Search

PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ Used on Farms Could Significantly Raise Health Risks, EPA Draft Guidelines Warn

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

15 Jan, 2025

This post was originally published on Eco Watch

Toxic chemicals from sewage sludge used as fertilizer pose health risks to those who regularly consume products from farms that use it, in some instances raising cancer risk by “several orders of magnitude” over what is considered acceptable by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), federal officials said on Tuesday.

EPA’s draft risk assessment, Draft Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment for Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid (PFOS), is a scientific evaluation of potential health risks to humans associated with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) “forever chemicals” in biosolids, or “sewage sludge,” a press release from EPA said.

“EPA under President Biden’s leadership has taken unprecedented actions to advance research and science on PFAS and to protect people from these dangerous forever chemicals,” said Jane Nishida, EPA’s acting administrator, in the press release. “This draft assessment provides important information to help inform future actions by federal and state agencies as well as steps that wastewater systems, farmers and other stakeholders can take to protect people from PFAS exposure, while ensuring American industry keeps feeding and fueling our nation.”

The findings show that exposure to PFOA or PFOS — two types of forever chemicals — during sewage sludge use and disposal methods may pose human health risks. The three methods are: surface disposal in landfills, land application of biosolids and incineration.

Once the assessment is finalized, it will assist EPA and partners in understanding the public health impacts posed by forever chemicals in biosolids, as well as inform potential future actions that could help reduce exposure risk.

Wastewater gets conveyed to a treatment plant from businesses, households and industrial dischargers. The treatment processes produce a semi-solid product that is rich in nutrients called “biosolids” or “sewage sludge.”

An urban wastewater treatment plant. Bilanol / iStock / Getty Images Plus

“EPA typically uses the term ‘biosolids’ to mean sewage sludge that has been treated to meet regulatory standards and is thereby suitable to be land applied as a soil conditioner or fertilizer. In turn, biosolids can be beneficially reused as land applied fertilizer on agricultural fields or on nonagricultural lands to promote plant health and productivity,” EPA explained.

EPA’s draft risk assessment focused on a narrow and specific population that the agency considered most likely to have exposure to PFOS or PFOA from biosolids being applied to land or through the consumption of products produced on the land where biosolids were applied as fertilizer.

“The preliminary findings of the draft risk assessment indicate that there can be human health risks exceeding EPA’s acceptable thresholds, sometimes by several orders of magnitude, for some scenarios where the farmer applied biosolids containing 1 part per billion (ppb) of PFOA or PFOS (which is near the current detection limit for these PFAS in biosolids),” the press release said.

The risk assessment used scientific modeling of hypothetical health risks to humans who live on or near sites that have been impacted by PFOS or PFOA or for those who mostly rely on products from the sites, such as animal products, food crops or drinking water.

“EPA risk assessments follow a scientific process to characterize the nature and magnitude of health risks to children, adults, and the environment from pollutants based on modeled exposure scenarios. An environmental risk assessment considers three primary factors: 1) presence (i.e., how much of a pollutant is present in the environment); 2) exposure (i.e., how much contact a human or wildlife has with the pollutant); and 3) the toxicity of the pollutant (i.e., the health effects the pollutant causes in humans or wildlife),” EPA said.

The modeled scenarios included farms that used one application of 10 dry-metric-tons per hectare of the biosolids for 40 consecutive years.

The modeling also found human health risks above the EPA acceptable standards in scenarios where 1 part per billion of PFOS or PFOA was put in a clay-lined or unlined surface disposal unit.

Once the draft risk assessment is finalized, EPA will use it to “help inform future risk management actions for PFOA and PFOS in sewage sludge. For the incineration scenario, risk is not quantified due to significant data gaps,” the press release said.

The analysis did not suggest that the country’s general food supply was contaminated by biosolids containing PFOS or PFOA, but the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration are conducting broad PFAS monitoring in the food supply and have taken actions to address products that have been impacted from imported and domestic sources.

According to the “best available data,” biosolids make up less than a percent of fertilized acreage of the nation’s productive agricultural lands annually. There are specific “hot spots” recognized by EPA, and certain farming operations could have higher PFOS or PFOA levels if they used contaminated sludge.

EPA said “further collaboration with impacted operations and other federal agencies will be important to fully understand risks and support impacted farmers.”

The analysis found that PFOS and PFOA risks of exposure from biosolids increased proportionally with how much of the chemicals were present.

“This means that if you lower the concentration of PFOA or PFOS in biosolids or the amount of biosolids applied to agricultural land, you lower the risk. The actual risks from exposure to PFOA or PFOS will vary at farms that land-apply biosolids or at biosolids disposal sites based on the amount of PFOA or PFOS applied, as well as geography, climate, soil conditions, the types of crops grown and their nutrient needs and other factors.,” EPA said.

The draft risk assessment’s findings highlight the importance of proactive state and federal policies to remove and control PFAS at their source.

“Moving forward, EPA is working to set technology-based limits on discharges from several industrial categories — including PFAS manufacturers, electro- and chrome-platers and landfills — under the agency’s Effluent Limitations Guidelines program,” the press release said. “Several states have begun monitoring for PFAS in sewage sludge and published reports and data that are publicly available.”

The post PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ Used on Farms Could Significantly Raise Health Risks, EPA Draft Guidelines Warn appeared first on EcoWatch.

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

You may also like…

Circularity roadmap for construction industry announced

Circularity roadmap for construction industry announced

World Green Building Council (WorldGBC) has launched the Asia Pacific Regional Network (APN) Resources and Circularity Readiness Framework, presented at the WorldGBC hosted accelerator session, ‘Retrofitting buildings: Lessons from a global network’, as part of the World Circular Economy Forum 2025 (WCEF2025), a global event dedicated to the circular economy.

Developed by WorldGBC’s APN of 17 Green Building Councils (GBCs) as well as knowledge partners, the framework is a practical roadmap aimed at policymakers and businesses across the region to assess their circularity readiness and identify strategic priorities for action to decarbonise their building stock on both a national and regional scale.

The framework can be used as a tool to quantify the business case for circular, sustainable principles in the built environment, and support businesses and governments to reduce waste, conserve resources and lower carbon emissions. It shows the industry the practical steps it can take now towards circularity, based on its current capabilities. It sets out clear assessment criteria, specific readiness indicators and actionable guidance based on five interconnected elements:

Government leadership: Policies and regulations driving circularity at all levels.
Technical solutions: Innovative approaches enabling resource efficiency and circular material flows.
Data: Measurement systems tracking resource use and circularity progress.
Finance: Funding mechanisms supporting circular business models and infrastructure.
Mindset: Cultural shifts prioritising resource conservation and sustainable consumption.
 

The Framework further supports WorldGBC’s 2025–2027 strategic plan, which outlines the vision for a sustainable built environment, guided by global 2030 decarbonisation goals.

Joy Gai, Head of Asia Pacific Network, WorldGBC said, “The framework has been developed by sustainability experts from the Asia–Pacific, one of the most diverse regions in the world, which is defined by remarkable complexities of culture, building stocks and environmental conditions. Our network recognises that harnessing diversity is fundamental to shaping a more resilient, resource-efficient future — but we need a guide to show us how to put our ambition into action. That is why we developed the APN Resources and Circularity Readiness Framework.

“WorldGBC is proud to join our Green Building Councils and partners in launching this timely resource. It creates a common language to guide businesses through collaboration, identifying their needs and applying circular methods which support our shared vision for a sustainable and regenerative future for Asia–Pacific and beyond.”

Jeff Oatman, chair of the Asia Pacific Regional network, Head of Collaboration and membership at Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA), added, “The Resources and Circularity Readiness Framework is a timely and much-needed initiative to accelerate the transition to a more regenerative and resource-efficient built environment across our region. By offering a clear pathway for assessing readiness and driving action, it empowers governments, industry and communities to make smarter, more sustainable decisions around circularity. I’m proud to be part of this collaboration and to contribute to a tool that not only fosters innovation but also supports practical outcomes that matter for people and the planet.”

Takuji Kohama, Chief Representative, AGC Group for Asia Pacific, also commented, “A resilient built environment relies on understanding ecological interconnections and making a conscious shift from linear consumption to cyclical resource stewardship. Designing buildings and infrastructures with their lifecycle in mind maximises material efficiency and minimises waste through a holistic approach from resource sourcing to end-of-life. Prioritising design for disassembly, material recovery, reuse and repurpose transforms buildings into dynamic material banks, significantly reducing construction’s environmental impact and fostering economic and environmental sustainability.

“Participating in the formulation of Resources and Circularity Readiness Framework offers a practical path to sustainable growth in our resource-constrained and climate-challenged region. This framework empowers built environment stakeholders to adopt a regenerative, resilient mindset focused on long-term value creation, redefining design, construction and living beyond waste minimisation. We aim to catalyse greater collaboration, innovation and systemic change, positioning AGC as a regional leader in circular economy practices and a model for urban sustainability.”

GBCs will use the framework to assess their own readiness to accelerate the transition to a circular economy in the built environment, as well as supporting the Asia–Pacific market. To find out more, head to the Green Building Council of Australia website.

Image credit: iStock.com/Benjamas Deekam

0 Comments