![]() ![]() The presence of PFAS in oil and gas extraction threatens to expose oil-field employees and emergency workers handling fires and spills as well as people who live near, or downstream from, drilling sites to a class of chemicals that has faced increasing scrutiny for its links to cancer, birth defects, and other serious health problems.Ī class of man-made chemicals that are toxic even in minuscule concentrations, for decades PFAS were used to make products like nonstick pans, stain-resistant carpeting and firefighting foam. Because not all states require companies to report chemicals to the database, the number of wells could be higher.Ĭhemours, which has in the past agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to settle injury claims related to PFOA pollution, did not provide comment.Īn Exxon spokesman, in response to questions regarding whether it uses the chemicals, said, “We do not manufacture PFAS.”Ĭhevron did not respond to a request for comment. There is no public data that details where the E.P.A.-approved chemicals have been used.īut the FracFocus database, which tracks chemicals used in fracking, shows that about 120 companies used PFAS - or chemicals that can break down into PFAS the most common of which was “nonionic fluorosurfactant” and various misspellings - in more than 1,000 wells between 20 in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Wyoming. (Chemours did not exist until 2015, though it would have had the responsibility to report chemicals on behalf of its predecessor, Dupont.) document shows that a chemical with the same EPA-issued number was first imported for commercial use in November 2011. data and identifies Chemours, previously Dupont, as the submitter. However, an identification number for one of the chemicals issued by the E.P.A. Even the name of the company that applied for approval is redacted, and the records give only a generic name for the chemicals: fluorinated acrylic alkylamino copolymer. allows companies to invoke trade-secret claims to keep basic information on new chemicals from public release. The documents, dating from the Obama administration, are heavily redacted because the E.P.A. ![]() identified serious health risks associated with chemicals proposed for use in oil and gas extraction, and yet allowed those chemicals to be used commercially with very lax regulation,” said Dusty Horwitt, researcher at Physicians for Social Responsibility. Those tests were not mandatory and there is no indication that they were carried out. scientists recommended additional testing. scientists pointed to preliminary evidence that, under some conditions, the chemicals could “degrade in the environment” into substances akin to PFOA, a kind of PFAS chemical, and could “persist in the environment” and “be toxic to people, wild mammals, and birds.” The E.P.A. In a consent order issued for the three chemicals on Oct. The records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by a nonprofit group, Physicians for Social Responsibility, are among the first public indications that PFAS, long-lasting compounds also known as “forever chemicals,” may be present in the fluids used during drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. ![]() The E.P.A.’s approval of the three chemicals wasn’t previously publicly known. in 2011 approved the use of these chemicals, used to ease the flow of oil from the ground, despite the agency’s own grave concerns about their toxicity, according to the documents, which were reviewed by The New York Times. ![]() For much of the past decade, oil companies engaged in drilling and fracking have been allowed to pump into the ground chemicals that, over time, can break down into toxic substances known as PFAS - a class of long-lasting compounds known to pose a threat to people and wildlife - according to internal documents from the Environmental Protection Agency. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |