The Canadian government has initiated a 60-day consultation period with the aim of adding per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to its list of toxic substances. PFAS, a class of thousands of chemicals, are widely used in various consumer products such as food containers, clothing, and cosmetics. The decision marks a significant and "unprecedented" move towards addressing the environmental and health concerns posed by PFAS contamination.
PFAS are prevalent in everyday items, including takeout containers, makeup, paper-based food packaging, feminine hygiene products, and clothing. Despite their widespread use, PFAS have raised alarms due to their persistence in the environment and potential health risks. Millions of people globally are exposed to PFAS through drinking water contaminated by PFAS-containing aqueous firefighting foam. These foams are often used around airports, military bases, and locations with massive fires, contributing significantly to the spread of these substances.
"Millions of people around the globe are drinking PFAS-contaminated water because of the use of PFAS-containing aqueous firefighting foam. It's most acute around airports, around military bases, around locations where there have been massive fires," – Miriam Diamond
Widespread Presence and Global Responses
Research has found PFAS in various environmental mediums, including fish from North American waters and in the air, rain, and water of the Great Lakes. Alarmingly, almost all Canadians and Americans have PFAS in their bodies. The chemicals' ubiquitous presence has led to international scrutiny and action.
The European Union has proposed a comprehensive ban on PFAS in consumer products, albeit with potential exemptions for certain industrial uses. In contrast, over half of U.S. states have taken legal action against PFAS manufacturers and users. However, the U.S. administration recently withdrew proposed discharge limits for industries.
"It is true that the U.S. administration is walking back on some of those commitments. But the good news is that there are a number of U.S. states that are maintaining their laws and regulations on these substances." – Guilbeault
Canada's proactive approach includes plans to restrict PFAS in firefighting foams, cosmetics, food packaging, and textiles. The ultimate goal is to mitigate the health and environmental impacts of these persistent chemicals.
Regulatory Challenges and Industry Dynamics
The path to regulation is fraught with challenges due to the extensive use of PFAS across numerous industries. Once listed as toxic, the Canadian government can proceed with regulations to eliminate PFAS from various products and industrial applications.
"Once that listing is finalized, then the government can move ahead with regulations. And those would involve removing [PFAS] from products, removing it for things like firefighting foam, removing it from industrial uses," – Elaine MacDonald
Despite these initiatives, setting definitive timelines remains complex.
"And the plan they laid out today really doesn't have a lot of timelines around what that might look like. So we will be pushing for them to do it as quickly as possible." – Elaine MacDonald
The Chemistry Industry Association of Canada highlights the critical role PFAS play in modern life, noting that in many cases, no known alternatives exist for these substances.
"PFAS are critical to a modern way of life," – Chemistry Industry Association of Canada
"In many cases there are no known alternatives to these substances." – Chemistry Industry Association of Canada
Potential Solutions and Future Outlook
Despite the daunting task ahead, there is optimism about the feasibility of finding alternatives or eliminating unnecessary uses of PFAS. Studies have shown that many consumer products do not need PFAS, suggesting that immediate restrictions could be implemented without significant disruption.
"The good news about our work was that half of those products didn't contain PFAS. So there are alternatives or it's not needed. Hence the government could be enacting restrictions right away on those products. There is no need for a Phase 2 in my eyes." – Miriam Diamond
Efforts to phase out PFAS will need to address their entrenched presence in the economy and various products.
"It's so ubiquitous in our economy. It is in so many different products," – Elaine MacDonald
"It's going to take a long time to figure out how to remove it from everything." – Elaine MacDonald
As other parts of the world move swiftly towards reducing reliance on PFAS, Canada’s initiative may set a precedent for comprehensive regulatory action.
"Other places in the world are moving away from it and are moving away from it quickly." – Miriam Diamond
