WildEarth Guardians’ Post

On 16 May 2024, the European Commission adopted a restriction on siloxanes D4, D5 and D6. This measure will protect our environment by reducing up to 90 % of the emissions of these very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances. The restriction will start applying after 6 June 2026. #environment #emissions #restriction https://lnkd.in/eeX3FnaC

On 16 May 2024, the European Commission adopted a restriction on siloxanes D4, D5 and D6. This measure will protect our environment by reducing up to 90 % of the emissions of these very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances. The restriction will start applying after 6 June 2026. #environment #emissions #restriction https://lnkd.in/eeX3FnaC

NO, PFOS & PFOA, FOR INSTANCE, DO NOT REPORT TO THE GASEOUS PHASE When I am made aware of yet another peer-reviewed paper in the PFAS space, either I: 1. Ignore it, or 2. Read it, and then consider it in the context of my own expertise in PFAS remediation; some work has been helpful indeed to my thinking. I certainly never comment on a scientific article that is beyond a paywall such that I have not read it. To do so would be very silly. Those few who follow me will know that I am readily-triggered when PFAS are described as ‘Forever Chemicals’: They are not, and I know for certain that such a message is detrimental with respect to governmental decision makers: Why try to solve a problem that is there forever? If one is apt to employ this moniker then please reconsider; one may feel that in so using it one is afforded membership of some kind of club, but it is the club for people who do not understand Gibbs Free Energy. Nor does PFAS stay in the body forever, because even the most vigorously adsorptive PFAS species form a surface equilibrium. (This is, by the way, the reason that injecting colloidal activated carbon into the ground to remediate PFAS contaminated water is barking bonkers.) There are those who see the word ‘PFAS’ and are catalysed into action. Here we see this phenomenon with respect to a very good paper that demonstrates that there are neutral PFAS species present in the air around a landfill site: https://lnkd.in/eN9QAfxd Indubitably, their data shows that there are. But not all PFAS behave the same way, either in the environment, nor in living organisms. Neutral PFAS, which are the topic of this study, are indeed volatile, but they are practically non-adsorptive, which means they exhbit almost no eco-toxicity. I’m no toxicologist, but if I take a look at the excellent PFAS-TOX database...  https://lnkd.in/eGuU7Hrx ...I find scant representation of neutral PFAS, and those which appear are ascribed very low toxicity. Neutral PFAS do not appear in the US EPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations either, presumably because they aren’t (particularly) toxic. Anionic PFAS are a different story: PFOS & PFOA, for instance, are materially soluble in water and are very adsorptive to surfaces. This is why they are problem, and a problem that we, as a community, need to fix. They do not report to the gaseous phase, unless in solution of aerosol droplets, for many thermodynamic reasons, one of which is that they’d rather stay attached to a surface. There are much better things to worry about than neutral PFAS. When one sees 'PFAS' mentioned, one should ask 'What kind of PFAS, and what are its relevant properties?' If you think that you could benefit from world-leading scientific expertise around PFAS remediation, rather than sales fiction, then you know where to come.  #PFAS #silly

Again the concern of halogenated solvents, especially dichloromethane has surfaced and this time, US has initiated implementation of total ban on usage of dichloromethane barring some critical usage. This will definitely impact the process development requirement as well. This has triggered to start switching to some other solvents. https://lnkd.in/dBSzga36

On February 8, 2024, the EPA proposed adding a group of chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “Forever Chemicals,” to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Section 3001 hazardous waste list. This proposal carries significant implications for businesses and industrial processes. What does this proposal mean and how would it affect businesses moving forward? Let's delve into the details: https://loom.ly/JfcDV5k #WaterTreatment #EPA #ForeverChemicals

Following pressure from global partners and stakeholders about the imminent entry into effect of the EU's 2023 regulation requiring that certain products sold in the EU be 'deforestation-free', the European Commission has proposed a delay of 12 months to the implementation and issued guidance to offer additional support. Read more here: https://ow.ly/1k1S50TISzo #whitecase

Following pressure from global partners and stakeholders about the imminent entry into effect of the EU's 2023 regulation requiring that certain products sold in the EU be 'deforestation-free', the European Commission has proposed a delay of 12 months to the implementation and issued guidance to offer additional support. Read more here: https://ow.ly/3aMz50TO1Ms #whitecase

Following pressure from global partners and stakeholders about the imminent entry into effect of the EU's 2023 regulation requiring that certain products sold in the EU be 'deforestation-free', the European Commission has proposed a delay of 12 months to the implementation and issued guidance to offer additional support. Read more here: https://ow.ly/kt4F50TKBYe #whitecase

I was chatting to a friend the other day about the fact that failures in regulation take time to have an effect, which is why they sneak up on us and cause disasters. Take, for example, the failure to regulate storm sewer overflows and flows to full treatment, and the failure to review the associated Permits. This went un-noticed for years, and then had a calamitous effect on water quality as Permit reviews were missed and Permit breaches occurred. This all took about a decade to unfurl, with the pollution worsening slowly over time. The same is true of the failure to regulate discharges of highway runoff (although very few people have noticed that yet). And there are other 'ticking-time-bombs' of failure lurking in the long grass - contaminated land regulations, compliance with Permit conditions at COMAH sites, underfunded regulation of petroleum retailers and many more. But then I read a paper this morning about UK chemical regulation post-Brexit and the authors made this and other conclusions: "The UK government has been unable to keep pace with EU regulation. It lacks the regulatory capacity, oversight, and capabilities of its EU counterpart, and a little more than two years after its departure, the United Kingdom is already failing to restrict the most harmful chemical substances or implement policy changes and commitments. This is a clear demonstration of divergence by default (i.e., passive divergence) in which a UK government has failed to enact all EU regulatory developments." From Jones, L.B. and Burns, C.J. (2024), REACHing for divergence?—UK chemical regulation post-Brexit. Integr Environ Assess Manag, 20: 1529-1538. https://lnkd.in/esFASDcA Doesn't that just fill you with dread 😪

What’s happening with PFAS clean-up across Australia? And is it even possible? ISF’s Dr Rachael Wakefield-Rann and Sarah Wilson explore these questions in their recently published article in The Conversation Australia + NZ. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were once hailed as wonder materials, but these compounds also have a dark side that’s earned them the nickname “forever chemicals”. As the science and technology continues to develop, it is more important than ever to adopt a whole-of-supply-chain approach to PFAS management. Read the full article here: https://ow.ly/Y3tZ50RrnP7 #PFAS #ForeverChemicals #Sustainability