Speaker 1: They said it couldn't be done, but now it may
Speaker 1: finally be happening, a viable replacement for p fast laden
Speaker 1: firefighting foam. On today's podcast, we talked about this potential
Speaker 1: breakthrough in the fight against P fast contamination and why
Speaker 1: it might not actually be that big of a breakthrough
Speaker 1: after all. Hello, and welcome back once again to partsiper Billion,
Speaker 1: the environmental podcast from Bloomberg Law. I'm your host, David Schultz.
Speaker 1: So you could sort of say that P fast is
Speaker 1: a victim of its own success. The so called forever chemicals,
Speaker 1: named as such because they're so resistant to breaking down
Speaker 1: the environment, are really really good at what they do,
Speaker 1: and they do a lot of things, but one of
Speaker 1: the things they do best is putting out fires. The
Speaker 1: military has been using sprayable phone lace with p fast
Speaker 1: to do exactly this since the Vietnam War era, and
Speaker 1: so have airports and other places that work with highly
Speaker 1: flammable materials. The problem, of course, is that, as we
Speaker 1: now know, P fast chemicals are really bad for your health,
Speaker 1: and estated earlier, they're really hard to get rid of.
Speaker 1: But now we may finally have other firefighting tools that
Speaker 1: work just as well as P FAST but aren't P fast.
Speaker 1: Liberal reporters Pat Rizzutto and Andrew Wallander just wrote a
Speaker 1: story about whether this means the military and other entities
Speaker 1: can start phasing app fast foam. As it turns out,
Speaker 1: doing that is going to be really, really hard. Here's
Speaker 1: my conversation with them. One of the reasons why I
Speaker 1: wanted to bring you guys on is you just did
Speaker 1: a story about, you know, replacements for P fast in
Speaker 1: firefighting foam. For the longest time, I was under the
Speaker 1: impression that it was impossible to replace because it's so effective. Um,
Speaker 1: but it sounds like that maybe changing. What's what's going
Speaker 1: on with that, Is it possible now to have a
Speaker 1: P fast replacement that just as good as P fast. Well,
Speaker 1: d D and the researchers it's funded have been evaluating
Speaker 1: dozens of products. Some of those products are actually used
Speaker 1: abroad at airports, but the challenge has been the at
Speaker 1: they have more limited uses where you know, an airport
Speaker 1: is mostly dealing with jet fuel. The military needs firefighting
Speaker 1: tools that can put out something with propane, something with gasoline,
Speaker 1: something with who knows how many chemicals, something that works
Speaker 1: with freshwater, something that works with saltwater. I mean, the
Speaker 1: conditions under which the military fights are so much broader
Speaker 1: than an airport that it really has You know, it's
Speaker 1: taken a lot of hard work to try and find
Speaker 1: one or perhaps more alternatives. As a layperson, I would
Speaker 1: think something that can put out jet fuel could probably
Speaker 1: put out anything. But it's sounds like that's not the
Speaker 1: case at all. You need some specialized stuff, apparently from
Speaker 1: people much smarter than I. I'm told they don't and
Speaker 1: that some of the problems with some of the substitutes
Speaker 1: that have worked abroad is that they don't work for
Speaker 1: the full range of stuff that can burn. And that's
Speaker 1: really really dangerous because it flows like a river as
Speaker 1: it burns. Yeah, that's frightening. Um, So give me a
Speaker 1: sense of how quickly the regulations around this are changing.
Speaker 1: You guys did a story about you know, d O
Speaker 1: D is doing its own thing, The FAA is doing
Speaker 1: it's things, States are doing their thing. Um, what what's
Speaker 1: happening here? Who are is this a coordinated effort or
Speaker 1: are they all on separate, parallel tracks. Well, I'm going
Speaker 1: to start just by saying that it's what's called equist
Speaker 1: film forming foam, A for people who don't want obnoxious
Speaker 1: names um. And that's the type of foam that until
Speaker 1: now and still today uses various forms of p FAST. Right, So,
Speaker 1: we've got at least two dozen states so far that
Speaker 1: have put out legislation of some kind past legislation restricting
Speaker 1: the use of this type of foam in some way.
Speaker 1: It's been one of the most active areas of p
Speaker 1: FAST enforcement that states have been involved in, and but
Speaker 1: it varies widely for how states have been looking at this.
Speaker 1: So a lot of a lot of those states they
Speaker 1: will just restrict the use of that foam in training
Speaker 1: and testing exercises. Well, some states have gone so far
Speaker 1: as to ban full use of the foam and or
Speaker 1: banned manufacturer manufactured distribution. There's a lot of exceptions for
Speaker 1: emergencies as well. So even even though these states are
Speaker 1: are putting the brakes on selling this foam and buying it,
Speaker 1: the phone that's still out there, a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of fire companies, organizations, airports, that sort of thing
Speaker 1: will still be able to use it for the foreseeable future.
Speaker 1: Well that's really interesting because I would imagine in a
Speaker 1: situation where the foam is banned outright Uh, then you
Speaker 1: can get to the to the you know, very laborious
Speaker 1: process of getting rid of it, which will get to
Speaker 1: you in a second. But in a situation where it's
Speaker 1: allowed only in emergencies, you can actually you know, keep around, right, Um,
Speaker 1: can you tell me a little bit about that. How
Speaker 1: do you if you if you keep it around, you
Speaker 1: have to store it, you have to make sure it
Speaker 1: doesn't you know, get out into the environment, right right, Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: And so a lot of fire departments are making a
Speaker 1: lot more effort to train their their firefighters and how
Speaker 1: to actually use this foam and when to use it,
Speaker 1: and trying to be very uh use it very sparingly.
Speaker 1: And I know that the government's on that as well,
Speaker 1: telling you know, airports not to use this foam unless
Speaker 1: it's absolutely necessary for an emergency, and trying to really
Speaker 1: restrict the use of it because a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of the contamination and pollution that we've seen from
Speaker 1: from fast foam has been from these training exercises where
Speaker 1: they've just been using it, uh way too often. From
Speaker 1: what we know now what the science is telling Andrew
Speaker 1: just nailed it. It's actually not the use to control
Speaker 1: the hazardous fires that were really worried about. That's been
Speaker 1: the problem with the A triple left. It was the
Speaker 1: you know, daily training, you know, for years, for decades
Speaker 1: that just was pouring it into the environment. UM. Really
Speaker 1: since the end of the Vietnam War. Now you know,
Speaker 1: in some cases, as you mentioned, it's it's being phased
Speaker 1: out completely. In some cases it's being phased out mostly UM.
Speaker 1: But one of the things that you wrote about in
Speaker 1: your story that I is now obvious, but it wasn't
Speaker 1: obvious to me before I read it, was that it's
Speaker 1: really hard to get rid of. You can't just throw
Speaker 1: it away, you can't just take it to a landfill.
Speaker 1: How do you get rid of aqueous film forming foam
Speaker 1: atriple leaf um, you know, safely without causing its own
Speaker 1: environmental hazards. So it seems and impact correct me if
Speaker 1: I'm wrong, but it seems there's two main ways that
Speaker 1: fire departments are going about disposing of the of the
Speaker 1: foam and the first sister incineration, burning the foam at
Speaker 1: very high temperatures where it can break apart some of
Speaker 1: these these molecules, and then the other is to basically
Speaker 1: put it in the ground to bury it. And UM.
Speaker 1: You mean like deep well well on the ground, right, UM,
Speaker 1: so truck it off to some facility that that has
Speaker 1: the ability to to do that. So either burning it
Speaker 1: or burying it is the two main ways. Just to
Speaker 1: elaborate on how challenging this waste problem is. UM. What
Speaker 1: makes p fast really wonderful for products is that they
Speaker 1: the chemicals last so long. Now, if you've got UM
Speaker 1: wires and cables that are coated with the chemicals in
Speaker 1: your office sailing, which we probably do to reduce the
Speaker 1: chance of fires, that's really great because you want those
Speaker 1: wires and cables to be resistant to fires for many,
Speaker 1: many years. But the downside is when you're trying to
Speaker 1: get it rid of it, it's really stubborn. It likes
Speaker 1: to hide in the nooks and the crannies of the
Speaker 1: pipes and the other equipment that you know shoot out
Speaker 1: the foam. So what that means is that as fire departments,
Speaker 1: oil rigs, oil refineries, chemical manufacturers, airports and anybody else
Speaker 1: who's using it D O D, they're going to have
Speaker 1: to clean out aircraft hangars that use that A triple left,
Speaker 1: they're going to have to clean out lots of fire
Speaker 1: trucks and other equipments that's had it, and maybe even
Speaker 1: trucks um that will have to be gotten rid of
Speaker 1: whole entire trucks. Some it's entirely possible, according to some
Speaker 1: of those folks that I spoke to, that it could
Speaker 1: be more cost effective to just buy a new truck,
Speaker 1: even if that's costing in the six digits then to
Speaker 1: clean it all out, or if it's a marginal difference,
Speaker 1: maybe you want a new truck that has some new
Speaker 1: cool features. And one of the challenges that folks are
Speaker 1: facing is win in January, d D announces the new
Speaker 1: requirements for these new phones. Then it's going to take
Speaker 1: a couple of months to certify and say these are
Speaker 1: the phones that actually work for the military. What if
Speaker 1: there aren't a lot of those, and the military, with
Speaker 1: all its vast purchasing power, buys up all the new phones,
Speaker 1: right Well, that's actually what I wanted to get into,
Speaker 1: is that it's one thing for the military to make
Speaker 1: a new rule or new regulation that applies to itself.
Speaker 1: It's another thing for civilian aviation for the FAA to
Speaker 1: make new rules, and then it's an entirely other thing
Speaker 1: for the states for fifty different states to have different rules.
Speaker 1: Are we concerned that there will be not totally compliance here,
Speaker 1: that some of these airports or other people who use
Speaker 1: or other firefighting entities might just say, Hey, you know,
Speaker 1: we'd like to replace this atribal left, but we just can't. Sorry,
Speaker 1: we'll just pay a fine. Airports are among the folks
Speaker 1: who are concerned, Well, the military could buy up all
Speaker 1: the available supply, so then what are we going to do.
Speaker 1: They're also concerned about, you know, getting enough just to
Speaker 1: to the general global supply chain problems. And they're also
Speaker 1: concerned about not having enough experts who know how to
Speaker 1: clean out the equipment, not having enough equipment to clean
Speaker 1: out the equipment. There's a real desire for are coordinated
Speaker 1: national strategy here. Andrew. I want to hear from you
Speaker 1: because you know, as we all know, you know, it's
Speaker 1: one thing to make a rule, it's another thing to
Speaker 1: ensure compliance with that rule. Did the states have a
Speaker 1: um plan for making sure that their new regulations are
Speaker 1: complied with or is it just they're saying phase out
Speaker 1: p fasts and not really following up. Yes, it's it's
Speaker 1: been interesting to see a lot of states have actually
Speaker 1: pushed some of the UH notification UH part of the
Speaker 1: compliance at least letting people know that this is these
Speaker 1: laws are out there to some of the manufacturers and saying,
Speaker 1: if you've sold these types of p fasts foams to people,
Speaker 1: it's your responsibility for the law to actually notify them
Speaker 1: that the laws changing, they're not going to be able
Speaker 1: to use it or not gonna be able to buy
Speaker 1: it from you anymore, which is interesting actually, right right
Speaker 1: and then and then there's also a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of card be outs in these laws. So even
Speaker 1: though we're seeing a lot of change going on now,
Speaker 1: some of these carve outs in the laws, we're going
Speaker 1: to be seeing p fast foam sticking around till at
Speaker 1: least the lateies, early twenty thirties, based on how long
Speaker 1: some of these windows are for the states UM. And
Speaker 1: then one of the things that's interesting to note in
Speaker 1: the state level two is UM Connecticut, they actually came
Speaker 1: out with a particular foam for people to buy, saying
Speaker 1: that this is we've done our research, UH, this foam
Speaker 1: meets our specifications. Are public agencies are going to buy
Speaker 1: this fast free phone uh and putting it out there
Speaker 1: that others So they didn't just say, you know, phase
Speaker 1: out p fast film. They said, phase out p fast foam.
Speaker 1: That by doing this, by buying this other they said,
Speaker 1: this one's approved for for state agencies to use, and UH,
Speaker 1: we've done the research and there's now alternatives that meet
Speaker 1: our needs. Finally, I wanted to get back to something
Speaker 1: that Pat alluded to earlier, that you know, P fast
Speaker 1: has a lot of uses. You know, for obvious, firefighting
Speaker 1: phone is what we're talking about now, but also you
Speaker 1: know it's it's used throughout the economy and in in a
Speaker 1: lot of different ways. But it sounds like the one
Speaker 1: of the main ways that p fast gets into the
Speaker 1: environment is through the spraying of this phone, because when
Speaker 1: you're spraying the foam, obviously it's going everywhere. It's meant
Speaker 1: to get down to the environment. If we actually do
Speaker 1: succeed in phasing out p fast in firefighting foam, will
Speaker 1: that be kind of will we get almost all the
Speaker 1: way towards solving the P fast problem? Will that be
Speaker 1: victory over P fast day UM? I would not characterize
Speaker 1: it that way at all. If UM, if the government,
Speaker 1: federal and state, UH and private sector are successful in
Speaker 1: finding alternatives to a triple F that will be a
Speaker 1: major step forward. They've already taken steps by not you
Speaker 1: using a triple left for training, and by the military
Speaker 1: doesn't use it for training. F A A discourages its
Speaker 1: use except in emergencies. UM fire departments aren't using it
Speaker 1: for training. I'm told I'm they used water UM. So
Speaker 1: they've already been some major steps to reduce its use
Speaker 1: for the firefighting foam. UM. Having alternatives will help mean
Speaker 1: that no more a trip left which has p FAST
Speaker 1: is being put into the environment, So it'll be a help,
Speaker 1: But it doesn't do anything about the p FST that's
Speaker 1: already out there. Since you know, we're talking especially with
Speaker 1: the older forms of a triple left, we're talking about
Speaker 1: real well known forever chemicals UM. And it doesn't stop
Speaker 1: the other sources of p FS in the environment. UM.
Speaker 1: Landfills are a major source because of all the products
Speaker 1: that are coated with the chemicals that then go into
Speaker 1: land fills and then over time the leach it happens. So,
Speaker 1: you know, does this address a major source? Yes? Does
Speaker 1: it solve everything? No? And UM. A major concern that
Speaker 1: I heard was do we know enough about the alternatives?
Speaker 1: Will they be safe or will there be shortcuts in
Speaker 1: the rush to get alternatives that there won't be enough
Speaker 1: testing and we'll have another problem, you know, a couple
Speaker 1: of decades from now. Yeah, because as you know very well,
Speaker 1: I mean, there's a long history of you know, industry
Speaker 1: creating an alternative to a harmful substance and then that
Speaker 1: alternative also turns out to be harmful itself, otherwise known
Speaker 1: as whack a mole. Exactly what do you think? I mean?
Speaker 1: Do you think it sounds like, based on what Pat
Speaker 1: is saying, that taking p fast out of firefighting foam
Speaker 1: would help make the problem not get worse or at
Speaker 1: least not get worse as quickly, but it wouldn't solve
Speaker 1: the problem at all. Yeah. No, I I agree with that.
Speaker 1: I think that it's it's a huge step and and
Speaker 1: cuts off a major source of some of the p
Speaker 1: fast pollution. But like Pat said, a lot of the
Speaker 1: damage is already done. There's a lot of uh places
Speaker 1: in the environment that already have a lot of p
Speaker 1: fast contamination in the groundwater from decades and decades of
Speaker 1: using these phones, and um, you know, there's there's still
Speaker 1: gonna be p fast applications in other consumer products and
Speaker 1: so there's still going to be a need to manufacture
Speaker 1: uh P fast, and so there's always you know, potential
Speaker 1: from contamination from some of those sites that are manufacturing
Speaker 1: the P fast and uh and and landfills and and
Speaker 1: and other sources. All right, well that was Andrew Wallander
Speaker 1: and pat Rizzuto talking about P fast. Thank you guys
Speaker 1: so much, And that's it for today's episode of Parts
Speaker 1: for Billion. If you want more environmental news, check us
Speaker 1: out on Twitter. We use the handle at environment just
Speaker 1: that environment nothing else. I'm at David B. Schultz if
Speaker 1: you want to chat with me about anything. Today's episode
Speaker 1: of Partner Really is produced by myself, David Joels special
Speaker 1: help from Monet Schuff. Partner Billion was created by Jessica
Speaker 1: Combs and Rachel Dagle and is edited by Zach Sherwood
Speaker 1: and Chuck McCutcheon. Our executive producer is Josh Block. Thanks
Speaker 1: everyone for listening. Have you ever thought to yourself, how
Speaker 1: is that legal? Why is that legal? Have you ever
Speaker 1: seen a big trial in the news and wondered what's
Speaker 1: really happening there? Have you ever pondered the question why
Speaker 1: are lawyers the way that they are and how much
Speaker 1: money do they really make anyway? These are the things
Speaker 1: we live and breathe over it. On the Merits, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Laws weekly legal news podcast. On the Merits looks into
Speaker 1: the biggest stories playing out in the legal industry right now,
Speaker 1: and we feature the finest journalists covering the biggest legal
Speaker 1: stories from across the Bloomberg Law newsroom. You can hear
Speaker 1: it wherever fine podcasts are found. Thanks for listening.