Farmers, the backbone of our food supply, could be facing an invisible enemy that lurks in their soil and water: PFAS, the so-called “forever chemicals.”
These harmful substances, once used in a wide range of products, have made their way into farms across the United States, affecting crops, livestock, and water supplies.
In some cases, PFAS contamination in agriculture has been linked to the use of biosolids from wastewater treatment plants as fertilizer.
The discovery of PFAS in these biosolids has created a growing challenge for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, raising concerns about the potential presence of PFAS in the food they produce.
As farmers confront this problem, it is critical to understand the scope of PFAS contamination, the risks involved, and the steps toward potential legal recovery against those ultimately responsible – the manufacturers of PFAS and the products that contained it.
PFAS Contamination on Farms
PFAS are a group of thousands of synthetic chemicals that have been used for decades in a variety of products, including non-stick cookware, firefighting foams, stain-resistant fabrics, food packaging, and other commercial and consumer products.
Their ability to form a layer that resists heat, water, and grease made them very useful.
However, these same properties also make PFAS dangerous: nearly impossible to break down in the environment, and prone to accumulating in human and animal tissue.
As a result, they accumulate over time, contaminating water, soil, and food supplies.
PFAS contamination on some farmland has been tied to the use of biosolids—semi-solid materials produced as a byproduct of wastewater treatment—as a fertilizer.
For years, biosolids have been considered a cost-effective, nutrient-rich way to improve soil health, and many farmers adopted their use to enhance crop growth.
Until very recently, it was not known or even suspected that these biosolids contained PFAS—the risks of these chemicals were concealed by the manufacturers that produced them, in some cases for decades.
Unfortunately, as the dangers of PFAS have come to light contamination has grown, it has become clear that these chemicals are not only present in biosolids, but resistant to breakdown and prone to accumulate in the environment over time, creating the potential to contaminate crops and livestock raised on land where biosolids were used.
Health and Environmental Risks
In recent years, studies have linked PFAS exposure to a range of serious health issues, including some cancers, thyroid disorders, liver damage, infertility, and developmental problems in children.
These chemicals are particularly dangerous because they accumulate in the body over time, with long-lasting effects.
For farmers, soil and water contamination by PFAS is a serious concern.
PFAS in soil can reach groundwater, contaminating wells used for drinking water or irrigation.
Certain crops, particularly leafy greens and forage crops, are prone to absorbing high levels of PFAS from the soil, further spreading the contamination into the food system.
Livestock, particularly dairy cows, are also vulnerable. Cows that graze on contaminated pasture, consume feed grown on PFAS-affected land, or drink PFAS-contaminated water can produce milk and meat containing harmful levels of chemicals.
With emerging studies revealing elevated PFAS levels in milk, this has quickly become a significant issue for dairy farmers.
Changing Regulatory Landscape
As public awareness of PFAS contaminations increases, state and federal agencies are beginning to take action.
At the national level, the U.S. Environmental Protection agency (EPA) has set maximum contaminant levels for certain PFAS in drinking water; however, enforceable federal standards for PFAS in food products and biosolids have yet to be established.
The EPA is also conducting a risk assessment of pollutants in biosolids, which may lead to future regulations aimed at reducing the spread of these chemicals on agricultural lands.
At the state level, Maine has led the charge in addressing PFAS contamination in biosolids, becoming the first state to ban the land application of biosolids and sewage sludge-derived fertilizers.
This decision followed the discovery of widespread contamination on more than 50 farms, where PFAS levels in soil, water and agricultural products were dangerously high.
Other states, including Connecticut, Michigan, and Wisconsin, are using short-term strategies to manage PFAS concentrations in biosolids.
Some states, for example, have required wastewater treatment operators to test for concentrations of PFAS in their biosolids, enabling further regulatory action, such as prohibiting the land application of heavily contaminated biosolids.
In addition to these biosolid management efforts, some states have also enacted or proposed bans on PFAS in consumer goods—such as food packaging, textiles, and firefighting foam—aimed at preventing PFAS from entering wastewater streams and biosolids in the first place.
Tighter regulations for PFAS in food products could also become a reality.
In Maine, for example, state regulations now prohibit the sale of milk with PFAS levels above 210 parts per trillion (ppt), and similar action levels are being considered for beef.
Maine’s actions may set a precedent to be followed by other states. These regulations are intended to protect farms by maintaining public confidence in food safety, but they can also impose significant financial and operational burdens on farmers.
Legal Action: Holding Polluters Accountable
As farmers face the financial and environmental challenges posed by PFAS contamination, several avenues of support and accountability have emerged.
Two key strategies are emergency relief funds and legal actions, both of which provide hope for those affected.
Some states and organizations have established emergency relief funds to support PFAS-affected farmers.
For example, Maine’s PFAS emergency Relief Fund offers short-term income replacement and testing assistance to farmers whose lands are contaminated by PFAS.
However, these funds often fall short of covering the long-term financial burden of PFAS regulations, which may continue for years.
One of the most successful avenues for recovering PFAS contamination costs has been legal action aimed at holding the manufacturers of the PFAS itself accountable.
In recent years, hundreds of municipalities and other utilities have sued PFAS manufacturers, resulting in settlements totaling over $14 billion so far.
These settlements, while limited to public water systems, show that these chemical companies can be held accountable for the contamination they have caused.
Legal action against the PFAS manufacturers brought by others who have been harmed, including farmers, continues.
Long-term Recovery
Mitigating the effects of PFAS contamination on farms is a complex and expansive process.
For many farmers, it could require significant investments in new water treatment systems, drilling new wells away from contaminated areas, and purchasing uncontaminated feed.
In some cases, entire fields or farms may have to be abandoned, leading to substantial losses of income.
To reduce PFAS levels in livestock, some farmers have had to switch to alternative crops or rotate pastures, ensuring that cattle are fed only “clean” feed.
Research shows that while some crops, such as corn and small grains, tend to accumulate lower levels of PFAS, crops grown for livestock forage, such as hay, often retain high concentrations of the chemicals.
While ongoing support from state and federal agencies is essential for farmers facing these challenges, legal action against the companies responsible for PFAS contamination could provide additional financial relief.
Navigating the Future of Farming in the Age of PFAS
The challenges posed by PFAS contamination are significant, but they are not impossible to overcome.
As more people become aware of the dangers of these “forever chemicals,” there is growing demand for stronger regulations, better support for affected farmers, and accountability from the polluters who caused the contamination in the first place.
For farmers, the path forward will require resilience, innovation, and, in many cases may be helped by legal action, to ensure that the burden of remediation is shared with those responsible for the pollution.
With ongoing research and financial support, the agricultural industry can take steps to address the impacts of PFAS, safeguarding the environment and ensuring that communities continue to benefit from safe, sustainable food production.
Ken Sansone is Senior Partner, and Valentina Marastoni-Bieser is Vice President of Client Engagement & Marketing. at the SL Environmental Law Firm in San Francisco.
Upcoming Event
Resource Links:
-- General Permits For Safe Land Application Of Sewage Sludge, Septage Extended For 1 Year, Delaying Updates For PFAS ‘Forever Chemical’ Contamination [PaEN - 2023]
-- DEP Presentation On Updating Biosolids Permits To Include PFAS Testing [2021]
-- Penn State: PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ In Agroecosystems Research & Extension Network
-- Penn State Research: PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ Persist Through Wastewater Treatment, May Enter Crops
-- Lancaster Farming: What Farmers And Consumers Need To Know About PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’
[Posted: December 4, 2024] PA Environment Digest
No comments :
Post a Comment