Latest news with #AlexFord
The Guardian
19-04-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Fears that UK military bases may be leaking toxic ‘forever chemicals' into drinking water
Three UK military bases have been marked for investigation over fears they may be leaking toxic 'forever chemicals' into drinking water sources and important environmental sites. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) will investigate RAF Marham in Norfolk, RM Chivenor in Devon and AAC Middle Wallop in Hampshire after concerns they may be leaching toxic PFAS chemicals into their surroundings. The sites were identified using a new PFAS risk screening tool developed by the Environment Agency (EA) designed to locate and prioritise pollution threats. RAF Marham and AAC Middle Wallop lie within drinking water safeguard zones. RM Chivenor borders protected shellfish waters, a special area of conservation, and the River Taw – an important salmon river. PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of synthetic chemicals widely used in firefighting foams and industrial processes as well as in aconsumer products including waterproof fabrics, non-stick cookware, cosmetics and food packaging. They are known as forever chemicals because they do not break down easily in the environment, and have been found polluting soil and water across the world. Some PFAS build up in the human body over time and have been linked to a range of serious health problems including cancers, immune system disruption and reproductive disorders. Military bases with airfields have used firefighting foams laden with PFAS for decades. Certain chemicals in foams including PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS have been linked to diseases and banned, but they remain in the environment. Prof Hans Peter Arp, from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said contamination at UK military sites would not be surprising. 'Most, if not all, military bases in Europe and around the world have used vast quantities of firefighting foams that contain PFAS,' he said. 'They now have substantial PFAS concentrations in the soil and groundwater beneath them, as well as soaked into the concrete of their buildings.' He warned that PFAS pollution will continue for 'decades to centuries' unless immediate local clean-up actions are taken. 'These PFAS that are leaching now likely took several decades to get there. There are more PFAS to come.' This month the Environmental Audit Committee launched a formal inquiry into PFAS contamination and regulation across the UK. Campaigners and scientists warn that until the full scale of PFAS pollution is understood and addressed, the threat to human health and the environment will continue to grow. Alex Ford, professor of biology at the University of Portsmouth, said: 'The EA has now identified thousands of high-risk sites around the UK with elevated concentrations of PFAS compounds. These forever chemicals are being detected in our soils, rivers, groundwater, our wildlife – and us. 'It is very worrying to hear PFAS is being detected … close to drinking water sources. The quicker we get this large family of chemicals banned the better, as their legacy will outlive everybody alive today.' He added that the cost of cleaning up these pollutants could run into the billions – costs that, he argued, should be footed by the chemical industry. Not all water treatment works can remove PFAS, and upgrades would be costly. A spokesperson for Water UK, which represents the water industry, said: 'PFAS pollution is a huge global challenge. We want to see PFAS banned and the development of a national plan to remove it from the environment, which should be paid for by manufacturers.' Prof Crispin Halsall, an environmental chemist at Lancaster University, called for greater transparency and collaboration. 'The MoD shouldn't try to hide things. They should come clean and set up monitoring,' he said. The UK's monitoring of PFAS is trailing behind the US, where contamination on military sites has been the focus of billions of dollars in federal spending on testing and clean-up operations. In July, the US Environmental Protection Agency and US Army launched a joint project to sample private drinking-water wells near army installations. UK authorities only recently began to investigate the scale of the problem. Brad Creacey, a former US air force firefighter, spent decades training with firefighting foam on military bases across the US and Europe. During fire exercises, Creacey and his colleagues would ignite contaminated jet fuel and extinguish it with AFFF (aqueous film-forming foams) – often wearing old suits that were soaked and never cleaned. On one occasion he was doused in the foams for fun. Twenty years after he had stopped working with the foams, a blood test revealed that Creacey still had high PFOS levels in his blood. He has been diagnosed with thyroid cancer and now suffers from Hashimoto's disease, high cholesterol and persistent fatigue. 'We've taken on too much of a lackadaisical attitude about this contamination,' he said. 'Unless this is taken seriously, we're doomed.' Creacey is pursuing compensation through the US Department of Veterans Affairs and a separate lawsuit against 3M and DuPont. Pete Thompson is a former Royal Air Force firefighter who served at several UK airbases including RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire. During his service he regularly used firefighting foams in training exercises and equipment tests, and said they usually sprayed them directly on to grass fields with no containment. 'We used the foam in the back of what was called a TACR 1 – basically a Land Rover with a 450-litre tank of premixed foam on the back. Every six months we had to do a production test to prove that the system worked. That production test we just produced on to the grass … there was no way of stopping it going anywhere other than just draining in through the ground.' The MoD is working with the EA to assess its sites, and work has begun to investigate whether to restrict PFAS in firefighting foams. Military sites are not the only sources of PFAS pollution – commercial airports, firefighting training grounds, manufacturers, landfills, paper mills and metal plating plants can also create contamination problems. An EA spokesperson said: 'The global science on PFAS is evolving rapidly, and we are undertaking a multi-year programme to better understand sources of PFAS pollution in England. We have developed a risk screening approach to identify potential sources of PFAS pollution and prioritise the sites for further investigation. We have used this tool to assist the MoD in developing its programme of voluntary investigations and risk assessments.' A government spokesperson said: 'There is no evidence that drinking water from our taps exceeds the safe levels of PFAS, as set out by the Drinking Water Inspectorate. 'Our rapid review of the Environmental Improvement Plan will look at the risks posed by PFAS and how best to tackle them to deliver our legally binding targets to save nature.' The guidelines for 48 types of PFAS in drinking water is 0.1 micrograms per litre (100 nanograms per litre). Earlier this year, Watershed Investigations uncovered MoD documents raising concerns that some RAF bases might be hotspots of forever chemical pollution. In 2022, the Guardian reported that Duxford airfield – a former RAF base now owned by the Imperial War Museum – was probably the source of PFOS-contaminated drinking water in South Cambridgeshire. The site is now under investigation by the EA. Patrick Byrne, professor of water science at Liverpool John Moores University, said current monitoring efforts only scratch the surface. 'We're at the tip of the iceberg. We're only monitoring a handful of PFAS compounds. There are many others we don't yet fully understand or detect. 'There are tests that measure the total PFAS load in water, and we're finding huge discrepancies between those results and the levels of individual compounds. That tells us there's a lot more PFAS in the environment than we know.' Even where testing is under way, labs are overwhelmed. 'The Environment Agency's lab is inundated. Private labs can't keep up either,' he said. 'Analytical technology is improving fast – but we're racing to keep pace.'
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
New study makes disturbing find about wildlife in the UK: 'Whichever organisms we look in, we find them'
Carcinogenic "forever chemicals" known as PFAS are infecting wildlife in the United Kingdom. The analysis — obtained and published by the Guardian, Watershed Investigations, and the Marine Conservation Society — showed that otters, harbor porpoises, and more had high levels of PFAS in their systems. PFAS, which stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are entirely human-made. Because they take so long to break down, they've been dubbed "forever chemicals." Definitely not something you want in your body. But unfortunately, they're everywhere. PFAS pollute waterways around the globe and are found in fish, soil, air, and even home gardens. Since fish sit toward the bottom of the food chain, they're more likely to spread PFAS up through to predators. There's a certain threshold they need to cross (9 micrograms per kilogram) before they're deemed unsafe. With that number in mind, about half of the fish studied exceeded the limit. Many experts also believe that number is too low. If you consider the suggested limit — 0.077 micrograms per kilogram — 92% of the fish exceeded it. U.K. animals up and down the food chain have PFAS in their systems. Professor Alex Ford from the University of Portsmouth told the Guardian, "Whichever organisms we look in, we find them." For starters, it's not just animals that are affected. Humans are also exposed to the terrifying, multi-generational consequences of PFAS. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFAS are used in food packaging, household products (think cookware, cleaning products, etc.), and more. The longer you're exposed, the more they build up in your body. While there's much unknown about the long-term effects, studies show that PFAS can lead to kidney cancer, developmental delays, a weakened immune system, and reproductive issues. Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home? Majorly Sometimes Not really I don't know enough about them Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Dr. Tony Fletcher, at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told the Guardian that humans and animals react similarly to PFAS, saying, "… the fact that similar effects on the endocrine system and immune system have been shown in animal species as in humans, suggests that to some extent you can read across." The U.K. wildlife study looks at just one piece of a larger, worldwide problem. According to Mongabay, Fletcher's comments are ringing true for animal species across the world. PFAS have made the hardy American alligator oddly susceptible to diseases and hurt Greenland polar bears' fertility. Scientists and lawmakers alike are hard at work trying to find solutions. Recently, a team of researchers at the University at Buffalo found bacteria that could break down PFAS. And Maryland lawmakers have proposed a ban on PFAS chemicals altogether. Given the ubiquity of PFAS, it's hard to keep them out of your life completely. However, you can try to limit your exposure by avoiding non-stick cookware and buying PFAS-free products. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
17-02-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Experts call out disturbing tactics of major sewage corporations: 'A playbook of denial [and] deflection'
A new study from the journal Nature Water exposed that the nine major water and sewage companies in England were using deceptive greenwashing tactics to minimize how serious their environmental impact truly was. Researchers from the University of Manchester, the University of Portsmouth, Windrush Against Sewage Pollution, and an independent scientist said the water industry was using "22 greenwashing tactics frequently used by tobacco, alcohol, fossil fuel, and chemical companies." These methods allegedly included "downplaying environmental harm, misrepresenting information, undermining scientific research, shifting blame, and delaying action." While the researchers said the companies claimed that the effects of sewage spills were "minimal" or "temporary," the study reported that "12.7 million hours of untreated wastewater" was discharged into English waterways between 2019 and 2023. Do you think governments should ban gas stoves? Heck yes! Only in new buildings Only in restaurants Heck no! Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. As well as this, corporations tried to blame consumer use of wet wipes as the major cause for water pollution (though those remain a concern in their own right), while diminishing the issues with the aging water and sewage infrastructure in the United Kingdom. "These companies have adopted a playbook of denial, deflection, and distraction, similar to other major polluting industries, to protect profits at the expense of the environment and public health," said professor Alex Ford from the University of Portsmouth. English water and sewage corporations are no strangers to criticism; only as far back as 2023 did the country face a scandal with reports that raw sewage was illegally dumped in protected waterways. However, unless these corporations seriously reduce their environmental impact, European countries could face water scarcity. Reports such as the one in Nature Water are vital so that citizens can hold big companies to account until they are honest about their environmental impact. The UK Government Environmental Agency publishes an annual report on the environmental performance of water and sewerage companies in England. Companies found to be polluting the environment can be forced to pay an unlimited financial penalty. In 2024, three major water companies had to pay a total of £168 million ($209 million) in fines because of their environmental damage. When these corporations are held accountable, it's much harder for them to muddy the waters, so to speak, and deters not only the fined companies but others from trying to get away with similar circumventions of the law. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
The Guardian
27-01-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Water companies in England ‘use greenwashing playbook to hide environmental harm'
Water companies are adopting disinformation tactics similar to those used by the fossil fuel and tobacco industries with the widespread use of greenwashing to downplay the environmental harm they cause, a study says. Environmental scientists analysed the communications of the nine main water and sewerage companies in England, and compared them with a framework of 28 greenwashing tactics employed, researchers say, by the tobacco, alcohol, fossil fuels and chemical industries. The water companies have adopted 22 of these tactics to downplay environmental harm, misrepresent information, undermine scientific research, shift blame and delay action, the researchers say. The lead author of the research, which was published on Monday in the journal Nature Water, Prof Alex Ford, of the University of Portsmouth's school of the environment and life sciences and institute of marine sciences, said: 'Water and sewage companies have prolonged environmental injustice by using a playbook of tactics other large polluters have relied upon in the past to mislead the public and influence government agencies or laws.' The research suggests water companies have softened the language around raw sewage discharges by rebranding sewage treatment facilities as 'water recycling centres'. They have also described sewage overflows as 'heavily diluted rainwater' even when untreated sewage was present and posed a threat to public health. The paper, titled Water Industry Strategies to Manufacture Doubt and Deflect Blame for Sewage Pollution in England, highlights what the researchers say is water companies misrepresenting their environmental performance while facing scrutiny for discharging untreated sewage for 12.7m hours into English waterways between 2019 and 2023. The nine companies analysed in the study were Thames Water, Southern Water, South West Water, Wessex Water, United Utilities, Anglian Water, Northumbrian Water, Yorkshire Water and Severn Trent Water. Some companies used what researchers said was emotive language around raw sewage discharges into rivers from overflows, presenting the public with a binary choice between flooding schools and hospitals with raw sewage, or allowing discharges through combined sewer overflows to reduce the pressure in the system and protect these institutions. Public campaigns by water companies also pointed the finger of blame at customers for raw sewage overflows into rivers, claiming wet wipes were the primary cause, but downplaying problems with ageing infrastructure. Companies have exaggerated the cost of solving these problems, according to the paper, quoting figures as high as £660bn, to manage expectations around investment and reform. The paper's co-author, Prof Jamie Woodward, from the department of geography at the University of Manchester, has linked the discharge of sewage and untreated wastewater to widespread microplastic contamination of UK riverbeds. 'Public trust in these companies is at an all-time low – the public deserve much clearer communication from the water companies and full transparency on the scale and impact of sewage pollution,' he said. 'Dumping sewage degrades precious ecosystems and poses a real and present danger to public health.' Ford said the companies had adopted a playbook of denial, deflection and distraction, similar to other big polluting industries, to protect profits at the expense of the environment and public health. The paper calls for stricter regulation of industry communications to combat greenwashing and misinformation. The authors also highlight the need for greater investment in sustainable solutions, such as restoring wetlands, alongside modernising sewerage systems. The study comes at a time of increasing public and legal pressure on water companies. Last October, the government launched an independent water commission to strengthen regulation, increase investment and inform further reform of the water sector. Ford said: 'Water as a finite resource, and in a monopolised industry, could become more profitable when financial drivers are poorly regulated. These same financial drivers have resulted in a failing infrastructure which hasn't increased capacity or been maintained to cope with population growth, climate change and our improved knowledge of chemical contaminants.' A spokesperson for Water UK, the trade association for the water industry, said: 'Contrary to the claims of this paper the English water sector is one of the most transparent in the world. Last year England became the first country in the world to make near-real time storm overflow data publicly available. In addition, data on company performance is regularly published by the sector's regulators. 'However, we recognise more needs to be done to end sewage spills and have previously apologised for not doing enough. Companies are poised to invest the largest amount of money ever on the natural environment – including more than £11 billion to almost halve spills from storm overflows by 2030.'
