Inside a bar in Parkersburg, a remote town in West Virginia, Rob Bilott, a lawyer specialised in the defence of multinational chemical corporations fidgeted nervously on his chair. Next to him, a scientist, part of the chemical company DuPont, was attempting to explain the significance of the scientific evidence, provided as thousands of photocopies. The lawyer wanted to investigate whether any environmental, or even public health crimes, had occurred at the Parkersburg plant.
The documents discussed a compound commonly called C8, also known by its chemical name – perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The DuPont scientist suggested that this fluorinated material was practically eternal. At that moment, Bilott got very serious. He quietly asked: ‘So, what would happen if someone ate or drank something contaminated with C8?’ The researcher looked at him in surprise: ‘Well… I suppose nothing good, but we don’t eat tyres, and that doesn’t mean they aren’t necessary.’
Present at every step of the way
When the chemists at DuPont and 3M, two giants of the chemical industry, synthesised the first per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the late 1940s, they probably had no idea how much of an impact these compounds would have on our daily lives. Rather, we would like to believe that was the case because, nowadays, these fluorinated “forever chemicals” are everywhere: in our waterproof raincoats and footwear, in mobile phones, cosmetics, non-stick cookware, fast-food packaging, construction materials… and much more. Indeed, they are an incredible invention, which was also highly lucrative. This reflects the power of science, and perhaps an element of serendipity as well: we always know where we start, but we rarely have any idea where we might end up.
Several decades passed between the manufacture of the first PFAS compounds and the day this lawyer from Cincinnati, Ohio, decided to launch his investigation into the C8 spills around the plant in West Virginia. What happened next is not only depicted in the film Dark Waters, inspired on the focus feature story published in the New York Times, but also marked the beginning of a path towards the regulation of these compounds. The historic class action lawsuit that Bilott –Mark Ruffalo in the movie– and the citizens of Parkersburg filed against DuPont in 2001 had a ripple effect in environmental legislation that lasts until today.
Sixteen years later, an external scientific committee validated Bilott’s claims: the PFOA present in the company’s products was not only found in the city’s water supply but also in the blood of its residents, and was the direct cause of up to seven known diseases.
A curious combination of carbon and fluorine
Most PFAS consist of a chain of several carbon atoms, each of which is bonded to one or several fluorine atoms. These substances often include functional groups such as carboxylic acids (COOH) and sulfonic acids (SO₃H), to further modulate and tailor their properties for different applications.
Their structure is key to their incredible properties: the fluorinated main chain is both hydrophobic and oleophobic –meaning they repel both water and fats–, while the terminal functional group is usually hydrophilic. This means that forever chemicals act as amphipathic compounds, which makes them interesting surfactants – substances that reduce surface tension between two distinct phases. Such s great achievement enabled the chemical industry to mix and match both polar and non-polar substances.
Moreover, the bonds between carbon and fluorine atoms are the strongest single bonds in organic chemistry,and therefore exhibit a high stability. This explains why polyfluorinated compounds persist for so long and barely degrade and decay.
Although the actual names of these chemical compounds are not readily recognised, several “best-seller” products are made from fluorinated forever chemicals. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), for example, was commercialised under a widely famous trademark – Teflon, developed and commercialized by DuPont in the 1960s and used as a non-stick coating for cookware, especially pans. In the past, DuPont used PFOA as a precursor in the production of Teflon. However, due to the controls around this poisonous substance, the company now employs other PFAS substances known as GenX as an alternative, which have also been deemed as toxic by environmental agencies. Another famous brand that used to sell PFOA-based products due to their high breathability and waterproofing properties is GoreTex.
Some of the fluorinated compounds commonly used in the chemical industry are:
- Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS): Found in firefighting foams, cleaning products and waterproof or stain-resistant fabrics. It is also used in the manufacture of electronic circuits.
- Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA): Commonly found in non-stick coatings as an alternative to Teflon, as well as in waterproof textiles and semiconductor production.
- Perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA): Used in textile treatments for outdoor clothing and water-resistant protective equipment, as well as in non-stick coatings and electronic component manufacturing.
- Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS): This compound has been used as a surfactant in cleaning agents and surface treatments for textiles. Furthermore, it is employed in the production of firefighting foams.
As you can see, many fluorinated forever chemicals have very similar applications. However, in the European Union, their use has now been extremely restricted, or even banned: PFHxS is completely prohibited, while other compounds such as PFDA and PFNA can only be used under very specific circumstances.
Throughout the food chain
According to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), an entity that regulates the production and use of chemical substances in the European Union, these materials reach us in two different ways. Firstly, through direct sources, such as the factories where these synthetic substances are produced. Additionally, we can also be exposed to PFAS when using products that contain them, such as cosmetics, food packaging, and certain types of clothing.
However, one of the biggest concerns for experts at the moment is water pollution. We have detected perfluorinated substances in rainwater and groundwater, both often intended for human consumption. It is not just the environment that is affected by these substances; they can also accumulate in living organisms and increase in concentration throughout the food chain.
Currently, the production of cookware and food-related products containing compounds such as PFOA and PFOS is not allowed in Europe. The impacts of these substances on health have been extensively studied, and the results are quite concerning: long-term exposure to these fluorinated “forever” chemicals has been shown to cause damage to the immune system, liver, and kidneys, as well as neurological damage, developmental issues, and an increased risk of miscarriage, among other conditions. PFOA is also associated with certain types of cancer, and in the case of PFOS, alterations in thyroid function have also been demonstrated.
A new path towards the reduction of per- and polyfluorinated compounds
In the past two decades, various regulatory bodies have become aware of the problem posed by fluorinated compounds to human health and the environment. Among them, the European Commission has regulated the manufacture and use of forever chemicals for several years under the ECHA Regulation, to restrict applications to some essential uses, for example in certain types of medical equipment such as biosensors or in the aerospace industry. The ultimate goal is to minimise exposure to these fluorinated compounds wherever possible, and implement greener, more sustainable alternatives if available.
The European Commission has recently adopted new measures that restrict the use of smaller perfluorinated compounds, such as PFHxA and PFHxA-related substances. These represent a subgroup of PFAS and are often used as less persistent substitutes for PFOA, which has already been banned. The regulation bans the sale and use of PFHxA in consumer textile products, food packaging, cosmetics and certain other uses where there is an elevated risk of human exposure. However, this new measure will not affect the production of semiconductors, batteries or fuel cells for green hydrogen.
Leading the way with ANEMEL
Standards and regulations are necessary; they enable us to control the production of certain substances or compounds, to study their effects, and to trace the origin of pollution when it occurs.
However, necessary is not the same as indispensable. What is truly important is to transform our way of thinking and lead the change: sometimes, we must decide to reduce certain products because of the risks they could pose, regardless of regulations. We must focus on the cause, not merely the consequence.
Of course, maintaining this position is more manageable when you have an inspiring goal, like our own ideas at ANEMEL: we want to turn dirty water into clean hydrogen. And if you think this is not ambitious enough, we want to do it by developing an electrolyser powered by renewable energies, without using critical raw materials or ”forever” chemicals in the whole process.
Therefore, at ANEMEL we’re moving away from fluorine. Our researchers are continuously exploring alternative compounds that possess similar properties, such as stability and durability, to PFAS, like cerium oxide, and developing innovative engineering methods to compensate the consequences of cutting out fluorinated materials.
Nowadays, ECHA presents one of the most ambitious legislative frameworks to date, with a clear aim of banning most “forever” chemicals by 2035. Even so, and even though their negative effects on health are well known, a huge amount of these compounds are still manufactured in other countries, and the increase in international production far exceeds the reduction of PFAS substances in the United States and European countries. This will only work if we take collective action.
We must be aware of the risks associated with these compounds and limit their use, but without demonising them; in certain contexts, they can be very useful and, perhaps, the only option available.
Text by Lucía Casas, a freelance science journalist based in Galicia, Spain
