Many water districts around the country are facing significant financial strain due to new federal legislation requiring low levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), popularly known as “forever chemicals,” in public drinking water.
Experts predict that this will ultimately result in increased water rates for customers in many places.
The Environmental Protection Agency released new regulations in April with the goal of safeguarding public health.
Additional studies have revealed that the chemicals can have negative effects on human health even at very low exposure levels.
Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS for short, are compounds that are difficult for the environment to decompose and have been linked to a number of health issues, including cancer and reproductive issues.
But eliminating PFAS from drinking water is not inexpensive.
For instance, the city of Thornton, Colorado, plans to spend $80 million upgrading one of its water treatment facilities with modern PFAS treatment.
The city claims that this expense is required to guarantee its future resilience.
With so many communities, it will be difficult, according to Thornton’s Caleb Owen, a water quality administrator. It’s undoubtedly a national problem.
The potential harmful effects of PFAS on human health were highlighted by the EPA.
“Due to excessively high PFAS levels, the city has currently ceased using a few of its subterranean wells along a portion of the South Platte River.
Water officials can resume using the wells if the city constructs a new treatment system, particularly in times of drought when sources of water are scarce. To assist in funding some of its PFAS initiatives, Thornton raised customer rates in April.
On the municipal website, water consumers may now anticipate paying an extra $4.79 a month on average this summer.
Owen notes that while the city has received a $2.4 million grant from the state to fund their new PFAS treatment, the amount will not even come close to covering the costs of the impending PFAS mitigation.
More rate impacts are likely to occur, but Owen stated that every effort is being made to keep them to a minimum.
According to him, the city is now considering unique federal financing possibilities to help defray costs that are passed on to consumers.
In the end, he claims, the cost of cleaning up someone else’s waste falls on the city and its patrons.
According to him, the city is pushing for greater accountability over the initial source of the PFAS contamination.
We are making efforts to get the EPA and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to implement standards on those releases that will decrease the amount of PFAS that is getting into our water so that we need to disinfect it less, Owen said.
There are ski waxes that contain PFAS in them, and any kind of municipality or industrial release is increasing the PFAS levels in our source waters.
In order to reduce its PFAS levels, Thornton has been working hard over the past few years, turning off some of its wells and employing a powdered carbon filtration method.
Owen, though, claims that’s not feasible. Owen stated, “We just want to work this durability into our process. We are in compliance with the rule.”
Their levels remain above the EPA’s much lower health advice criteria, even though they are now below the EPA’s new legal limits.
According to Owen, there shouldn’t be too much of an impact on health unless you belong to a sensitive population, such as a pregnant woman, an infant, or someone else similar.
In those situations, you might need lower levels, which is when the health advisory comes in.
As new treatment techniques are implemented, we should also lower our levels even further.
He claims that the public health will be protected to the fullest extent by Thornton’s new $80 million PFAS treatment addition.
I entered this field for that reason, Owen stated. “Public and environmental health are very important to me; they bring me peace of mind.
According to him, Thornton’s new treatment method, which should be operational by 2027, would employ granulated active carbon, which is more efficient than the powdered carbon they currently utilize.
He’s relieved that his team is ahead of the curve on this, as he predicts prices will only rise as more water companies rush to comply by 2029.
According to Owen, since the epidemic, inflation and building prices have increased dramatically. As a result, demand for these items has increased.
In Colorado, a lot of public water utilities haven’t even started testing for PFAS, much less installed new filters.
Ask your water district for the results of their PFAS test if you’re concerned about the safety of your water.
Use a charcoal or reverse osmosis filter if your district hasn’t tested or if the levels are greater than allowed.
By staying away from other home items that include PFAS, such as nonstick cookware, waterproof apparel, and even some makeup, you may further reduce your exposure to these chemicals.