Search

Concerning level of 'forever chemicals' in global source water

We are an online community created around a smart and easy to access information hub which is focused on providing proven global and local insights about sustainability

18 Apr, 2024

This post was originally published on Sustainability Matters

A recent UNSW-led international study has assessed the levels of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in surface and ground water around the globe.

PFAS are a group of over 14,000 human-made chemicals that have been popular since the 1950s thanks to their diverse abilities in resisting heat, water, grease and stains. They have commonly been found in household products like non-stick frying pans, clothing, cosmetics, insecticides and food packaging, as well as specialty industry products like firefighting foam.

Despite their utility, the chemicals have a more sinister reputation. Dubbed ‘forever chemicals’, they are notorious for not degrading any further once they’re in the environment — or in people’s bodies.

Concerningly, the study found that much of our global source water exceeds PFAS safe drinking limits.

“We already knew that PFAS is pervasive in the environment, but I was surprised to find out the large fraction of source waters that are above drinking water advisory recommendations,” said UNSW Engineering Professor Denis O’Carroll, senior author of the study.

“We’re talking above 5%, and it goes over 50% in some cases.”

The research team pulled together PFAS measurements from sources around the world, including government reports, databases and peer-reviewed literature. Altogether, they collated more than 45,000 data points, which span roughly 20 years. Their study is reportedly the first to quantify the environmental burden of PFAS on a global scale.

High concentrations of PFAS were found in Australia, with many locations above recommended drinking water levels. This tended to be in areas where firefighting foams had been used in the past, like military institutions and fire training facilities.

O’Carroll stressed that these PFAS traces are found in source water, such as dams, and not drinking water itself, which goes through treatment plants, some of which are designed to reduce the amount of chemicals such as PFAS in our water before it comes out of the tap. However, some water providers — eg, Sydney Water — don’t routinely measure the broad range of PFAS potentially in our drinking water, O’Carroll said.

“Drinking water is largely safe, and I don’t hesitate drinking it,” he said. “I also don’t suggest that bottled water is better, because it doesn’t mean that they’ve done anything differently than what comes out of the tap.

“But I certainly think that monitoring PFAS levels and making the data easily available is worthwhile.”

Most people in Australia are likely to have low levels of PFAS in their bodies. The potential health risks are poorly understood and haven’t been agreed on universally. While an Australian Government expert health panel found there is “limited to no evidence” that PFAS poses clinically significant harm to human health, peak bodies in the US and Europe suggest that PFAS is linked to adverse health outcomes, and last year the WHO declared PFOA, a type of PFAS, a category one human carcinogen.

There is also a lack of consensus as to the acceptable level of PFAS in drinking water, with Australia allowing significantly higher limits than the US, and Canada being much stricter than both countries.

“There’s debate about what level PFAS should be regulated to,” O’Carroll said. “Australia has much higher limits than the US, but the question is why.

“Both health bodies would have different reasoning for that, and there’s not a really strong consensus here.”

The study suggests that actual PFAS pollution in global water resources could be higher than suspected. This is partly because only a limited number of the 14,000 PFAS in existence are monitored and regulated, and also because the levels of PFAS in consumer products are higher than expected.

“There’s a real unknown amount of PFAS that we’re not measuring in the environment,” O’Carroll said. “Commercial products like garments and food packaging have a lot more PFAS in them than we realise.

“This means we’re likely underestimating the environmental burden posed by PFAS.”

The team is now attempting to quantify the level of PFAS from commercial products in the environment. It is also working to develop technologies that can degrade PFAS in drinking water systems, and looking at developing predictive models that determine where PFAS will go in the environment.

“Part of this is figuring out how PFAS will associate with different parts of the environment and our bodies — proteins, for example,” O’Carroll said.

These new studies will be in progress over the next two years, with the aim of being completed by 2026. The findings of the current study have been published in Nature Geoscience.

Image credit: iStock.com/LKR Photography

Pass over the stars to rate this post. Your opinion is always welcome.
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

You may also like…

Energy Efficiency as an Imperative Climate Strategy

Energy Efficiency as an Imperative Climate Strategy

With mandatory climate statement disclosure rolling out in Australia, businesses need to start reporting on their emissions and sustainability plans for the future. As companies begin assessing the relevant risks and opportunities related to various climate scenarios, energy efficiency presents itself as an immediate climate-strategy with long-term benefits.

Commencing 1 January 2025, businesses that meet two of the three conditions — more than 500 employees, gross assets above $1 billion or $500 million or more in consolidated gross revenue — are required to lodge a climate statement, which discloses their climate-related plans, financial risks and obligations. As part of the gradual roll-out, by 1 July 2027, businesses that meet two of these conditions — more than 100 employees, gross assets above $25 million or exceeding $50 million in consolidated gross revenue — will also be required to report.

This climate statement will need to include the company’s sustainability governance, climate risks and opportunities, including those physical and transition related. They will also need to disclose their Scope 1 and 2 emissions, strategy to decarbonise, and conduct scenario analysis on the short, medium and long term impacts on the business. By the second year of reporting, businesses will also be expected to report on Scope 3 emissions.

Scenario analysis will be based on various assumptions of the state of the climate, one of which includes a possible future where global temperature has increased 2.5°C or more. They will be required to share their climate strategy and steps they are taking long-term in preparation for this scenario.

Common themes within climate strategies will include switching to renewable energy sources, electrifying fleet vehicles, purchasing carbon credits, and carbon capture and storage. Many of these methods look at reducing emissions through the energy source, or targeting the carbon aspect directly; however, climate strategies can also include reducing the amount of energy used. By investing in more energy efficient equipment, sites can maintain production whilst using less energy and producing less emissions.

When increasing energy efficiency and reducing energy consumption first, businesses will see short-term impacts; however, in the long term, they are also improving their foundation for an energy transition. Assuming no other changes, higher energy efficiency can lead to decreased energy demand, allowing for reduced system requirements when specifying and planning for self-generation or energy costs.

To understand what opportunities are available for upgrading to more energy efficient equipment, businesses can start with an energy audit to understand how energy is being consumed across site. Energy audits, like the ABB Energy Appraisal, can provide a roadmap for where and how equipment can be upgraded for the best energy saving potential. An energy audit identifies areas that can be immediately improved with existing equipment on the market, so there is no need to wait for the commercialization or development of more sustainable technology. Going beyond just changing all lights to LEDs, efficiency recommendations may include areas where variable speed drives can be added to control motor speed or upgrading from an IE3 motor to an IE5 ultra-premium efficiency or IE6 hyper-premium efficiency motor to reduce energy losses by 40% or more. This area can often be overlooked on sites as the Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS) in Australia for motors is just IE2.

Mostly used in pumps, compressors, conveyors and fans, motors may seem like a minor part of a site; however, with 45% of the world’s electricity converted into motion by industrial electric motors, there are many opportunities for energy savings. In fact, a recent survey commissioned by ABB IEC Low voltage motors, showed that 92% of surveyed businesses in Australia recognize the important role of electric motors in achieving sustainability targets. In this same survey, participants ranked a reduction in operating cost as a more important driver for investing in energy efficiency than lowering their organization’s emissions. This is because upgrading to newer, more efficient equipment provides benefits beyond just emission reduction. For example, ABB’s Synchronous Reluctance (SynRM) Motors, available in IE5 ultra-premium efficiency or IE6 hyper-premium efficiency, use no rare earth metals or magnets. Running quieter and with bearing temperatures reduced by up to 15°C and winding temperatures by up to 30°, SynRM motors have longer maintenance periods, superior reliability, and contribute to a better operational environment.

Looking ahead, upgrading to an IE5 SynRM motor also provides more visibility into Scope 3 emissions, as SynRM motors meet ABB’s circularity criteria and transparency on environmental impact is provided through Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs).

By requiring companies to disclose their climate information, these new legal requirements are opening the door and facilitating more internal discussions on environmental impact and emission reduction. Whilst mandatory climate reporting is only required of large business entities this year, the progressive roll-out and Scope 3 emission reporting requirements mean that businesses of all sizes in Australia will be impacted by these new requirements. As businesses become more conscious of how sustainability should be integrated into their operations and finances, there is no better time to start investing in energy efficient solutions.

For more information, click here.

Image credit: iStock.com/denizunlusu

0 Comments