The problem with pfas is that it’s not just one chemical. PubChem says it’s more like 7 million. Yes there are ways to destroy/remove them and they are being used in remediation. However some methods work better for certain types of pfas, and all have some form of operational costs from manageable to expensive.
Yes there is public support for legislating the use of these chemicals; it is also a market with a value estimated around $28 billion. I don’t expect these companies or interests will be eager to encroach on these profits.
Even if legislators can regulate the use of these chemicals it will be challenging on at least 2 levels. Given the variety of pfas if one chemical is banned there is another pfas that can perform the same function with a slight molecular tweak so that legally, it is not banned/regulated. And, this stuff is in practically everything- and I’m not exaggerating; I knew someone doing research in this field. They had strict instructions on what products they could use bathing before work, no lotion, lip balm, cosmetics, even specific writing utensils and paper were required; all those items were prohibited not because they could foul a test, but because they likely contain pfas and would cause inconsistent data.
Drinking water aside we don’t exactly know how much of this is already out there or what it’s in.
We should definitely worry about pesticides, but pfas is pretty concerning, and worse, it’s impacts are still emerging with research.
The problem with pfas is that it’s not just one chemical. PubChem says it’s more like 7 million. Yes there are ways to destroy/remove them and they are being used in remediation. However some methods work better for certain types of pfas, and all have some form of operational costs from manageable to expensive.
Yes there is public support for legislating the use of these chemicals; it is also a market with a value estimated around $28 billion. I don’t expect these companies or interests will be eager to encroach on these profits.
Even if legislators can regulate the use of these chemicals it will be challenging on at least 2 levels. Given the variety of pfas if one chemical is banned there is another pfas that can perform the same function with a slight molecular tweak so that legally, it is not banned/regulated. And, this stuff is in practically everything- and I’m not exaggerating; I knew someone doing research in this field. They had strict instructions on what products they could use bathing before work, no lotion, lip balm, cosmetics, even specific writing utensils and paper were required; all those items were prohibited not because they could foul a test, but because they likely contain pfas and would cause inconsistent data.
Drinking water aside we don’t exactly know how much of this is already out there or what it’s in.
We should definitely worry about pesticides, but pfas is pretty concerning, and worse, it’s impacts are still emerging with research.