PFAS Basics.  The Significance of the EPA’s Recently Imposed Limits on PFAS Levels in Drinking Water

 Extracted from a Statement from Guardian Editor Georgia Warren

April 2024

With so many big, splashy headlines fighting for our attention every day, it’s easy to miss those vital stories that build drip by drip, slowly over many years.

Falling into that bucket this week was the news that the US government has imposed the first-ever limits on levels of PFAS in our drinking water. The Guardian has been aggressively covering the health threat posed by PFAS for years, including a year-long investigation with Consumer Reports that revealed the extent to which these so-called “forever chemicals” have permeated US drinking water supplies.

For those who haven’t been following this story, this acronym masks a dangerous issue that everyone with a human body should be aware of.

OK, so what are PFAS?
PFAS (short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a group of about 15,000 human-made chemical compounds used widely in manufacturing to make products resistant to water, stains or heat – meaning they’re in everything from aerospace engineering components to takeout containers. Also known as “forever chemicals”, PFAS are unable to break down naturally in the environment or in our bodies.

Why should we care about them?
In recent years, scientists have discovered that exposure to PFAS is linked to a myriad of serious health problems, including cancer, obesity and birth defects. While many of the vast number of PFAS compounds remain unstudied, it is understood today that any exposure to some of the known highly toxic varieties is considered a health and cancer risk.

Are we all being exposed to these chemicals?
In short: yes – everywhere, all the time. In the past two months alone, the Guardian has published stories revealing that PFAS are entering our bodies via sources as disparate as bandages, artificial turf, plastic sandwich baggies and household dust. However, our biggest exposure to PFAS is via our food and water – which takes us to this week’s big news.

What happened with PFAS this week?
On Wednesday, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced legally enforceable drinking water limits for a group of the most dangerous PFAS compounds, after years of issuing only advisories. All US water providers will soon have to test their water and then install treatment systems that can filter PFAS if the results exceed EPA limits.

Is the PFAS problem solved then?
Public health advocates say it’s a great step – but not enough, as drinking water represents only about 20% of human PFAS exposure. Diet is likely a larger problem, as PFAS enter our food system via packaging, storage and machinery in factories, as well as during the farming process via contaminated water and sewage sludge used as fertilizer.

Is there hope for further action?
According to reporter Tom Perkins, who has been leading our PFAS coverage and provided this excellent analysis on the state of play following the EPA’s announcement this week: “Where there’s most hope is at the state level, where legislatures have started banning PFAS for all non-essential uses. It’s already happening in Maine and Minnesota. In turn, that creates market pressure on companies to stop using the chemicals altogether, because what are you going to do: produce shoes that can be sold in Mississippi but not in Maine? That wouldn’t make any sense.” Indeed, 3M, one of the world’s largest producers of the chemicals, announced last year that it would no longer make the compounds, citing in part the regulatory and legal environment.

That’s a lot of information: it seems the Guardian has really been on top of this issue.
Indeed. According to environment editor Mark Oliver: “In 2019, we launched a series called Toxic America, inspired by the idea that compared with the EU and other places, US safeguards and regulations around the threat of toxic chemicals were weaker. It’s one of those times where our outsider lens on the US can be helpful for how we see issues that perhaps other outlets aren’t seeing with as much alarm. We got a lot of engagement from readers on that series, and they helped us fund more journalism in that area. We’ve been in the vanguard of coverage around this ever since.”

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Source: U.S. EPA

Nearly half of US prisons draw water from sources likely contaminated with toxic PFAS “forever chemicals”, new research finds.

At least around 1m people incarcerated in the US, including 13,000 juveniles, are estimated to be housed in the prisons, and they are especially vulnerable to the dangerous chemicals because there is little they can do to protect themselves, said Nicholas Shapiro, a study co-author at the University of California in Los Angeles.

“We need to think about who is exposed and who has the least agency to mitigate their exposure – that’s why this is such a unique population,” he said. “We see the dehumanization of incarcerated people across the country, and these exposures are symptoms of that larger problem.”

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make products resistant to water, stains and heat. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down, and are linked to cancer, liver problems, thyroid issues, birth defects, kidney disease, decreased immunity and other serious health problems.

The study analyzed the likelihood that watersheds serving the nation’s 6,118 carceral facilities were contaminated with PFAS. The authors zoomed in on hydrologic unit codes to identify those regions near prisons most likely to be contaminated from nearby airports, military sites, landfills, wastewater treatment plants and a range of manufacturing facilities.

The study found that testing has only been performed on several hundred of the drinking water sources identified, and better monitoring is “desperately needed”, the authors wrote. The true number of incarcerated people drinking contaminated water is likely much higher, they noted.

Shapiro highlighted a women’s prison near Tampa, Florida, that draws from groundwater highly contaminated by PFAS-laden firefighting foam from by a nearby firefighting school. Foam is one of the largest sources of PFAS water pollution in the US.

Levels in the groundwater were 170 times higher than state health guidelines, and officials warned residents who drew the water – but no one alerted the incarcerated people or did anything to prevent their exposure. Even when incarcerated people learned of the threat, the state would not provide clean water.

That is especially a problem because the nation’s prison population is generally in poorer health than the non-incarcerated population, and the issue disproportionately threatens people of color and people with lower incomes, Shapiro noted.

“For all of these reasons, we need to take extra care to understand these exposures and mitigate them,” he said.

Source: The Guardian

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Why We Send Postcard Reminders

If you have a product of ours that requires regular replacement parts, we send you a postcard reminder once a year. Reminders go to customers who need filter cartridges for whole house or drinking water filters or reverse osmosis units, washing machine or garden hose filters. Even shower filters.  UV customers also get cards to remind them to replace the ultraviolet lamp.

Cards are sent with the broad assumption that cartridges and lamps need to be replaced once a year. It’s an imperfect system, and once a year is as close as we can get. We fully realize that in some homes one person uses the shower filter while in others six do.   People often tell us things like the filter is in a summer home that is unoccupied much of the year, or that their daughter has gone away to college, so they don’t need replacements as often. That’s way too complicated for us. We are simple people and it’s a simple system.  Once a year. And it’s once a year from your last purchase: If we send a card in February and you purchase in April, you’ll get your next reminder in April. And if you don’t purchase, you don’t get another postcard.

And if you get a card and don’t buy anything, you won’t get another card until you buy something, so rest assured that buying a countertop water filter from us does not put you on a never-ending mailing list. We aren’t like the Vet who’ll keep sending cards until you take Bowser in for his rabies shot.

Postcards may be the most popular thing we do, judging from the many thank-you notes we get. Cards make re-ordering easy. They tell you what you need to know to order by phone or from our website.

Why don’t we send email reminders instead? Email is cheaper and easier. We’ve tried, and email isn’t even remotely as effective as a postcard.

Do KDF Filters Remove Chloramine from Water?

Contrary to popular legends, KDF 55 and KDF 85 do not remove chloramine from water. In filters where KDF is mixed with carbon, there may be some chloramine reduction, but the KDF has nothing to do with it.

Drinking water and wastewater managers throughout the U.S. are keenly aware of just how pervasive per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) can be in the environment. But now, new research has found that all rainwater around the world contains these contaminants to unsafe degrees.

“Atmospheric levels of toxic ‘forever chemicals’ are so high that rainwater everywhere contains amounts that are unsafe for long-term human consumption according to safety guidelines,” Vice reported. “‘Even in these remote and sparsely populated regions, such as Antarctica and the Tibetan plateau, the most stringent PFAS guidelines are exceeded,’ according to a study.”

The rising prevalence of PFAS in drinking water around the country has prompted the U.S. EPA to commit to more stringent regulations around the contaminants, has initiated a “seismic shift” in the legal landscape for industrial polluters, and has prompted existential questions about how drinking water and wastewater operations are supposed to respond.

But this latest study underscored the fact that PFAS are nearly impossible to avoid, no matter what actions water and wastewater systems take.

“This new study, which looks at four specific chemicals in the class, suggests that levels of one PFAS in rainwater around the globe often ‘greatly exceed’ US drinking water advisory levels,” according to the BBC. “The study’s findings lead the authors to conclude that a planetary boundary has been crossed — that there simply is no safe space on Earth to avoid these substances.”

As researchers learn more about PFAS and the potential harm that can come from exposure to them, regulations are becoming stricter. And while the production of products containing PFAS has been largely phased out, these so-called forever chemicals remain in the environment for a notoriously long time.

With the global environment now found to be totally inundated with PFAS, much of the burden for keeping these compounds away from consumers continues to fall on drinking water treatment operations.

“Removing the chemicals in the study from drinking water at treatment plants is possible, if expensive,” per BBC. “But getting below the US advisory levels is extremely challenging, according to the authors.”

Water Online

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Ultrapure Water Is Not For Drinking

While we think that water straight from the RO unit is wonderful, water can indeed by too pure for human consumption.

NEWater

Scientific developments like  membrane bioreactor technology enable enduring, sustainable development that does not leave permanent scars on the planet.  — Shivali Vora.

Countries all over the world are facing progressively higher levels of water stress — periods when demand exceeds supply. Part of the issue is that demand exists not just for drinking water, but also for water used for agriculture, livestock and electricity generation. From hydropower to nuclear power plants, many forms of energy, renewable and nonrenewable alike, require large volumes of water, as does irrigation for staple crops like sugarcane, wheat and rice, all of which are in high demand as the world population rises relentlessly.

Singapore has one of the highest gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in the world, but it is also one of the most water-stressed nations in the world because of limited land for reservoir construction, few freshwater resources, increasingly common droughts and climbing average temperatures. However, their extensive water reclamation system is alleviating some of the stress and making a heavily limited resource last longer for this island state.

To achieve the goal of water self-sufficiency and independence from foreign imports, Singapore began researching and, in 1998, building a system of 17 reservoirs connected by water reclamation plants — facilities that clean wastewater and in some cases recover the extracted materials for reentry into the ecosystem. Decades of investment into research and development for superior wastewater treatment have resulted in a product called NEWater that is well within World Health Organization (WHO) potability standards. The wastewater first goes through a filter that removes debris and pollutants, followed by passage through a membrane bioreactor, which efficiently combines bioreactors (growing specific biomass that will chemically consume unwanted substances in wastewater) with microfiltration or ultrafiltration. After this, a round of reverse osmosis — the process of using pressure to force water through a semipermeable membrane, thereby separating it from possible contaminants — targets microorganisms, metals, hydrocarbons, pesticides and other impurities. Finally, disinfection with UV light kills any remaining traces.

Most of the end product is used industrially, such as for microchip manufacturing, but small amounts are also added to drinking water reservoirs, especially after periods of evaporation. Singapore now uses NEWater to meet 40% of its water needs, as it is significantly cheaper than desalination. Its success and public acceptance are in large part due to successful collaboration between the scientists who developed it and the community leaders who spread awareness about it. At National Day Parades, for example, bottled NEWater was distributed for people to taste. Engagement and transparency with both the public and partnering sectors like the semiconductor industry — now a significant consumer of NEWater — helped the science make it from the lab to Singapore’s future.

Singapore’s resourcefulness and commitment to water recycling is quite uncommon; 80% of wastewater worldwide flows back into the ecosystem unmanaged. For emerging economies like those in sub-Saharan Africa, where only 30% of people have reliable access to a safe supply of water on tap, adopting Singapore’s innovative technology may help build sustainable water security. Despite the initial burden of financing the design and implementation of a water reclamation system, it will pay off in multitudes.

Ultimately, economic development rests on the shoulders of basic needs like food, water and energy. Pushing toward indiscriminate urbanization and industrialization does no good if long-term sustainability is not adequately considered in parallel, instead of as an afterthought — as evidenced by post-Industrial Revolution development, which left irreversible environmental destruction in its wake. Furthermore, the onus of these efforts falls on wealthier countries, which have the means to finance solutions to this destruction.

Excerpted from “From Field to Future: Wastewater Treatment and the Path to Water Security,” by Shivali Vora.  La Hoya, February 16, 2024.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Adsorption of Water Contaminants: How Filter Carbon Works

According to the Wikipedia,  “Adsorption is the adhesion of atoms, ions, or molecules from a gas, liquid, or dissolved solid to a surface. This process creates a film of the adsorbate on the surface of the adsorbent. This process differs from absorption, in which a fluid (the absorbate) permeates or is dissolved by a liquid or solid (the absorbent). Note that adsorption is a surface-based process while absorption involves the whole volume of the material.”

Explained more graphically:

This man has adsorbed a pie.

This man is absorbing a pie.

In water treatment, activated carbon is the main adsorbing agent. This is true because filter carbon has an amazing amount of surface area and a strong ability to attract and hold organic chemicals.

Most of the surface area of a particle of carbon is internal.

Enlargement of granular carbon shows countless pores that adsorb contaminants. The surface area of the pores is exceptional. A single pound of activated carbon has more surface area in its pores than 100 football fields.

Carbon’s amazing ability to adsorb organic chemicals varies according to the chemical in question and conditions of the water. In general, chemicals of high molecular weight and low solubility are most easily adsorbed. The lower the concentration of the chemical, the higher the adsorption rate by carbon. Also, the fewer the interfering organic compounds present in the water the better. The pH of the water is also significant, with acidic compounds being most readily adsorbed at low pH. And, as with most other aspects of water filtration, rate of flow of the water being treated is extremely important with carbon adsorption. The more residence time the better.

In regard to specific chemicals, one source lists dozens of common chemicals and ranks them according to the likelihood that they will be removed by carbon adsorption. Here are a few of the more common items from the list:

Very High Probability of Adsorption: Atrazine, Malathion, 1, 3-dichlorobenzene,  DDT, Lindane.

High Probability of Adsorption: Toluene, styrene, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, vinyl acetate,  phenol.

Moderate Probability of Adsorption: Chloroform, vinyl chloride, acetic acid.

Unlikely to be adsorbed by carbon:  Isopropyl alcohol, dimethylformaldehyde, propylene.

It should be remembered that although carbon has great chemical reduction capacity because of its ability to attract and hold chemicals on its surface, it acts in other ways as well. Chlorine, for example, is reduced mainly by catalytic reaction with the carbon, not by the “grab and hold” process of adsorption.

Despite notable efforts from industrial wastewater operations and treatment utilities alike, the U.S. EPA has seen virtually no progress on one of the country’s most pressing contamination problems.

“The nation’s rivers and streams remain stubbornly polluted with nutrients that contaminate drinking water and fuel a gigantic dead zone for aquatic life in the Gulf of Mexico,” the Associated Press reported. “It’s a problem only expected to get harder to control as climate change produces more intense storms that dump rain on the Midwest and South. Those heavy rains flood farm fields, pick up fertilizers and carry them into nearby rivers.”

The troubling results were uncovered by an EPA assessment of samples collected in 2018 and 2019, comparing river conditions from previous samplings. Phosphorus levels dipped, but nitrogen levels were found to be almost completely unchanged.

As nutrient-driven problems like harmful algal blooms grow worse, regulators are cracking down on sources of nitrogen and phosphorus, like meat processing operations. But as those efforts have yet to make a dent in the problem, calls for additional measures are emerging.

“Anne Schechinger, Midwest director with the Environmental Working Group, said new regulations are needed, not voluntary efforts,” according to the Associated Press. “She said the Biden administration has done a lot to improve drinking water, but not enough to reduce agricultural runoff.”

Stricter regulation alone might not be enough to address the problem. For the Chesapeake Bay, one of the country’s most iconic water bodies as well as one of its most nutrient polluted, significant funding will have to be central to the solution as well.

“In the last decade alone, state and federal agencies have spent more than $2 billion on programs to help farmers in the Chesapeake region install conservation practices,” per Bay Journal. “And spending is dramatically increasing as the 2025 deadline for the Bay’s cleanup goals approaches.”

With nitrogen and phosphorus levels proving to be more stubborn than officials hoped, additional regulation, funding, and technological innovation are likely on the horizon for wastewater treatment operations.

Source: Water Online

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement