PFAS and AFFF have been used in firefighting foams for decades. However, there are growing concerns about their risks to human health and the environment.
PFAS have been used since the 1950s to make nonstick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, and firefighting foam. In fact, the Ecology Center says that PTFE is a polymer form of PFAS. It is found in almost 79% of tested nonstick cooking pans and 20% of tested nonstick baking pans. The samples were gathered from ten retailers.
This article will explain what PFAS and AFFF are, how they work, and why they have become so controversial. We’ll also discuss how these chemicals impact the environment and human health and how companies respond to litigation from people impacted by them.
The Chemistry Behind PFAS and AFFF
The term “PFAS” or “per- and polyfluorinated substances” refers to a group of chemicals that have similar properties. These compounds persist in the environment, meaning they take a long time to break down and don’t easily degrade.
As stated in an NCBI article, the half-lives of long-chain PFAS are almost three years. The life of the short-chain ones may be shorter, say around 0.63 years. Because of this, they’re found in a range of products, from cookware to clothing to cosmetics. AFFF is one such product that uses PFAS to prevent fire from spreading effectively.
AFFF formulations include PFAS, particularly PFOS and PFOA, to improve the foam’s performance. The use of PFAS in AFFF has led to concerns about the environmental persistence and potential health impacts of these chemicals.
This has highly impacted firefighters, who are in constant exposure to AFFF. According to TorHoerman Law, PFAS exposure has been linked to thyroid, testicular, kidney, and many other cancers. Hence, the firefighters and others exposed to AFFF have filed lawsuits against the manufacturers of this firefighting foam product.
Anyone who has developed any form of cancer or is facing any other health issue due to AFFF exposure can file a firefighting foam lawsuit. Winning the case will require help from an experienced attorney. Thus, research and find a lawyer with expertise in this kind of case.
Health and Environmental Risks of PFAS-Based AFFF
Most people are aware that PFAS poses a risk to human health and the environment. For example, exposure to PFAS can lead to health conditions like cancer, thyroid disease, and other serious illnesses. Here are some key considerations regarding the health and environmental risks of PFAS-based AFFF:
Health Risks:
- Bioaccumulation: PFAS have the potential to bioaccumulate in living organisms, including humans, meaning that they can build up in tissues over time.
- Persistence: PFAS are highly persistent in the environment and can resist degradation, leading to long-term exposure.
- Human exposure: Firefighters and individuals working at sites where AFFF is used or stored may be exposed to PFAS through inhalation, ingestion, or skin contact. According to ewg.org, more than 400 military installations across the US are affected by these forever chemicals.
- Health Effects: Several studies have linked PFAS exposure to various health issues, including developmental effects, immune system dysfunction, liver damage, and certain cancers.
Environmental Risks:
- Groundwater contamination: PFAS from AFFF can leach into the soil and contaminate groundwater, posing risks to both human and ecological receptors.
- Surface water contamination: Runoff from firefighting activities can introduce PFAS into surface water bodies, affecting aquatic ecosystems and potentially entering the food chain. The same ewg.org article linked above also states that almost 200 million Americans are drinking water contaminated with these chemicals.
- Ecotoxicity: PFAS have been shown to adversely affect aquatic life, including fish and other organisms. These effects can include developmental abnormalities and reproductive issues.
- Soil contamination: AFFF releases can accumulate PFAS in soil, potentially impacting plants and soil-dwelling organisms.
Regulatory Landscape
The EPA has issued drinking water standards for PFOS and PFOA. The EPA is developing a PFAS action plan, which will include recommendations on managing PFAS contaminants in drinking water, surface water, and groundwater. The agency has also released draft guidance documents that provide states with technical information about how to test for PFOAs.
Regulatory agencies worldwide are increasingly recognizing the risks associated with PFAS. There is also ongoing research to establish guidelines and regulations for their use and remediation. Some jurisdictions have started to phase out the use of certain PFAS-containing AFFF formulations.
According to Reuters, the FAA had also asked US airports to limit the usage of AFFFs containing PFAS due to its environmental and public health risks. The FAA also mentioned that 400 researchers have evaluated 15 fluorine-free firefighting foam products, which could pave the way for a replacement product.
AFFF Lawsuits: Legal Perspectives
The legal process for PFAS lawsuits is long, complex, and expensive. It can take years to get a settlement or verdict in your case. The same holds for AFFF lawsuits, although the time frame may be shorter because of the fewer plaintiffs involved.
To file an AFFF lawsuit successfully, it’s important that you have an attorney who knows how to navigate this complicated legal landscape. Your lawyer will guide you through all stages of litigation, from initial discovery requests through depositions.
At each step along the way, he or she will help ensure that all evidence is preserved correctly. This helps ensure that everything goes smoothly when it comes time for trial. Many cases are already filed. In fact, there are around 6,000 lawsuits already consolidated into multidistrict litigation.
Challenges and Controversies
The presence of PFAS in the environment and human tissue has become a major concern for both government agencies and the public. The EPA has stated that “it is important to understand how PFAS may affect people’s health.” The agency also noted that there is still much to be learned about this class of chemicals.
While there is some consensus on certain aspects of PFAS regulation, there are still many questions surrounding their use. The major challenge is that it will be difficult to find an alternative to PFAS-based AFFF. PFAS makes AFFF more effective, and removing it can make the product less efficient at fighting fire.
In conclusion, the intersection of PFAS and AFFF lawsuits highlights the complex relationship between industry practices, environmental impact, and public health. As the legal battles continue to unfold, it becomes imperative for regulatory bodies, manufacturers, and the public to work collaboratively in finding sustainable solutions. The chemical chaos surrounding PFAS and AFFF serves as a stark reminder of the importance of responsible chemical management.
