Last June historical settlements in the billions were reached between U.S. water suppliers and PFAS manufacturing companies 3M, DuPont, Chemours and Corteva over the contamination of drinking water. Although a significant win in the battle to address forever chemicals in water, the problem is even bigger, argues a recent analysis in The Guardian.
“While over a billion dollars is real money, it is a virtual drop in the bucket of potential utility costs to monitor, remove and dispose of these contaminants in accordance with anticipated federal regulations”, said Tom Dobbins, CEO of the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) in reaction to the settlement reached with DuPont, Chemours and Corteva, highlighting that estimates indicate the cost of drinking water treatment of PFAS can approach around $3-6 billion annually nationwide.
The settlements reached so far represent a first wave of lawsuits, since those two settlements include some 6,000 water systems, and utilities that were not part of suits can either claim some of the payout or sue on their own. Moreover, the settlement does not include contaminated private wells. PFAS manufacturers may also have to face personal injury suits. And US states my sue over contamination of natural resources like rivers and lakes. Experts estimate the industry’s final bill over PFAS contamination could be more than $200 billion.
Currently the best options to remove PFAS from drinking water may be granular activated carbon and reverse osmosis; the cost of clean-up not only includes putting those systems in place, but also operating them, which can cost millions every year for utilities.
Kevin McKie, an attorney with the Environmental Litigation Group, who represented a water management company in the 3M case, said the government could use an excise tax on PFAS to cover some of the costs.
