AFFF has been relied upon to extinguish hazardous fires and save lives. Used extensively at airfields and industrial sites around the world, this foam was considered a heroic firefighting tool. However, recent scientific evidence has uncovered a troubling possibility – that these same perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) found in AFFF may have insidious health effects.
As firefighters, regulators, and communities grapple with understanding the health implications of prolonged AFFF exposure, important questions have arisen. These questions revolve around the use of this firefighting tool and the need to balance fire safety with potential public health concerns.
What Is Toxic About AFFF?
Aqueous film-forming foam, generally known as AFFF, is a type of firefighting foam.
It is often used in fire suppression systems on ships, at marine facilities, on fire trucks, and in fire training facilities. AFFF comes as a concentrate that is mixed with water in either a 3% or 6% solution depending on its intended use.
These websites offer diverse content catering to specific interests. Instabiokick focuses on social media tools, atozbollywoodbudget Budget covers film industry insights, Primesmediabiz explores media news, and Infoshandle delivers general updates.
AFFF works to extinguish fires effectively due to its ability to form an aqueous film when sprayed onto a fire. This film acts as a barrier between the fuel source of the fire and oxygen in the air, which is necessary for combustion. In addition, the foam cools the fuel and surfaces and smothers the fire, preventing reignition.
However, AFFF contains certain chemicals called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that allow it to form this effective fire-smothering foam. PFAS, such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), are human-made compounds that have been widely used in industry and consumer products since the 1950s.
Long-term exposure studies have shown that PFOS and PFOA can accumulate in the human body over time and may lead to negative health impacts. These chemicals have been found to be toxic to animals as well.
Due to the potential risks to both human health and the environment, the EPA has phased out the production and use of long-chain PFAS like PFOS and PFOA in firefighting foams.
While effective at putting out petroleum-based fires, the PFAS within older AFFF stockpiles and in foams produced prior to the EPA phase-out render this useful firefighting tool potentially toxic. Especially upon long-term or repeated exposure to contaminated soil and water.
Understanding the Health Risks of PFAS in Firefighting Foam
Firefighting foam contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds (PFAS), which may be harmful to both human and environmental health. Effects on the immunological, endocrine, and reproductive systems are a few areas of concern. Due to their extensive use and enduring presence in the environment, it is predicted that nearly all Americans have detectable amounts of PFAS in their bodies.
PFAS can enter drinking water supplies when firefighting foam is used for fire suppression, system testing at facilities like airports, fire training exercises, accidental spills, or other releases. Repeated exposure to these chemicals has been associated with various types of cancer in scientific studies, as well as other health issues.
According to TruLaw, cancers that some research has linked to PFAS exposure include bladder, breast, colon, kidney, liver, pancreatic, prostate, colorectal, testicular, and thyroid cancers.
The scientific literature reports additional non-cancer health effects, such as increased cholesterol levels and changes in liver enzymes. It also includes minor drops in baby weights, a decline in children’s vaccination response, and an increase in the risk of hypertension during pregnancy.
Legal Action Over PFAS Exposure Leading to Serious Health Concerns
Various lawsuits, including the AFFF foam lawsuit, have been filed for individuals alleging health impacts from occupational or environmental exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
This includes lawsuits brought by firefighters and military personnel claiming injuries from occupational exposure to aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) containing PFAS. It also includes lawsuits by residents near sites where AFFF was routinely used and allegedly contaminated local drinking water supplies with PFAS chemicals.
Significant financial settlements have already been reached in a few of these PFAS exposure cases. Particularly, it looks like the number of lawsuits pertaining to exposure to AFFF foam is rising.
However, the multidistrict litigation (MDL) consolidating many federal AFFF lawsuits has yet to reach any settlements. This MDL has scheduled some initial “bellwether” trials for December 2022, which may help determine damages and influence future settlement negotiations.
What’s Next?
Scientists have been researching potential replacements for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that offer similar performance without health and environmental concerns. Several novel alternative materials show promise.
Bio-based materials derived from renewable plant and microbial sources could replace PFAS in some applications. For example, biosurfactants from fungi and bacteria show effectiveness as grease-cutting detergents in cleaning products. Their biodegradability reduces ecological impacts compared to conventional PFAS surfactants.
Fluorine-free synthetic compounds under development aim to provide water and oil repellency without fluorine, which contributes to PFAS persistence. Some fluorine-free foams have proven effective for firefighting while being safer and more sustainable than PFAS-containing foams.
Electrospun nanofibers produced through high-voltage fiber spinning offer another option. This technique can create fibers from non-PFAS polymers, proteins, or plant-based materials with water and oil resistance plus reduced toxicity. Their uses could include waterproof, breathable apparel and fire-safe textiles.
Abundant silica minerals provide a substrate for creating water and oil repellent coatings without PFAS. Silica is non-toxic and chemically stable, making it well-suited for harsh manufacturing environments as a textile or electronic finishing alternative.
Some studies explore using shorter-chain PFAS, as they tend to break down more readily than long-chain varieties. Short-chain compounds are being tested for textiles, carpets, paper, and tiles but require further research to evaluate human and environmental impacts versus long-chain PFAS fully. Continued innovation aims to yield safer and more sustainable performance chemicals.
While AFFF has successfully saved lives and protected property for decades, its potential health risks can no longer be ignored. As scientific evidence increasingly links PFAS to serious health issues, firefighters, the EPA, and manufacturers must find viable, non-toxic replacements.
Alternative firefighting foams show promise, as do novel biomaterials, nanotechnologies, and other fluorine-free options. With further research and development, the fire safety community is poised to transition away from PFAS and its hidden dangers, protecting both fire personnel and the public.
FAQs
1. What are the harmful effects of AFFF?
A: The concern surrounding AFFF arises from its composition containing PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), which are toxic chemicals notorious for their detrimental effects on human health. These PFAS compounds exhibit resistance to breaking down in the environment, posing threats to waterways, wildlife, and human bodies alike.
2. Is there a link between PFAS and cancer?
A: PFAS, which are found in firefighting foams utilized at airports and military bases to combat petroleum-based fires, have raised concerns regarding potential health impacts. Among these concerns is the heightened risk of developing kidney and testicular cancers associated with exposure to PFAS.
3. Which cancer-causing compounds are present in AFFF?
A: Two carcinogenic compounds found in AFFF are perfluorooctane acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). Both belong to the chemical group known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Being human-made chemicals, they do not naturally occur in the environment.
