Latest news with #PFAS-laden
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Governor signs ban on dangerous chemical used for decades in first responder jobs: 'Something has to change'
Oregon's governor, Tina Kotek, approved a ban on firefighting foam that contains forever chemicals. As Environment America reported, Kotek made Oregon the 16th state in the U.S. to ban perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, in firefighting missions. She signed Senate Bill 91 into law at the request of the state Senate Interim Committee on Energy and Environment. This firefighting foam ban is good news because experts have linked PFAS to many health and environmental issues. The ban will protect firefighters from toxic chemical exposure as they risk their lives to save others. These substances are called forever chemicals because they don't break down in the human body or in natural environments. Even small amounts of exposure to them can lead to serious health conditions, including cancer, birth defects, organ damage, and developmental delays. Fortunately, many states have been working to pass laws to reduce exposure to forever chemicals. Because of the growing body of research connecting PFAS to health risks, lawmakers have proposed banning them from hospital equipment and common household products. Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a ban on a commonly used, toxic solvent called N-Methylpyrrolidone because of its health risks. As new laws are gradually implemented to keep forever chemicals out of everyday life, you can protect yourself by reading product labels and avoiding plastic products. For example, you can choose plastic-free alternatives for the products you use and support brands that use plastic-free packaging. The Statesman Journal reported state Rep. Courtney Neron as saying: "When our first responders are getting sick from the very tools meant to keep us safe, something has to change. Safer alternatives are already being used by the military, at Oregon airports and fire stations in numerous states across the country." Celeste Meiffren-Swango, state director of Environment Oregon, thanked Kotek and the Oregon legislature for eliminating PFAS-laden firefighting foam to protect firefighters. "Together, we can keep working to eliminate PFAS from consumer products and help build a cleaner, greener, safer future in Oregon," she said, per Environment America. 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. 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
25-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Health officials investigating reasons for chemical spill that is impacting community: 'These ... just don't disappear'
Most people in Harpswell, Maine, had no idea anything was wrong until they were told not to eat the fish. A firefighting foam spill months earlier had quietly made its way into the water, and the chemicals were persistent. Locals are asking why it took so long to find out, and what it means for their health moving forward. Environmental officials in Maine are still assessing the fallout from the state's largest recorded spill of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) months after it happened. As News Center Maine reported, a malfunction at the former Brunswick Naval Air Station caused more than 50,000 gallons of water mixed with PFAS-laden firefighting foam to spill. The contaminated runoff traveled through storm drains and ponds before reaching Harpswell Cove. "These chemicals just don't disappear; they stay around, but the ocean is a big body of water, so it dilutes them," said senior research scientist Christoph Aeppli. According to the Harpswell Anchor, tests later revealed PFAS levels in the cove had jumped to 70 times higher than what was recorded just two years earlier. State agencies issued a warning against eating fish from the area, and community members are now worried about the safety of the water and wildlife they rely on. PFAS are often called "forever chemicals" because they don't break down naturally. 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. They are used in a diverse range of products and substances, from cookware to firefighting foam. These synthetic compounds have been linked to serious health problems, including cancer, liver damage, immune system harm, and reproductive issues, as Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health observed. These chemicals can build up in fish, soil, and drinking water. In the case of Harpswell Cove, nearby residents are concerned about what long-term exposure could mean for their health. According to the Environmental Working Group, 2,719 U.S. communities have documented PFAS contamination, and many of them are still waiting for cleanup plans or drinking water protections. In response to the Brunswick spill, Maine's Department of Environmental Protection has launched an investigation and stepped up water testing in the area. The U.S. Navy, which operated the former airbase, is also under pressure to expand cleanup and monitoring plans. Meanwhile, local environmental groups are conducting independent sampling to hold agencies accountable and track the spread of contamination. On the policy front, Maine has passed some of the nation's toughest PFAS laws, including a ban on most PFAS-containing products by 2030. More states are following suit, and the EPA finalized federal drinking water standards for six PFAS compounds, which will require utilities to start testing and filtering for them in the coming years. At home, you can help protect yourself by using water filters certified to remove PFAS and checking for contamination in your area through your state's health department or the EWG's tap water database. Taking action to educate yourself on toxic chemicals like PFAS and the health risks that come with them is one small but powerful step toward building a healthier, more resilient future. 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
29-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Decision looming for Trump administration on first PFAS drinking water limits
In pain so bad he couldn't stand, Chris Meek was rushed to the hospital with a life-threatening ruptured gallbladder. When he emerged from surgery, he learned he had kidney cancer that thankfully hadn't yet spread. Meek, a social studies teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, was 47 at the time. But he remained confused for years about why, as someone seemingly not at risk, he had gotten cancer until Emily Donovan, a parent of students at his school, gave a guest talk about high levels of harmful forever chemicals known as PFAS in North Carolina's environment. When Donovan mentioned kidney cancer, the possible cause of Meek's diagnosis finally clicked. Until then, Meek said, he 'had no idea what PFAS was.' Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency set the first federal drinking water limits for PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, finding they increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers and babies being born with low birth weight. In a decision with consequences for tens of millions of Americans, the Trump administration is expected to soon say whether it intends to stand by those strict standards and defend the limits against a water utility industry challenge in federal court. PFAS in drinking water created a crisis for many communities In North Carolina, runoff from a Chemours plant contaminated the Cape Fear River, creating a crisis for cities like Wilmington that use it for drinking water. Amid public outcry, Wilmington effectively eliminated it from tap water. Other U.S. communities — often near military bases or industrial sites — did the same when test results were frightening and public pressure, local leadership or state law forced PFAS-laden wells offline or prompted installation of expensive filtering systems, according to Mark White, drinking water global practice leader at the engineering firm CDM Smith. The EPA said the PFAS found in North Carolina, often called GenX chemicals, can be toxic to the kidney. While other types of PFAS may raise kidney cancer risk, little research has focused on the link between kidney cancer and GenX, according to Sue Fenton, director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University. Chemours said evidence doesn't support arguments that GenX at low levels is a health threat. The company has sharply reduced PFAS discharges. So far, sampling has found nearly 12% of U.S. water utilities are above the recently set EPA limits, but most aren't above by much. Forcing this group to reduce PFAS more than doubles the rule's health benefits but roughly triples its costs, the EPA has said. The Biden administration's rule set standards for two common types of PFAS at 4 parts per trillion, effectively the lowest level at which they can be reliably detected. Standards for several other PFAS chemicals were set, too, and utilities must meet those levels by 2029. PFAS have had wide uses over the decades Manufactured by companies like Chemours and 3M, PFAS were incredibly useful in many applications -– among them, helping clothes to withstand rain and ensuring that firefighting foam snuffed out flames. But the chemicals also accumulate in the body. As science advanced in recent years, evidence of harm at far lower levels became clearer. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has championed fossil fuels and the rollback of major clean air and water rules. His history with PFAS is more nuanced; during his time as a New York congressman, he supported legislation to regulate forever chemicals in drinking water. 'It's an issue that touches people in a very tangible way across the political spectrum, including in Lee Zeldin's former district," said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. Zeldin has offered clues about what the EPA could do. The agency estimated the rule would cost about $1.5 billion annually and Zeldin said recently that communities struggling to afford a fix for PFAS that are just above the standard might be handled differently than wealthy places with lots of it. 'What we are going to have to be is extremely thoughtful in figuring this out,' he said. On Monday, the EPA said it will establish an agency lead for PFAS, develop wastewater limits for PFAS manufacturers and investigate sources that pose an immediate danger to drinking water, among other actions. EPA decision looms on whether to let the rule stay as it is Soon, the EPA must tell a federal appeals court in Washington whether the rule should stand or be rewritten, although weakening it could be complicated because the Safe Drinking Water Act prevents new rules from being looser than previous ones. The agency could, however, encourage exemptions and deadline extensions, according to Erik Olson, an attorney with the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council supporting the current standards in the court case. Consider Avondale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix, which produces PFAS results modestly above the limits. Officials have done detailed testing and are planning to enhance water treatment. All told, lowering PFAS may cost Avondale more than $120 million, according to Kirk Beaty, the city's public utility director. That's money a city like Avondale 'just doesn't have sitting in a back room somewhere," Beaty said, adding he'll defer to federal experts to dictate what's acceptable. 'We're hoping we're a little further ahead of everybody else. If the regulation changes, well you know, we may let off the gas a little bit, we may not,' he said, adding that it is hard to justify spending extra money to do more than what's required when the cost falls on residents. If the government decides higher amounts of PFAS are acceptable, that could confuse people, especially in areas where the public is already concerned. 'If we enter into a gray area over what's healthy and what's not healthy, then utilities are at risk of being caught up in a debate for which they have no real responsibility nor expertise to decide on,' said Karine Rougé, CEO for municipal water at Veolia North America, a water operations company. Industry group says the rule goes too far and is too costly The American Water Works Association, an industry group, filed the court challenge to the new rule. It agrees that certain PFAS should be regulated but argues the EPA's standards go too far, underestimate costs and are 'neither feasible nor cost-effective.' There are serious consequences for residents' water bills, it says. The burden of complying will fall heavily on small utilities that can least afford it. Many water providers already struggle to maintain their existing infrastructure, some experts say. On top of everything else, they face new requirements to replace lead pipes. The AWWA wants the EPA to extend the PFAS and lead deadlines by two years. There is money available to help. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided $9 billion for chemicals like PFAS and utilities have won multibillion-dollar settlements against PFAS polluters that help as well. Meek, who successfully recovered after surgery from cancer and is now 59, is planning to sue over his illness. He once didn't second-guess using tap water. Now he reaches for bottled water. Donovan, who introduced Meek to PFAS and helped start Clean Cape Fear, says if the government's standards are weakened, it'll relieve pressure on utilities to effectively treat the water. Previously, 'our local utilities could tell us publicly that the water met or exceeded all state and federal guidelines because there weren't any,' she said. ___ The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP's environmental coverage, visit
San Francisco Chronicle
29-04-2025
- Health
- San Francisco Chronicle
Decision looming for Trump administration on first PFAS drinking water limits
In pain so bad he couldn't stand, Chris Meek was rushed to the hospital with a life-threatening ruptured gallbladder. When he emerged from surgery, he learned he had kidney cancer that thankfully hadn't yet spread. Meek, a social studies teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, was 47 at the time. But he remained confused for years about why, as someone seemingly not at risk, he had gotten cancer until Emily Donovan, a parent of students at his school, gave a guest talk about high levels of harmful forever chemicals known as PFAS in North Carolina's environment. When Donovan mentioned kidney cancer, the possible cause of Meek's diagnosis finally clicked. Until then, Meek said, he 'had no idea what PFAS was.' Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency set the first federal drinking water limits for PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, finding they increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers and babies being born with low birth weight. In a decision with consequences for tens of millions of Americans, the Trump administration is expected to soon say whether it intends to stand by those strict standards and defend the limits against a water utility industry challenge in federal court. PFAS in drinking water created a crisis for many communities In North Carolina, runoff from a Chemours plant contaminated the Cape Fear River, creating a crisis for cities like Wilmington that use it for drinking water. Amid public outcry, Wilmington effectively eliminated it from tap water. Other U.S. communities — often near military bases or industrial sites — did the same when test results were frightening and public pressure, local leadership or state law forced PFAS-laden wells offline or prompted installation of expensive filtering systems, according to Mark White, drinking water global practice leader at the engineering firm CDM Smith. The EPA said the PFAS found in North Carolina, often called GenX chemicals, can be toxic to the kidney. While other types of PFAS may raise kidney cancer risk, little research has focused on the link between kidney cancer and GenX, according to Sue Fenton, director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University. Chemours said evidence doesn't support arguments that GenX at low levels is a health threat. The company has sharply reduced PFAS discharges. So far, sampling has found nearly 12% of U.S. water utilities are above the recently set EPA limits, but most aren't above by much. Forcing this group to reduce PFAS more than doubles the rule's health benefits but roughly triples its costs, the EPA has said. The Biden administration's rule set standards for two common types of PFAS at 4 parts per trillion, effectively the lowest level at which they can be reliably detected. Standards for several other PFAS chemicals were set, too, and utilities must meet those levels by 2029. PFAS have had wide uses over the decades Manufactured by companies like Chemours and 3M, PFAS were incredibly useful in many applications -– among them, helping clothes to withstand rain and ensuring that firefighting foam snuffed out flames. But the chemicals also accumulate in the body. As science advanced in recent years, evidence of harm at far lower levels became clearer. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has championed fossil fuels and the rollback of major clean air and water rules. His history with PFAS is more nuanced; during his time as a New York congressman, he supported legislation to regulate forever chemicals in drinking water. 'It's an issue that touches people in a very tangible way across the political spectrum, including in Lee Zeldin's former district," said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. Zeldin has offered clues about what the EPA could do. The agency estimated the rule would cost about $1.5 billion annually and Zeldin said recently that communities struggling to afford a fix for PFAS that are just above the standard might be handled differently than wealthy places with lots of it. 'What we are going to have to be is extremely thoughtful in figuring this out,' he said. On Monday, the EPA said it will establish an agency lead for PFAS, develop wastewater limits for PFAS manufacturers and investigate sources that pose an immediate danger to drinking water, among other actions. EPA decision looms on whether to let the rule stay as it is Soon, the EPA must tell a federal appeals court in Washington whether the rule should stand or be rewritten, although weakening it could be complicated because the Safe Drinking Water Act prevents new rules from being looser than previous ones. The agency could, however, encourage exemptions and deadline extensions, according to Erik Olson, an attorney with the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council supporting the current standards in the court case. Consider Avondale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix, which produces PFAS results modestly above the limits. Officials have done detailed testing and are planning to enhance water treatment. All told, lowering PFAS may cost Avondale more than $120 million, according to Kirk Beaty, the city's public utility director. That's money a city like Avondale 'just doesn't have sitting in a back room somewhere," Beaty said, adding he'll defer to federal experts to dictate what's acceptable. 'We're hoping we're a little further ahead of everybody else. If the regulation changes, well you know, we may let off the gas a little bit, we may not,' he said, adding that it is hard to justify spending extra money to do more than what's required when the cost falls on residents. If the government decides higher amounts of PFAS are acceptable, that could confuse people, especially in areas where the public is already concerned. 'If we enter into a gray area over what's healthy and what's not healthy, then utilities are at risk of being caught up in a debate for which they have no real responsibility nor expertise to decide on,' said Karine Rougé, CEO for municipal water at Veolia North America, a water operations company. Industry group says the rule goes too far and is too costly The American Water Works Association, an industry group, filed the court challenge to the new rule. It agrees that certain PFAS should be regulated but argues the EPA's standards go too far, underestimate costs and are 'neither feasible nor cost-effective.' There are serious consequences for residents' water bills, it says. The burden of complying will fall heavily on small utilities that can least afford it. Many water providers already struggle to maintain their existing infrastructure, some experts say. On top of everything else, they face new requirements to replace lead pipes. The AWWA wants the EPA to extend the PFAS and lead deadlines by two years. There is money available to help. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided $9 billion for chemicals like PFAS and utilities have won multibillion-dollar settlements against PFAS polluters that help as well. Meek, who successfully recovered after surgery from cancer and is now 59, is planning to sue over his illness. He once didn't second-guess using tap water. Now he reaches for bottled water. Donovan, who introduced Meek to PFAS and helped start Clean Cape Fear, says if the government's standards are weakened, it'll relieve pressure on utilities to effectively treat the water. Previously, 'our local utilities could tell us publicly that the water met or exceeded all state and federal guidelines because there weren't any,' she said. ___
The Independent
29-04-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Decision looming for Trump administration on first PFAS drinking water limits
In pain so bad he couldn't stand, Chris Meek was rushed to the hospital with a life-threatening ruptured gallbladder. When he emerged from surgery, he learned he had kidney cancer that thankfully hadn't yet spread. Meek, a social studies teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, was 47 at the time. But he remained confused for years about why, as someone seemingly not at risk, he had gotten cancer until Emily Donovan, a parent of students at his school, gave a guest talk about high levels of harmful forever chemicals known as PFAS in North Carolina's environment. When Donovan mentioned kidney cancer, the possible cause of Meek's diagnosis finally clicked. Until then, Meek said, he 'had no idea what PFAS was.' Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency set the first federal drinking water limits for PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, finding they increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers and babies being born with low birth weight. In a decision with consequences for tens of millions of Americans, the Trump administration is expected to soon say whether it intends to stand by those strict standards and defend the limits against a water utility industry challenge in federal court. PFAS in drinking water created a crisis for many communities In North Carolina, runoff from a Chemours plant contaminated the Cape Fear River, creating a crisis for cities like Wilmington that use it for drinking water. Amid public outcry, Wilmington effectively eliminated it from tap water. Other U.S. communities — often near military bases or industrial sites — did the same when test results were frightening and public pressure, local leadership or state law forced PFAS-laden wells offline or prompted installation of expensive filtering systems, according to Mark White, drinking water global practice leader at the engineering firm CDM Smith. The EPA said the PFAS found in North Carolina, often called GenX chemicals, can be toxic to the kidney. While other types of PFAS may raise kidney cancer risk, little research has focused on the link between kidney cancer and GenX, according to Sue Fenton, director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University. Chemours said evidence doesn't support arguments that GenX at low levels is a health threat. The company has sharply reduced PFAS discharges. So far, sampling has found nearly 12% of U.S. water utilities are above the recently set EPA limits, but most aren't above by much. Forcing this group to reduce PFAS more than doubles the rule's health benefits but roughly triples its costs, the EPA has said. The Biden administration's rule set standards for two common types of PFAS at 4 parts per trillion, effectively the lowest level at which they can be reliably detected. Standards for several other PFAS chemicals were set, too, and utilities must meet those levels by 2029. PFAS have had wide uses over the decades Manufactured by companies like Chemours and 3M, PFAS were incredibly useful in many applications -– among them, helping clothes to withstand rain and ensuring that firefighting foam snuffed out flames. But the chemicals also accumulate in the body. As science advanced in recent years, evidence of harm at far lower levels became clearer. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has championed fossil fuels and the rollback of major clean air and water rules. His history with PFAS is more nuanced; during his time as a New York congressman, he supported legislation to regulate forever chemicals in drinking water. 'It's an issue that touches people in a very tangible way across the political spectrum, including in Lee Zeldin's former district," said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. Zeldin has offered clues about what the EPA could do. The agency estimated the rule would cost about $1.5 billion annually and Zeldin said recently that communities struggling to afford a fix for PFAS that are just above the standard might be handled differently than wealthy places with lots of it. 'What we are going to have to be is extremely thoughtful in figuring this out,' he said. On Monday, the EPA said it will establish an agency lead for PFAS, develop wastewater limits for PFAS manufacturers and investigate sources that pose an immediate danger to drinking water, among other actions. EPA decision looms on whether to let the rule stay as it is Soon, the EPA must tell a federal appeals court in Washington whether the rule should stand or be rewritten, although weakening it could be complicated because the Safe Drinking Water Act prevents new rules from being looser than previous ones. The agency could, however, encourage exemptions and deadline extensions, according to Erik Olson, an attorney with the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council supporting the current standards in the court case. Consider Avondale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix, which produces PFAS results modestly above the limits. Officials have done detailed testing and are planning to enhance water treatment. All told, lowering PFAS may cost Avondale more than $120 million, according to Kirk Beaty, the city's public utility director. That's money a city like Avondale 'just doesn't have sitting in a back room somewhere," Beaty said, adding he'll defer to federal experts to dictate what's acceptable. 'We're hoping we're a little further ahead of everybody else. If the regulation changes, well you know, we may let off the gas a little bit, we may not,' he said, adding that it is hard to justify spending extra money to do more than what's required when the cost falls on residents. If the government decides higher amounts of PFAS are acceptable, that could confuse people, especially in areas where the public is already concerned. 'If we enter into a gray area over what's healthy and what's not healthy, then utilities are at risk of being caught up in a debate for which they have no real responsibility nor expertise to decide on,' said Karine Rougé, CEO for municipal water at Veolia North America, a water operations company. Industry group says the rule goes too far and is too costly The American Water Works Association, an industry group, filed the court challenge to the new rule. It agrees that certain PFAS should be regulated but argues the EPA's standards go too far, underestimate costs and are 'neither feasible nor cost-effective.' There are serious consequences for residents' water bills, it says. The burden of complying will fall heavily on small utilities that can least afford it. Many water providers already struggle to maintain their existing infrastructure, some experts say. On top of everything else, they face new requirements to replace lead pipes. The AWWA wants the EPA to extend the PFAS and lead deadlines by two years. There is money available to help. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided $9 billion for chemicals like PFAS and utilities have won multibillion-dollar settlements against PFAS polluters that help as well. Meek, who successfully recovered after surgery from cancer and is now 59, is planning to sue over his illness. He once didn't second-guess using tap water. Now he reaches for bottled water. Donovan, who introduced Meek to PFAS and helped start Clean Cape Fear, says if the government's standards are weakened, it'll relieve pressure on utilities to effectively treat the water. Previously, 'our local utilities could tell us publicly that the water met or exceeded all state and federal guidelines because there weren't any,' she said. ___
