I suspect that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Probably many more companies have been contaminating the environment with PFAS during the decades when it was not yet forbidden.
If we would take PFAS samples across the country I bet that Dordrecht would not be an exception.
This is the problem. We need to start regulating these industrial chemicals with the assumption that they are unsafe to discharge into sewers/wastewater until proven otherwise. The opposite approach (banning or regulating discharge of specific chemicals) just leads to huge toxic messes that need to be cleaned up at great cost later.
But the chemical companies will complain. “Think about the jobs”. And the government with those jobs in the country will hesitate.
> On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18]
>> On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18]
You're quoting criticism from outside the EU for an EU regulation. I don't see what's at all unreasonable about that criticism.
The regulation would cause major supply disruptions for the US, India and Brazil, and would not substantially help the water supply, health or safety of the US, India and Brazil either.
In cases like these we need international treaties that create alignment and mutual interest before we can expect an EU regulation like this one to succeed
There was resistance inside the EU, mainly from Germany that have large chemical companies. REACH is in force in the EU and other countries are following along.
> A number of countries outside of the European Union have started to implement REACH regulations or are in the process of adopting such a regulatory framework to approach a more globalized system of chemicals registration under the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS).[16] Balkan countries such as Croatia and Serbia are in the process of adopting the EU REACH system under the auspices of the EU IPA programme. Switzerland has moved towards implementation of REACH through partial revision of the Swiss Chemical Ordinance on February 1, 2009. The new Chemicals Management Regulation in Turkey is paving the way for the planned adoption of REACH in 2013. China has moved towards a more efficient and coherent system for the control of chemicals in compliance with GHS.
In the UK, the government announced a "UK REACH" that the UK's Chemical Industry Association described as a "hugely expensive duplication" of the EU's safety data.[17] The new regulations were to be enforced from October 2021 but deferred to October 2023, and then to October 2025. Following industry representations, the responsible Minister announced "that officials would now explore 'a new model' for UK REACH registrations that would look to 'reduce the need for replicating EU Reach data packages'".[17] In March 2021, a group of more than 20 leading UK organisations, including the CHEM Trust and Breast Cancer UK, "rejected industry proposals to streamline UK Reach as a 'major weakening' of the envisaged post-Brexit regime".[17]
I wonder how long it is going to take the media to realize the large drinking water resevoirs for the Randstad in the Biesbosch nature preserve are 10km from this plant.
The article mentions the pollution is in all surface water including small lakes and drainage ditches not connected to the main rivers, i'd assume it is at least partly spread by air.
Aside from those resevoirs there is also a lot of dairy farming within 15 km, i wonder if anyone has bothered to test the cheeses from that area.
>The Chemours factory, previously DuPont, in Dordrecht knowingly leached the toxic and carcinogenic PFAS variant PROA into the water and air for decades.
There must be severe penalties for intentional serious crimes such as these for the company, if not for the natural persons in the management who intentionally violated applicable laws.
Anyone who knowingly endangers the health of the general public, in any context, must be prosecuted. It does not matter whether he acted within the framework of a company or as a private individual. A way out, such as bankruptcy proceedings, must be excluded, as this undermines the rule of law and lowers the inhibition threshold to break the law.
>When asked about the extremely high concentration of PFOA and GenX in the waters around it, Chemours referred to a 2020 analysis by the RIVM that stated that there were no health risks. “Chemous did not mention that the RIVM used standards for this that are now outdated and have been significantly lowered by the RIVM,” Zembla said.
Surely the limit wasn't 13000x as high previously?
I saw the DuPont logo on the first image and I knew what was coming. This is not the first time they have contaminated natural resources with harmful forever chemicals. Their contamination of a site with PFOA in West Virginia, is covered in the movie Dark Waters.
They not only dumped tons of that chemical in a landfill, they also tried their best to cover it up and delay discovery when they were caught. During the entire time they were fully cognisant of the fact that the chemical is carcinogenic and fatal for livestock and humans.
The fact that these corporations are still solvent and allowed to operate near human settlements or wildlife is a failure of regulatory authorities.
In fact, it was in The Netherlands that I first saw the award-winning report in their decades-long chemical war on the community surrounding one of their plants in the US. It’s what made me stop buying Gore-Tex.
Shame it’s always the same people, never held accountable. Shame.
It’s kind of hidden at the end of the article, but if these numbers were considered fine in 2020, it’s a bit backwards to blame them for keeping to the original limit now that someone adjusted the numbers.
Even if they don’t release any more PFAS than acceptable under the new standards that won’t clear up the earlier pollution.
And I sorta agree that making people attentive to the fact their water is now at dangerous levels due to a fuckup by whoever set the 2020 levels is not the factories’ responsibility.
This still reads like a failure of governance to me.
It’s up to Chemours whether to hold themselves responsible for not meeting their internal guidelines (from what I read here they did/do). Of course it’s less than ideal they keep everything silent but their incentives probably point them that way.
If the government also knew, and chose not to do anything (and indeed, apparently wrote that it’s not financially feasible), then that’s a fault of government. The company won’t close itself if what they’re doing is morally dubious but legally perfectly fine (especially the people working at that location have a great incentive to not make waves, even if they’re the ones drinking the water).
> Of course it’s less than ideal they keep everything silent but their incentives probably point them that way.
> The company won’t close itself if what they’re doing is morally dubious but legally perfectly fine
It always surprises me that society has been programmed to accept morally-dubious practices that are legal as something inevitable, that a company can use that as a cop out. Perhaps amoral capitalism isn't a great system for society, and needs some reform to stop fucking people's lives for economical/financial gains...
> morally-dubious practices that are legal as something inevitable
I think I stopped believing that there was any changing this around age 30 or so. You can only see so much of it before it just becomes the default assumption.
Then there’s these times in your life when you do the right thing and are consistently punished for it… I can see why people would stop caring.
Also mentioned in the article is that this company did know that about the toxic effects of these chemicals but just ignored it or kept it secret. They know it is toxic but still choose to dump it in the river because it below the limit or there is no limit.
oh, nice :( ... Just a coincidence, but I read today about PFAS pollution around the Munich Airport caused by the foam used with fire drills... Very much the tip of the iceberg, I assume :(
These foams are a good reason to never raise a family near an airport or military base. Particularly military bases, they're notorious for covering up chemical pollution for years and being dismissive of local concerns. They think their mission puts them above casual reproach.
I was on vacation in Sweden last year. Along the lake near the town of Östersund there were signs that said: PFAS pollution, prohibited fishing. The reason: a fire department training ground where firefighting foam was being practiced. Östersund is a small town in a sea of nature. Madness. - https://ostersund-se.translate.goog/bygga-bo-och-miljo/kemik...
I'm only somewhat familiar with how the Dutch people rose up in the 1970's and forced a change that seems unthinkable now in most automobile centric countries. Maybe it could happen again, one can dream.
Holland is now more addicted to cars than most EU countries. Doesn't have to be that way because it's an ideal country for excellent public transport. But cars have been a status symbol there for decades.
The 70s were really a very different time. From a predominantly socialist country to one of the most neoliberal ones in Europe (after the UK).
Of course it's been half a century since the 70s, too.
Like we did with the natural gas drillings in Groningen? The government is sure dragging their feet fixing that problem, and I don't see the companies behind the NAM paying bills any time soon.
I don’t know the answer to that, but even if it was true, wouldnt the water be significantly filtered and cleaned as part of the normal process before delivering it to household?
Surely the municipalities actually test the water though, especially since these chemicals are a decades-old issue across the world, I can't imagine it wouldn't be a standard thing to look for before determining the safety of water.
Go to the nearest water purification plant? I’m sure they have at least their own numbers somewhere. Maybe a direct display on their website?
Edit: Well, that was a depressingly long search only to find that the most recently available data is from 2021… but you can ask for current data it seems [1] scroll down to ‘Gegevens openbaar’.
Edit2: evides.nl has monthly PFAS values for a few locations in the netherlands [2]. I kinda expect every different purification plant will have these, but apparently they’re hidden.
I was hoping to test the water straight out of my taps, maybe I can find a place to send some samples to. I'm pretty sure at minimum I can ask for the standard tests but I'm unsure if they'll tell me the PFAS levels.
If we would take PFAS samples across the country I bet that Dordrecht would not be an exception.