PFAS in US source and treated drinking waters

Boone JS, Vigo C, Boone T, Byrne C, Ferrario J, Benson R, Donohue J, Simmons JE, Kolpin DW, Furlong ET, Glassmeyer ST. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in source and treated drinking waters of the United States. The Science of the total environment. 2018 Oct 18;653:359-369. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.245.

Contaminants of emerging concern (CECs), including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), are of interest to regulators, water treatment utilities, the general public and scientists. This study measured 17 PFAS in source and treated water from 25 drinking water treatment plants (DWTPs) as part of a broader study of CECs in drinking water across the United States. PFAS were quantitatively detected in all 50 samples, with summed concentrations of the 17 PFAS ranging from <1 ng/L to 1102 ng/L. The median total PFAS concentration was 21.4 ng/L in the source water and 19.5 ng/L in the treated drinking water. Comparing the total PFAS concentration in source and treated water at each location, only five locations demonstrated statistically significant differences (i.e. P < 0.05) between the source and treated water. When the perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) concentrations in the treated drinking water are compared to the existing US Environmental Protection Agency’s PFOA and PFOS drinking water health advisory of 70 ng/L for each chemical or their sum one DWTP exceeded the threshold. Six of the 25 DWTPs were along two large rivers. The DWTPs within each of the river systems had specific PFAS profiles, with the three DWTPs from one river being dominated by PFOA, while three DWTPs on the second river were dominated by perfluorobutyric acid (PFBA).

Carbon capture technology to eliminate CO2 emissions is unsustainable.

“The Environmental Protection Agency is set to announce Thursday it is weakening an Obama-era rule that had required costly technology capturing carbon dioxide emissions on new coal plants, according to multiple people familiar with the news.” click here

US Global Change Research Program needs accountability as well as an overhaul

“The 468 page report released by the USGCRP is filled with speculative claims presented as if they are established science. The authors use “expert Judgement” to support their conclusions. The experts have an obvious financial and emotional stake in global warming doomsday scenarios. If the global warming doomsday is shown to be imaginary, the experts will lose their financial support and in many cases their jobs.” click here

80 percent of French people oppose carbon tax

Anger against President Macron is growing with eight in 10 French people now supporting the popular “yellow vest” movement denouncing rising fuel prices and spiralling living costs, a poll published on Wednesday showed.” click here

US national climate – Not so bad afterall.

“The BBC inevitably made a lot of propaganda out of the latest US National Climate Assessment report, which I have already shot holes in. But below is the report the climate scientists did not want to publish: click here

Sea level rise nothing out of the ordinary

Energy poverty results in more deaths than climate or coal

“Energy poverty is a lack of access to modern energy services. These services are defined as household access to electricity and clean cooking facilities (e.g. fuels and stoves that do not cause air pollution in houses).” click here