye surgeries, joint replacements and tonsillectomies were the procedures with the largest backlogs. Doctors speaking about the release of those figures put the increase down to staff shortages and budget cuts. But, as Herald health editor Kate Aubusson reports today, doubts have been cast over whether the pressure to meet KPIs at some hospitals had led to surgeries being strategically categorised, so they did not appear as overdue on the books. Among the allegations made by doctors at Sydney's RPA and Westmead hospitals, which follow an ABC investigation into similar behaviour at Orange Hospital last month, are that hospitals have been effectively refusing patients because they will not be able to perform their surgery within the recommended timeframe, or changing the categories of patients.
7NEWS
01-06-2025
- 7NEWS
Toxic forever chemicals in the blood of most Aussies as researchers uncover EPA testing gap for potential polluters
The Australian Bureau of Statistics has published new data revealing forever chemicals are in the blood of most Australians. These PFAS chemicals, which can accumulate in the body over a lifetime, are linked to cancer — but researchers have also now linked high PFAS concentrations in a Sydney drinking water catchment to sewage sources that the EPA does not test. Detectable levels of the three most prevalent PFAS chemicals — PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS — were found in 85 per cent of the biomedical samples given to the ABS, it said on Tuesday. That data comes just days after Western Sydney University researchers published their own alarming findings about PFAS in Sydney's waterways. 'Essentially, we wanted to look at potential contributors to PFAS in our aquatic ecosystems and were very interested in sewage treatment plants that discharge into Sydney's drinking water catchment,' lead study author Katherine Warwick told The study, built on Warwick's 2024 research, looked into nine dead PFOS-contaminated platypus found in the Warragamba catchment. The Warragamba catchment supplies about 80 per cent of Sydney's water, which is consumed by over five million people. For her latest study, Warwick and her team tested water at sewage treatment plants which pump their treated wastewater back into that catchment, and the researchers found a concerning build-up of PFAS in sediment downstream from the outfalls. 'While PFAS may not be detected in high concentrations in the sewage outfall, it can build up in the downstream sediment, which can pose ecological risks to aquatic wildlife and potentially enter our drinking water supply,' Warwick told 'Currently, these sewage treatment plants are not required to test or monitor for PFAS in either the water or the sediment, and so this issue is largely going undetected.' NSW EPA confirmed it does not currently test for PFAS in the wastewater pumped out into rivers and streams by the sewage treatment plants. But they said that wheels have been in motion to do so for several months. 'As part of the implementation of the revised PFAS National Environmental Management Plan, the EPA has commenced a process to include PFAS monitoring on sewage treatment plant (STP) licences,' the spokesperson said. 'We have commenced targeted engagement on the implementation of monitoring conditions consistent with the NEMP, which was released in March. 'We have also commenced public consultation on our statutory five-yearly review of Sydney Water's STP licences, including on the level of treatment required at STPs. Public submissions close on 12 June 2025 and feedback will inform future licence changes.' Thorough investigation recommended PFAS was not the only pollutant that Warwick's study tested for in the water by sewage treatment plants serving Lithgow, Goulburn, Mittagong, Moss Vale, and Bowral — it also tested for metals, nitrogen and phosphorus. 'The concentration of these pollutants generally exceeded recommended NSW Government catchment guidelines in rivers downstream of the sewage treatment plant outfalls,' the study said. And while PFAS levels measured in running water from the sewage treatment plant outfalls were generally below Australian guideline values, it did found PFAS sediment bioaccumulation areas in water nearby. 'We suggest consideration should be given to establishing effluent disposal licence requirements that impose concentration limits and require the regular measurement of PFAS,' the study said. Sewage treatment plants are not the only possible source of PFAS in the catchment — landfills, or and run off from fire training locations where the chemicals in firefighting foam, could also be at fault. The study recommended that 'the source and concentration of PFAS in Warragamba catchment STPs and rivers is thoroughly investigated over an extended period of time.' Sydney Water does test for PFAS in its drinking water, but asserts that there is a safe level of PFAS that can be consumed daily. Australian standards lag behind the US, where a new safety standard would deem some Sydney drinking water unsafe based on 2024 data. An expert previously told that Australian drinking water standards are an 'international embarrassment'. Warragamba Dam was just one of the places where the 2024 testing by Sydney Water found controversial levels of PFAS in the drinking water. The highest levels were detected at Cascade Dam in Blackheath and Katoomba in the Blue Mountains. Toxic national blood findings There were 11 different types of PFAS that the ABS sought to detect in the blood of the Australians over the age of 12, for its National Health Measures Survey. ABS head of health statistics James Eynstone-Hinkins said that the data is will work 'to create a national baseline for levels of PFAS in the Australian population' and 'support further research into PFAS and the potential impacts of these chemicals on human health.' It will allow the nation to monitor the levels of PFAS in Australians in the future, he said. While the 85 per cent of Australians were found to contain a combination of the three most common PFAS chemicals, the most common of the three, PFOS, was found in 99.1 per cent of men, and 98.3 per cent of women. Two of the other types of PFAS, that the ABS was testing for, were detected in Aussie blood samples at rates between 15 per cent and 45 per cent. Six other types of PFAS were also detected in less than 10 per cent of people. Older people were found to have higher levels of PFAS in general, despite varying levels among survey respondents 'This was in line with expectations as there have been changes in the population's exposure to PFAS over time,' Eynstone-Hinkins said. 'PFAS levels were also generally higher for males than for females.'
