The chemical industry lobby is wielding its influence against an EU's proposal to restrict PFAS – "forever chemicals”. According to a new investigation by The Forever Lobbying Project — a collaboration of 46 journalists across 16 countries — and Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), this could lead to a high cost to society: concretely up to €2 trillion for clean-up efforts, with an annual bill of €100 billion. This includes attempts to protect our drinking water from TFA, a breakdown product of PFAS pesticides.
Among these hazardous forever substances, TFA (trifluoroacetic acid) stands out as a special and significant threat. As a degradation product of PFAS pesticides, TFA is not only toxic and extremely persistent, but contrary to most other PFAS also very soluble and mobile in water, with concentrations in drinking water steadily rising. International scientists warn that it represents a “planetary boundary” threat due to its harmful impacts on the environment and human health. [1]
Proposal to ban all PFAS
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is currently evaluating a broad ban on a wide range of PFAS proposed by Denmark, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden that would require approval by the Commission and Member States. These chemicals are already present in nearly all human bodies, including fetuses, and are linked to severe health issues such as cancer, liver damage, and hormone disruption. The ban would end the use of most PFAS products and that is what the chemical industry is now lobbying against.
The proposal does not include the group of PFAS pesticides - with currently 33 active substances allowed in the EU used in hundreds of ‘plant protection’ products. [2] The argument for this is that it is already regulated elsewhere. True, there is a separate law to control pesticides. However, this law does not prevent PFAS pesticides from entering the market. There are very good arguments to quickly change this, as pesticides do not leak accidentally from products or a factory. Instead, they are actively and deliberately sprayed on fields and food. Most farmers do not even know that they spray PFAS, because it is not on the label. ‘Not necessary’, according to the pesticide lobby organisation Croplife, ‘because they are tested and proven safe’. [3]
Casting doubt and confusion
The fluorine industry is actively lobbying against any PFAS restriction, as CEO and The Forever Lobbying Project show in their new investigation. The major agro-chemical PFAS producer Bayer paid €1 million in 2023 to the lobbying firm Rud Pedersen Public Affairs. This highlights the relentless efforts of the industry to block reforms against harmful substances.
This is not new in itself. For a long time, chemical companies have cast doubt on research that pointed at the toxicity of PFAS products. A tactic first practised by the tobacco industry. [4]
And this tactic still works. For nearly 60 years, the fluorine industry was allowed to dump unrestricted toxic substances into the environment. A long-secret report of a meeting of the DuPont top brass at their Wilmington headquarters in May 1984 shows that they were aware of the major health hazards from PFOA, one of the most toxic PFAS substances. The directors realised that they would be held ‘increasingly liable’ if they ‘do nothing’. They even acknowledged at that point that they are liable ‘for the past 32 years’. The document talks about liabilities of the company. Not a word about it being bad for workers, nearby residents or the environment. DuPont concluded during the 1984 consultation that they would eventually have to ‘eliminate all PFOA emissions’, but in a way that would ‘not cause economic harm’ to the company. That ‘elimination’ only happened almost 30 years later under government pressure. [5]
TFA, the small PFAS: misclassified and misunderstood
For a long time the focus on PFAS toxicity was on the ‘heavy’ PFAS: longer carbon chains completely saturated with fluorine bonds. The PFAS with 8 carbon atoms like PFOA and PFOS were proven to be extremely toxic, both for reproduction, liver and immune system.
Next, the focus moved to the ‘medium chain’ PFAS with 6 or 4 carbon atoms. The fluorine industry presented these as harmless alternatives. However, they were proven to show the same toxicity characteristics as the C8 PFAS mentioned above.
Then there are the breakdown products of more complex PFAS molecules that contain one or two fluorinated carbon atoms. Many of them do break down, partially. However, the carbon-fluorine bonds remain. They form ‘short chain’ PFAS with 2 carbon atoms like Tri Fluor Acetic Acid, in short TFA. PFAS pesticides have been a major source of the small TFA.
For years, this molecule was completely under the radar. In 2001, the European Commission and the Member States, aligned with the industry’s proposal to consider TFA as a "non-relevant metabolite." However, recent studies show a different picture: TFA is likely toxic to reproduction and shares the same health-damaging mechanisms as other PFAS. By far not as strong as the C8 PFAS, maybe a factor 1000 less according to the Dutch Health Authority RIVM. But since TFA is highly mobile and soluble in water its exposure through drinking water can also be a factor 1000 higher.
Alarmingly, TFA contamination has already infiltrated most of Europe’s water systems. A recent report published by PAN Europe showed that TFA is in 94% of 36 tap water samples collected across 11 EU countries and even in 63% of 19 bottled mineral and spring water samples. This man-made chemical is highly mobile, polluting vast water systems and creating widespread environmental challenges.
Flufenacet and the industry resistance
Last November, the European Commission proposed banning flufenacet, a widely used PFAS herbicide that decomposes into TFA and is an endocrine disruptor. The top-selling product manufactured by Bayer, and BASF and Syngenta, continues to generate significant profits despite its harm to humans and the environment, PAN Europe, alongside 48 environmental and health organisations, had urged the Commission and Member States to withdraw it. Nearly 80,000 citizens have supported this ban in a petition which is still open for signatures [6].
The European Commission also proposed banning flutolanil, another TFA-emitting PFAS. However, the industry is making great efforts to derail its ban.
An urgent need and a great opportunity: ban PFAS pesticides immediately
PFAS pesticides are the main generators of TFA in rural areas and are part of hundreds of different pesticide products that are deliberately sprayed on fields and food. The good news is that we don’t have to wait for the PFAS ban. With proper implementation of the existing pesticide regulation, this problem can be immediately addressed. This would be very beneficial for our health and the environment.
Read more:
- Ban PFAS and TFA
- Chemical reaction: Inside the corporate fight against the EU’s PFAS restriction
- TFA is polluting our water – We have crossed a Planetary boundary
- EU Commission Proposes Ban of PFAS pesticide Flufenacet
Notes:
[1] The Global Threat from the Irreversible Accumulation of Trifluoroacetic Acid (TFA)
[2] Europe's Toxic Harvest: Unmasking PFAS Pesticides Authorised in Europe - PAN Europe and Générations Futures, November 2023
[3] CropLife's Misleading Claims on PFAS Pesticides - PAN Europe February 2024
[5] Exposed (again) in the Dutch TV program Zembla in June 2023
