WEBVTT - With PFAS Science, the More We Know, the Worse It Gets 0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:03.280 You're listening to the podcast Parts per Billion, but today 0:00:03.320 --> 0:00:06.200 we're gonna be talking about parts per quadrillion. We have 0:00:06.280 --> 0:00:08.600 to get that small because we're talking about the new 0:00:08.720 --> 0:00:11.479 science on p fasts and about why it seems like 0:00:11.840 --> 0:00:19.040 the more we know about these chemicals, the worst they see. 0:00:21.800 --> 0:00:24.320 Hello everybody, and welcome once again to Parts per Billion, 0:00:24.440 --> 0:00:28.000 the environmental podcast from Bloomberg Law. I'm your host, David Schultz, 0:00:28.480 --> 0:00:30.000 and as I mentioned up at the top, we are 0:00:30.040 --> 0:00:33.199 now in parts per quadrillion territory when it comes to 0:00:33.240 --> 0:00:37.519 measuring the safe levels of certain p fast chemicals. Earlier 0:00:37.560 --> 0:00:39.520 this month, the ep OF lowereded standard for the amount 0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:42.600 of safe exposure to two substances within this broader class 0:00:42.640 --> 0:00:46.720 of so called forever chemicals. Previously, according to figures set 0:00:46.840 --> 0:00:50.120 just in sixteen, the threshold was at seventy parts per 0:00:50.159 --> 0:00:53.880 trillion for both substances, known as p FOSS and p FOA. 0:00:54.720 --> 0:00:58.560 Now it's thousands of times smaller than that, at twenty 0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:02.480 parts per quadrillion for p FASS and four parts per 0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:05.800 quadrillion for p FOA. It's hard to wrap your head 0:01:05.800 --> 0:01:09.400 around what that means. I mean, what even is a quadrillion? 0:01:09.880 --> 0:01:12.039 But I did a back of the envelope calculation, and 0:01:12.160 --> 0:01:14.800 four parts per quadrillion is like taking half a cup 0:01:14.840 --> 0:01:20.280 of water and pouring it into Lake Mead. Seriously, it 0:01:20.360 --> 0:01:22.240 was a reminder that even though we've been talking about 0:01:22.240 --> 0:01:24.840 p fast chemicals for years now, we're still learning new 0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:27.640 things about them, and those new things are pretty alarming. 0:01:28.040 --> 0:01:29.920 To find out what this means and where the sciences 0:01:29.959 --> 0:01:32.319 is heading, I rang up our ace chemicals reporter Pat 0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:34.600 Razzuto and had her walk with me through why the 0:01:34.600 --> 0:01:38.120 e p A said the safety standard so mind bogglingly low. 0:01:38.720 --> 0:01:44.280 It issued four health advisories for four different p fast chemicals, 0:01:44.319 --> 0:01:48.840 and those dealt with the amount of those chemicals that 0:01:48.920 --> 0:01:51.880 the ep A thinks a person could drink in water 0:01:52.560 --> 0:01:56.800 for their entire life, which is estimated to be seventy 0:01:56.880 --> 0:02:01.160 years without being harmed, and that it's the whole purpose 0:02:01.240 --> 0:02:07.160 of them is to let states, drinking water utilities the 0:02:07.200 --> 0:02:11.600 public know what EPA's latest thinking about the sciences. It's 0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:16.280 information I see. And they did this, uh in so 0:02:16.360 --> 0:02:19.359 I guess they felt that in you know it, and 0:02:19.360 --> 0:02:21.480 they just needed updating. Is that why they issued these 0:02:21.480 --> 0:02:27.160 new numbers. So the ones that updated and really ratcheted down. 0:02:27.600 --> 0:02:32.480 The numbers were for UM, the oldest and best known 0:02:33.600 --> 0:02:37.120 of the chemicals. Let's get into that, because when you 0:02:37.200 --> 0:02:41.360 say ratcheted down, I mean this, that's an understatement. These 0:02:41.480 --> 0:02:45.440 new numbers are some of the smallest numbers I've ever 0:02:45.520 --> 0:02:50.280 seen on any type of environmental document. We're talking about, 0:02:51.600 --> 0:02:56.920 you know, basically four parts per quadrillion for one of them. 0:02:56.960 --> 0:02:59.600 Why are these numbers so low? I mean it used 0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:02.280 to be of inde parts per trillion, which itself was 0:03:02.400 --> 0:03:04.639 very low, and now we're just getting it seems like 0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:11.359 we're thousands of times lower. Well, I understand the numbers 0:03:11.680 --> 0:03:16.680 are beyond human scale. We can't understand how tiny these 0:03:16.800 --> 0:03:21.760 numbers are. UM. One analogy I heard that I just 0:03:21.840 --> 0:03:25.760 kind of liked was that, UM, the PFOA advisory of 0:03:26.000 --> 0:03:30.440 fur parts per quadrillion would be like four kernels of 0:03:30.560 --> 0:03:34.520 corn in the fifty two million acres of corn fields 0:03:34.560 --> 0:03:39.320 across the corn belt. That's you know, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, 0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:46.440 and Wisconsin. UM. But what I was really helped to 0:03:46.520 --> 0:03:50.280 see by people who have a simpler vision than I 0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:54.120 do at a conference I attended last week is e 0:03:54.280 --> 0:03:59.080 p A is essentially saying there is no safe level 0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:05.480 to drink those particular two chemicals over a lifetime. These 0:04:05.520 --> 0:04:09.200 are these levels that it issued were below what laboratory 0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:15.760 technology can measure. But um, yes, So what e p 0:04:15.920 --> 0:04:19.719 A it was saying is ideally there shouldn't be any 0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:22.640 in the water. Now e p A has actually said 0:04:22.680 --> 0:04:25.440 that for other chemicals. E p A says that for lead, 0:04:26.120 --> 0:04:29.080 it doesn't want any lead in the drinking water, It 0:04:29.160 --> 0:04:33.640 doesn't want any radionucleoides like uranium in the drinking water. 0:04:34.839 --> 0:04:38.800 But that's not where it regulates. Um. It says the 0:04:38.920 --> 0:04:43.320 goal is zero, but then it uses you know what 0:04:43.440 --> 0:04:48.840 technology can do? How expensive is that technology factors like 0:04:48.960 --> 0:04:52.240 that to actually set a regulatory level. So this is 0:04:52.240 --> 0:04:55.960 not as bizarre as it comes across. But that's and 0:04:56.000 --> 0:04:57.640 that's one thing I'm eager to hear from you, is 0:04:57.680 --> 0:05:01.200 that why didn't it do that for for these chemicals, 0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:04.320 to say the goal of zero, no amount is safe, 0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:07.240 but practically we want you to get to this level. 0:05:07.400 --> 0:05:10.000 It seems like it didn't do that here, Well why not? 0:05:10.480 --> 0:05:13.599 Um it sends the same message. It just sends it 0:05:14.200 --> 0:05:18.839 based on the science, because apparently it's you can't say 0:05:18.880 --> 0:05:24.760 there's absolutely no amount that's safe. The science isn't there 0:05:24.920 --> 0:05:28.119 for that, I see. So yeah, I mean I guess 0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:31.080 if you can get that precise, why not get that precise? 0:05:50.960 --> 0:05:53.799 Um So, let's talk about the reaction to this, because 0:05:54.200 --> 0:05:57.800 you know, this is a pretty shockingly low number, as 0:05:57.839 --> 0:06:00.599 you mentioned, hard to comprehend. What was the action from 0:06:00.720 --> 0:06:05.279 the chemical industry. Imagine they weren't too thrilled with this. Well, actually, 0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:09.400 I think the people who are hit who are in 0:06:09.480 --> 0:06:13.719 the front lines with this, the drinking water utilities, because 0:06:13.760 --> 0:06:19.880 suddenly what they're being told is that no amount of 0:06:19.920 --> 0:06:24.320 this that they can measure in their drinking water is safe. 0:06:24.760 --> 0:06:26.640 Right if you if you test your drinking water and 0:06:26.880 --> 0:06:30.839 any amount of these chemicals comes up, you have a problem, exactly. 0:06:30.920 --> 0:06:36.880 And that's a hard message to deliver to your water customers. Um. So, 0:06:36.920 --> 0:06:40.760 I think that they're in the front lines. And um 0:06:40.880 --> 0:06:44.360 since they are providing a public service, they don't make 0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:48.760 these chemicals. They actually just receive them and remove them 0:06:48.880 --> 0:06:51.880 out of the water when they can, and when they 0:06:51.920 --> 0:06:55.279 reach a high enough level that they've got a big challenge. 0:06:55.760 --> 0:07:01.640 Between next January and December five, EPA is going to 0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:06.800 require drinking water utilities of basically any significant size to 0:07:06.960 --> 0:07:14.040 be measuring PFOA p FAST the other two, Um, there 0:07:14.080 --> 0:07:17.560 are twenty nine fast that you drinking water utilities are 0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:20.240 going to have to measure and report to e p 0:07:20.440 --> 0:07:24.280 A and they'll need to you know, that information will 0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:29.080 become public and people will have questions about that, and 0:07:29.680 --> 0:07:33.800 those questions are going to trigger legislators, you know, asking 0:07:33.880 --> 0:07:38.120 you what do we need to do? Um, do we 0:07:38.280 --> 0:07:43.320 need to be installing more drinking water control technologies? So 0:07:44.160 --> 0:07:46.440 there are there are a few things. This all sounds 0:07:46.520 --> 0:07:50.360 doom and gloom. On the one hand, by putting these 0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:56.920 super extraordinarily low health advisories out, e p A send 0:07:57.040 --> 0:08:00.600 a really strong signal to everybody it's going to be 0:08:00.840 --> 0:08:04.720 some years before the e p A can regulate PFOA 0:08:04.840 --> 0:08:09.440 and p FASE in drinking water. In the meantime, it 0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:13.640 told everybody the regulatory level that's coming is going to 0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:19.920 be a lot lower than the advisory we've been using. 0:08:20.680 --> 0:08:25.000 Get ready for it. So there's actually a logic to 0:08:25.280 --> 0:08:29.320 e p A releasing these advisories as a signal right 0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:33.360 now on. But that doesn't change the fact that drinking 0:08:33.400 --> 0:08:37.640 water utilities have this signal and with it. There's not 0:08:37.960 --> 0:08:42.800 a strong um direction from the agency. This is the 0:08:42.960 --> 0:08:47.960 best drinking water clean up technology to use to meet 0:08:48.280 --> 0:08:50.880 a regulatory standard. It will have to do that in 0:08:50.960 --> 0:08:53.640 the future. Yes, so right now they have a target 0:08:53.720 --> 0:08:55.920 to meet, but they don't have a lot of direction 0:08:56.000 --> 0:08:58.880 on how to meet that target. You know, it's interesting 0:08:58.920 --> 0:09:01.520 You're you're bringing up water utilities and how this is 0:09:01.600 --> 0:09:04.840 affecting them, and it sounds like it's affecting them pretty seriously. 0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:08.719 You're not talking about the chemical manufacturers, the companies that 0:09:08.840 --> 0:09:12.920 made these these chemicals. Is it because these don't affect them? 0:09:13.040 --> 0:09:15.720 Or is it because they're already in such deep trouble 0:09:15.880 --> 0:09:18.520 that things can't get possibly get worse for them. No, 0:09:18.720 --> 0:09:21.160 I think they're absolutely I was trying to talk about 0:09:21.280 --> 0:09:25.599 frontline first, drinking water utilities next in line um not 0:09:25.840 --> 0:09:30.760 only the manufacturers of p fast but also the companies 0:09:30.840 --> 0:09:35.280 that use them because what the health advisory will also 0:09:36.040 --> 0:09:39.880 likely spur. And I heard an attorney say this at 0:09:39.920 --> 0:09:46.040 a webinar yesterday. The Drinking Water Act allows drinking water 0:09:46.240 --> 0:09:51.240 utilities if their states agree to act as regulators, they 0:09:51.320 --> 0:09:57.880 can go upstream and slap effluent limits on the companies 0:09:57.960 --> 0:10:01.640 who are putting problematic calm pounds into their source water. 0:10:02.559 --> 0:10:08.360 So if states and drinking water utilities didn't have a 0:10:09.080 --> 0:10:13.880 good incentive already to be regulating those upstream companies, they 0:10:13.960 --> 0:10:18.880 certainly do now. Um. So I would expect more states 0:10:18.960 --> 0:10:23.920 and more drinking water utilities to be exploring that particular authority. 0:10:23.920 --> 0:10:31.160 I'd be expecting companies upstream to be getting more permit limits. Um. 0:10:31.640 --> 0:10:37.439 And I would expect attorneys who represent injured parties to 0:10:37.600 --> 0:10:41.600 be absolutely using the new health advisory in the thousands 0:10:41.679 --> 0:10:44.360 upon thousands of legal cases that are you know, have 0:10:44.520 --> 0:10:49.240 been filed against three M du Pont Comorris Tycho fire Products, 0:10:49.320 --> 0:10:52.800 and and and and and yeah, definitely alright, So finally 0:10:52.880 --> 0:10:56.360 wrapping things up, where's the p FAST science heading? I mean, 0:10:56.440 --> 0:11:00.360 I know that's an impossible question to answer, but you know, 0:11:00.679 --> 0:11:03.160 are we It seems like we're having a trend here 0:11:03.200 --> 0:11:05.560 where the more we learn about p fast, the worse 0:11:05.679 --> 0:11:10.120 it gets. The more concerning things we discover and the 0:11:10.160 --> 0:11:13.880 more avenues of research that we have. Are we getting 0:11:13.920 --> 0:11:16.679 to a point where that won't be happening and we 0:11:16.880 --> 0:11:19.640 are kind of reaching a plateau? Or have we not 0:11:19.800 --> 0:11:24.000 even approached the science plateau yet. For p Fass, I 0:11:24.080 --> 0:11:28.880 don't think we've even approached the science plateau yet because 0:11:29.400 --> 0:11:34.280 there are thousands upon thousands of these chemicals out there. 0:11:34.920 --> 0:11:38.280 Most of what we know is based on the older, 0:11:39.240 --> 0:11:46.800 longer ones, but there's enough information about the newer ones 0:11:47.240 --> 0:11:52.360 that concerns have been raised about them as well. Your 0:11:52.480 --> 0:11:58.760 question gets a really important noub many scientists, say. Ma Halfriedoff, 0:11:58.920 --> 0:12:03.439 who's the chief hunt O over chemicals at e p A, 0:12:03.920 --> 0:12:07.080 said this morning, we can't study the p fast chemicals 0:12:07.280 --> 0:12:12.160 one at a time. It's just impossible. So how do 0:12:12.280 --> 0:12:15.319 you get the information? Becomes the question. E p a 0:12:15.480 --> 0:12:19.280 s approach is to try and break them into categories 0:12:19.400 --> 0:12:24.400 and try and get information about categories. Um. The European 0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:29.480 Union's approach is to aim for some type of regulation 0:12:29.640 --> 0:12:34.280 that says, unless the chemicals are essential to society, you 0:12:34.440 --> 0:12:39.800 can't use them. Now, there are absolutely essential uses. If 0:12:39.880 --> 0:12:41.959 I have a heart stent, I want it to have 0:12:42.080 --> 0:12:45.560 p fast chemicals on it because that enables the heart 0:12:45.679 --> 0:12:48.839 stent to last in my body for decades. But there 0:12:49.120 --> 0:12:55.040 is a huge divide between the affected communities in particular 0:12:55.559 --> 0:13:00.200 and some scientists who strongly feel the default approach, which 0:13:00.280 --> 0:13:05.000 has to be regulate them as one consider them bad 0:13:05.200 --> 0:13:12.679 unless proven innocent, and then the other um view says, wait, 0:13:13.720 --> 0:13:18.480 it's like the term feelines. Okay, fee lines are not 0:13:18.840 --> 0:13:23.360 all alike. One's a lion, one's a panther, one's a jaguar, 0:13:23.800 --> 0:13:28.079 one's my kitty cat. They don't all act alike. We 0:13:28.320 --> 0:13:32.240 can't handle them as the equivalent. That's a good point, 0:13:32.600 --> 0:13:35.160 although I will say sometimes my kitty cat does think 0:13:35.360 --> 0:13:39.240 he is a panther, so that's that's another story. But 0:13:39.320 --> 0:13:43.280 now the metaphor holds um. That's really fascinating stuff. Thank 0:13:43.320 --> 0:13:46.360 you Pat so much for talking about this, and uh, 0:13:46.480 --> 0:13:48.360 you know, I'm just so fascinated to see where this 0:13:48.480 --> 0:13:50.640 goes in the future. It sounds like we're gonna be 0:13:50.679 --> 0:13:54.320 talking about it for a very long time, forever conversation, 0:13:54.559 --> 0:13:59.280 forever conversation about for every cat calls. Thanks and that's 0:13:59.320 --> 0:14:01.120 it for today's Out of Parts per Billion. If you 0:14:01.160 --> 0:14:03.520 want more environmental news, check us out on Twitter. We 0:14:03.640 --> 0:14:06.480 use a pretty easy to remember handle at environment It's 0:14:06.559 --> 0:14:09.400 just that environment. I'm at David B. Schultz if you 0:14:09.520 --> 0:14:13.640 want to chat with me about anything and everything. Today's 0:14:13.640 --> 0:14:16.280 episode of Parts per Billion was produced by myself, David Schultz. 0:14:16.520 --> 0:14:18.840 Parson Billion was created by Jessica Combs and Rachel Dagle 0:14:18.880 --> 0:14:21.480 and is edited by Zach Shrwood and Chuck McCutcheon, and 0:14:21.480 --> 0:14:24.800 our executive producer is Josh Block. Thanks for listening, everyone, 0:14:27.400 --> 0:14:30.400 Those nine justices in Washington can be hard to keep 0:14:30.440 --> 0:14:34.440 track of. That's where we commit. On our podcast Cases 0:14:34.480 --> 0:14:37.560 and controversies. We give you a week by week accounting 0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:41.520 of the Supreme Court, the filings, the arguments, the opinions, 0:14:41.760 --> 0:14:45.440 and much much more. Check in on Fridays with Bloomberg Laws, 0:14:45.520 --> 0:14:47.880 Cases and Controversies to find out what's coming up on 0:14:47.960 --> 0:14:51.200 the horizon of the Supreme Court. Download and subscribe wherever 0:14:51.240 --> 0:14:52.280 you get your podcasts.