The Trump administration's new plan to abandon drinking water regulations for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (Pfas) and instead focus on destroying the chemicals has drawn sharp criticism from environmental advocates. They compare the strategy to the fossil fuel industry's reliance on carbon capture, arguing it benefits polluters while endangering public health.
EPA Reverses Biden-Era Limits
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last week announced it would kill strong Biden-era drinking water limits for four Pfas compounds and delay implementation for two more. The move was a blow to public health, as advocates say stringent limits and reduced production are critical. However, the press conference was billed as a "Pfas destruction event," with administration leaders touting an "explosion in destruction technology" and EPA investment in industry efforts to eliminate the chemicals.
Critics Question Feasibility
Kyla Bennett, a former EPA scientist now with the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), called the plan "nonsensical." She noted that technology to fully destroy Pfas on a large scale does not exist. "No one has said they can destroy Pfas on a large scale," Bennett said. "From what we know about Pfas, this is not going to work."
Pfas, a class of at least 16,000 compounds, are used to make products water-, stain-, and grease-resistant. They are linked to cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, high cholesterol, and kidney disease. Dubbed "forever chemicals," they persist for thousands of years and contaminate water, soil, and air worldwide. An estimated 200 million Americans have Pfas in their drinking water.
Destruction Technology Flawed
Current destruction methods, such as incineration and thermal oxidation, often fail to fully break down Pfas, instead creating smaller byproducts that may be equally dangerous. A 2023 Guardian investigation found that a thermal oxidizer at a Chemours plant, claimed to destroy 99.999% of Pfas, still released chemicals missed by standard tests. Similarly, over 200 incinerators across the US release Pfas into the air despite claims of efficiency.
Economic Incentives Questioned
Laura Orlando, a waste management systems engineer at Boston University, said the administration's moves can be explained by "following the money." Pfas-contaminated sewage sludge is either landfilled or used as fertilizer, poisoning food. Instead of reducing chemical use, industry promotes expensive, unproven destruction methods. Pfas removal from water costs up to $18 per pound, with taxpayers bearing the cost.
Advocates emphasize the need to "turn off the tap" by reducing Pfas production, rather than relying on unproven destruction. "We need to continue to research Pfas destruction by funding entities without a profit motive," Orlando said. "Right now the fox is guarding the hen house, and it's not looking good for the hens."
