When I bought a lipstick-red Prius a few years back, I thought mine was unique, but, of course, I started seeing identical ones everywhere. It is the same with a class of compounds called here perfluoroalkyl substances, abbreviated as PFAS, but also known as perfluorinated compounds. I hardly noticed them at all until Ned Beecher’s recent conference call to discuss a serious, evolving regulatory issue in New England. Now PFAS seem to be everywhere, literally and figuratively.
In a short two week, both MABA and NEBRA website have posted
PFAS information. Of particular importance, and as a “first stop” for a detailed
overview of the PFAS biosolids issue, is Beecher’s “Fact
Sheet & Talking Points – Perfluorinated Substances in Biosolids.” If
you intend to track this issue, watch for the “PFAS & Biosolids Webinar,”
tentatively scheduled for Monday, May 8th at 1 pm (look for an announcement at the
NEBRA Events page). As a MABA member, you have likely seen Dr. Sally
Brown’s latest “blurb” entitled “Tight
Bonds.”
If you are like me,
you are way behind on your background reading on PFAS. When I started, I was taken aback at how this
class of compounds had been implicated in some bad, though still unproved
health effects. The EPA put out a 2014 document, Health
Effects Document for Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA), which was the basis of the 70 ppt “lifetime health advisory” for
drinking water. The Centers for
Disease Control issued a serious overview
of PFAS exposure for use by clinicians with patients living in contaminated
areas, available also on
the web. In the report Perfluoroalkyl
and polyfluoroalkyl substances and human fetal growth: A systematic review,
the authors report “[H]igher PFOS and PFOA concentrations were associated with
decreased average birth weight in most studies, but only some results were
statistically significant. The impact on public health is unclear, but the
global exposure to PFASs warrants further investigation.” The report Association
between perfluoroalkyl substance exposure and asthma and allergic disease in
children as modified by MMR vaccination concluded that “Perfluoroalkyl
substances (PFASs) are highly persistent chemicals that might be associated
with asthma and allergy, but the associations remain unclear.”
When scientists looked at human body burdens of PFAS,
clearly everyone everywhere is exposed. Even the Arctic is not spared (Perfluorinated Acids in
Arctic Snow: New Evidence for Atmospheric Formation).The massive, 1,774
page CDC report and update, Fourth
National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, showed that,
while white males had somewhat higher concentrations in their blood, no one,
regardless of age or race, is without a body burden of perfluorinated
compounds. One hopeful note is that over the past 15 years serum concentrations
have declined significantly, approximately 70%, following the removal of the
compounds from many consumer products. Also, a positive feature is that the
half-life of these compounds in the human body is a little over two years: (Occurrence and Potential
Significance of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Detected in New Jersey Public
Drinking Water Systems”)
So where are PFAS coming from? EPA’s report discovered
environmental hotspots, such as manufacturing locations, fire training
facilities, and airports. But, according
to Impacts
of daily intakes on the isomeric profiles of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs)
in human serum “[d]ietary intake contributed > 99% of the estimated
daily intake (EDI) for the general population...” The report Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in Food and Human Dietary Intake: A Review
of the Recent Scientific Literature, claimed that “fish and other seafood
seem to be the food group in which more PFASs are detected and where the
concentrations of these compounds are higher.” This was the case, too, for wild-caught bass
in Comparison
of perfluoroalkyl substances contamination in farmed and wild-caught European
sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax). PFAS are in food packaging: Fluorinated
Compounds in U.S. Fast Food Packaging explains that “The prevalence of
fluorinated chemicals in fast food packaging demonstrates their potentially
significant contribution to dietary PFAS.” PFAS have entered our food from
Teflon cookware and microwave popcorn: Quantitation of Gas-Phase
Perfluoroalkyl Surfactants and Fluorotelomer Alcohols Released from Nonstick
Cookware and Microwave Popcorn Bags. But, thankfully, these sources are being
withdrawn from the marketplace and from human use.
PFAS are in indoor and outdoor dust. The paper from Korea, Human
exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) via house dust in
Korea: Implication to exposure pathway, determined that “house-dust
ingestion was a minor contributor in this study, but should not be ignored for toddlers….”
And a nation-wide study found “substantial levels” throughout China, Nationwide
Distribution of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Outdoor Dust in Mainland
China From Eastern to Western Areas.
Among these several sources, tap water is the big issue for people
and biosolids. The first issues arose
with tap water contaminated by local manufacturing activities. In the report Detection of
Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in U.S. Drinking Water Linked to
Industrial Sites, Military Fire Training Areas, and Wastewater Treatment Plants
“We find drinking water supplies for 6 million U.S. residents exceed US EPA’s
lifetime health advisory (70 ng/L) for PFOS and PFOA.” New England has a few
such sources, hence Ned’s urgency, but in the mid-Atlantic, Parkersburg, WV, is
the home of a former DuPont Teflon plant, with a sad legacy of PFAS, reported
by WV
Public Broadcasting in October 2016.
The research conversation quickly turned to wastewater and
biosolids. Mass Loading and Fate of
Perfluoroalkyl Surfactants in Wastewater Treatment Plants reported that “PFOS
and PFOA are known to be non-biodegradable by an activated sludge process….
Therefore, a reduction in mass flow following activated sludge treatment was
neither expected nor observed.” Further,
“This study provides further evidence that PFAS are not removed from wastewater
by conventional treatment. An effective strategy for reducing their
contamination of the environment should include the removal of PFAS and their
precursors from domestic, commercial, and industrial sources.”
One famous horror story is given in Application of WWTP
biosolids and resulting perfluorinated compound contamination of surface and
well water in Decatur, Alabama, USA, which “describes a situation in
Decatur, Alabama, where PFC contaminated biosolids from a local municipal
wastewater treatment facility that had received waste from local
fluorochemical facilities were used as a soil amendment in local
agricultural fields for as many as twelve years.” Biosolids-borne PFAS were
implicated in groundwater contamination.
How much PFAS can you expect in biosolids. Rolf Halden at
the University of Arizona weighed in with his National
inventory of perfluoroalkyl substances in archived U.S. biosolids from the 2001
EPA National Sewage Sludge Survey, which
reported a national average for the dominant compound in biosolids, perfluorooctane
sulfonate (PFOS), at approximately 400 ng/g dry weight.
Analysis of more current samples show much lower
concentrations today. Perfluoroalkyl
substances (PFASs) in wastewater treatment plants and drinking water treatment
plants: Removal efficiency and exposure risk reported the “average total
PFASs concentrations in the three selected WWTPs were 19.6–232 ng/L in
influents, 15.5–234 ng/L in effluents, and 31.5–49.1 ng/g dry weight in
sludge.” Temporal
trends of perfluoroalkyl substances in limed biosolids from a large municipal
water resource recovery facility is
an important time series of measurements from Washington, DC, in which “the
highest mean concentrations observed over the study period were 25.1 ng/g
dw, 23.5 ng/g dw, and 22.5 ng/g dw for perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA),
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS),
respectively…” These recent studies
confirm that today’s values are about an order of magnitude lower than those values
reported for National Repository biosolids.
The million-dollar question is what happens when biosolids
are land applied? We have only a few clear field studies, and some questionable
pot studies. To start with, biosolids carry the larger-chain PFAS. While these
resist movement in soil, microbial action mobilizes them as shorter chain
compounds. Occurrence
and fate of perfluorochemicals in soil following the land application of
municipal biosolids showed that “trace levels of PFCs were also detected in
soil cores from biosolids-amended soils to depths of 120 cm, suggesting
potential movement of these compounds within the soil profile over time and
confirming the higher transport potential for short-chain PFCs in soils amended
with municipal biosolids.” Ed Topp in Canada looked at the pathway of PFAS from
biosolids to tile drains (Brominated
flame retardants and perfluoroalkyl acids in groundwater, tile drainage, soil,
and crop grain following a high application of municipal biosolids to a field.)
Under conditions in which the pathway is short between plowed-in biosolids and
tiles, “Exponential dissipation of … [PFCs]
in [biosolids] aggregates were not significant…. {though] No [PFCs] were
detected in wheat grain.” The finding on plant uptake was reassuring.
Beecher is dealing with several closely related issues in
New Hampshire. What had been an advisory level put out by EPA was grabbed by
state regulators as a criterion. Evidence of PFAS transport in groundwater from
an industrially contaminated site is seen by state regulators as prima facie
rationale for regulating land applied biosolids bearing PFAS. Regulators are tempted
by “low hanging fruit” to impose a ban on land application.
Biosolids professionals are putting a stake in the ground
for “sound science.” At each step in the environmental exposure chain –
wastewater treatment, biosolids stabilization, land spreading/incorporation,
groundwater withdrawal, and crop update -- the connection needs to be scientifically
understood before regulations are imposed. Decades of good biosolids recycling practices
urge us to Stick with Biosolids.
No comments:
Post a Comment