6 ms·

Water heavily polluted with PFAS in 15 km radius around Dordrecht chemical plant

113 points by jb1991 3y ago

yourusername 3y ago
I wonder how long it is going to take the media to realize the large drinking water resevoirs for the Randstad in the Biesbosch nature preserve are 10km from this plant.
- amelius 3y ago
  Isn't that upstream from the Dodrecht company?
  - yourusername 3y ago
    The article mentions the pollution is in all surface water including small lakes and drainage ditches not connected to the main rivers, i'd assume it is at least partly spread by air. Aside from those resevoirs there is also a lot of dairy farming within 15 km, i wonder if anyone has bothered to test the cheeses from that area.
  - tremon 3y ago
    De Biesbosch is a tidal wetland, it's both upstream and downstream of Dordrecht.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Call or email them. Media loves tips.
- cassepipe 3y ago
  Even better, discharge your waste somewhere then make it a national park : https://www.calanques-parcnational.fr/en/waste-discharge-sea-gardanne-factory https://www.calanques-parcnational.fr/en/waste-discharge-sea...
misja111 3y ago
I suspect that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Probably many more companies have been contaminating the environment with PFAS during the decades when it was not yet forbidden. If we would take PFAS samples across the country I bet that Dordrecht would not be an exception.
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  This is the problem. We need to start regulating these industrial chemicals with the assumption that they are unsafe to discharge into sewers/wastewater until proven otherwise. The opposite approach (banning or regulating discharge of specific chemicals) just leads to huge toxic messes that need to be cleaned up at great cost later.
  - bjelkeman-again 3y ago
    But the chemical companies will complain. “Think about the jobs”. And the government with those jobs in the country will hesitate. > On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registration,_Evaluation,_Authorisation_and_Restriction_of_Chemicals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registration,_Evaluation,_Auth...
    - wiz21c 3y ago
      oh yeah, like the Titan sub that doesn't go through regulation because it stiffles its progress... how depressing...
    - hammock 3y ago
      >> On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18] You're quoting criticism from outside the EU for an EU regulation. I don't see what's at all unreasonable about that criticism. The regulation would cause major supply disruptions for the US, India and Brazil, and would not substantially help the water supply, health or safety of the US, India and Brazil either. In cases like these we need international treaties that create alignment and mutual interest before we can expect an EU regulation like this one to succeed
29athrowaway 3y ago
The government should attempt to fix the problem and send them the bill with all the expenses involved. If it costs 100 billions then so be it.
- b3lvedere 3y ago
  I see you are not familiar with Dutch government :) You're right of course, but i think hell will freeze over way way earlier.
  - stevenwoo 3y ago
    I'm only somewhat familiar with how the Dutch people rose up in the 1970's and forced a change that seems unthinkable now in most automobile centric countries. Maybe it could happen again, one can dream. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422421000769 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221042242...
    - wkat4242 3y ago
      Holland is now more addicted to cars than most EU countries. Doesn't have to be that way because it's an ideal country for excellent public transport. But cars have been a status symbol there for decades. The 70s were really a very different time. From a predominantly socialist country to one of the most neoliberal ones in Europe (after the UK). Of course it's been half a century since the 70s, too.
- tremon 3y ago
  Like we did with the natural gas drillings in Groningen? The government is sure dragging their feet fixing that problem, and I don't see the companies behind the NAM paying bills any time soon.
bondarchuk 3y ago
>When asked about the extremely high concentration of PFOA and GenX in the waters around it, Chemours referred to a 2020 analysis by the RIVM that stated that there were no health risks. “Chemous did not mention that the RIVM used standards for this that are now outdated and have been significantly lowered by the RIVM,” Zembla said. Surely the limit wasn't 13000x as high previously?
toomuchtodo 3y ago
https://archive.is/Wayn5 https://archive.is/Wayn5
marstall 3y ago
any epidemiological data for the area? seems like a great source of data on health impact.
DoingIsLearning 3y ago
Isn't everyone in South Holland drinking from Maas sources? That is well within 15km of Dordrecht.
- WouterSpaak 3y ago
  Whipped up a quick little map: https://imgur.com/iMvuYz3 https://imgur.com/iMvuYz3 The purple/blue areas are drinking water (ground water) protection areas, the grey areas are protected wetlands. One of those drinking water areas is less than 1,500 meters away from the plant.
  - Aeolun 3y ago
    I have to assume drinking water isn’t pumped into the system without monitoring safe levels of all detectable substances.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- jb1991 3y ago
  I don’t know the answer to that, but even if it was true, wouldnt the water be significantly filtered and cleaned as part of the normal process before delivering it to household?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - curtis3389 3y ago
    I think you're right based on this article: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/health/pfas-water-filters-wellness/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/health/pfas-water-filters-wel... PFAS looks to be removable with activated carbon or reverse osmosis filters. EDIT: I think you're right that it's possible. idk if municipalities usually use these filters
jkellermann 3y ago
oh, nice :( ... Just a coincidence, but I read today about PFAS pollution around the Munich Airport caused by the foam used with fire drills... Very much the tip of the iceberg, I assume :(
- shakes_mcjunkie 3y ago
  Fire fighting foam is, surprisingly, one of the main ways pfas are spread. Recent majority report episode on the topic: https://majorityreportradio.com/2023/06/23/6-23-casual-friday-w-heather-digby-parton https://majorityreportradio.com/2023/06/23/6-23-casual-frida...
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    These foams are a good reason to never raise a family near an airport or military base. Particularly military bases, they're notorious for covering up chemical pollution for years and being dismissive of local concerns. They think their mission puts them above casual reproach.
- berryg 3y ago
  I was on vacation in Sweden last year. Along the lake near the town of Östersund there were signs that said: PFAS pollution, prohibited fishing. The reason: a fire department training ground where firefighting foam was being practiced. Östersund is a small town in a sea of nature. Madness. - https://ostersund-se.translate.goog/bygga-bo-och-miljo/kemikalier-miljogifter-och-farliga-amnen/pfas-i-vatten---svar-pa-vanliga-fragor.html?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=nl&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://ostersund-se.translate.goog/bygga-bo-och-miljo/kemik...
zachrip 3y ago
I live in the Netherlands, what is an easy (but accurate) way to test my water (including for PFAS)?
- Aeolun 3y ago
  Go to the nearest water purification plant? I’m sure they have at least their own numbers somewhere. Maybe a direct display on their website? Edit: Well, that was a depressingly long search only to find that the most recently available data is from 2021… but you can ask for current data it seems [1] scroll down to ‘Gegevens openbaar’. Edit2: evides.nl has monthly PFAS values for a few locations in the netherlands [2]. I kinda expect every different purification plant will have these, but apparently they’re hidden. [1]: https://www.agv.nl/onze-taken/schoon-water/waterkwaliteit-meten/ https://www.agv.nl/onze-taken/schoon-water/waterkwaliteit-me... [2]: https://www.evides.nl/uw-drinkwater/mijn-waterkwaliteit/pfas-en-drinkwater https://www.evides.nl/uw-drinkwater/mijn-waterkwaliteit/pfas...
  - zachrip 3y ago
    I was hoping to test the water straight out of my taps, maybe I can find a place to send some samples to. I'm pretty sure at minimum I can ask for the standard tests but I'm unsure if they'll tell me the PFAS levels.
    - DoingIsLearning 3y ago
      From what I've read it is not a straightforward test to order in Europe as an individual person. Seems easier to convince your huisarts to perform a blood test if you are in an affected region.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Aeolun 3y ago
It’s kind of hidden at the end of the article, but if these numbers were considered fine in 2020, it’s a bit backwards to blame them for keeping to the original limit now that someone adjusted the numbers. Even if they don’t release any more PFAS than acceptable under the new standards that won’t clear up the earlier pollution. And I sorta agree that making people attentive to the fact their water is now at dangerous levels due to a fuckup by whoever set the 2020 levels is not the factories’ responsibility.
- Kaotique 3y ago
  Also mentioned in the article is that this company did know that about the toxic effects of these chemicals but just ignored it or kept it secret. They know it is toxic but still choose to dump it in the river because it below the limit or there is no limit.
- englishrookie 3y ago
  Except that Chemours, the company behind the pollution, already knew about the toxicity of PFAS in the 1990's. Source (in Dutch): https://www.bnnvara.nl/joop/artikelen/chemours-wist-dertig-jaar-geleden-al-van-ernstige-pfas-vervuiling-in-grondwater-dordrecht https://www.bnnvara.nl/joop/artikelen/chemours-wist-dertig-j...
  - Aeolun 3y ago
    This still reads like a failure of governance to me. It’s up to Chemours whether to hold themselves responsible for not meeting their internal guidelines (from what I read here they did/do). Of course it’s less than ideal they keep everything silent but their incentives probably point them that way. If the government also knew, and chose not to do anything (and indeed, apparently wrote that it’s not financially feasible), then that’s a fault of government. The company won’t close itself if what they’re doing is morally dubious but legally perfectly fine (especially the people working at that location have a great incentive to not make waves, even if they’re the ones drinking the water).
    - piva00 3y ago
fifteen1506 3y ago
Tip the health insurance companies that they have to up the premiums or deny cancer coverage.
Run_DOS_Run 3y ago
>The Chemours factory, previously DuPont, in Dordrecht knowingly leached the toxic and carcinogenic PFAS variant PROA into the water and air for decades. There must be severe penalties for intentional serious crimes such as these for the company, if not for the natural persons in the management who intentionally violated applicable laws. Anyone who knowingly endangers the health of the general public, in any context, must be prosecuted. It does not matter whether he acted within the framework of a company or as a private individual. A way out, such as bankruptcy proceedings, must be excluded, as this undermines the rule of law and lowers the inhibition threshold to break the law.
nvrgngvup 3y ago
I saw the DuPont logo on the first image and I knew what was coming. This is not the first time they have contaminated natural resources with harmful forever chemicals. Their contamination of a site with PFOA in West Virginia, is covered in the movie Dark Waters. They not only dumped tons of that chemical in a landfill, they also tried their best to cover it up and delay discovery when they were caught. During the entire time they were fully cognisant of the fact that the chemical is carcinogenic and fatal for livestock and humans. The fact that these corporations are still solvent and allowed to operate near human settlements or wildlife is a failure of regulatory authorities.
- xctr94 3y ago
  I had the same reaction. In fact, it was in The Netherlands that I first saw the award-winning report in their decades-long chemical war on the community surrounding one of their plants in the US. It’s what made me stop buying Gore-Tex. Shame it’s always the same people, never held accountable. Shame.

113 points by jb1991 3y ago

I wonder how long it is going to take the media to realize the large drinking water resevoirs for the Randstad in the Biesbosch nature preserve are 10km from this plant.

amelius 3y ago
Isn't that upstream from the Dodrecht company?
- yourusername 3y ago
  The article mentions the pollution is in all surface water including small lakes and drainage ditches not connected to the main rivers, i'd assume it is at least partly spread by air. Aside from those resevoirs there is also a lot of dairy farming within 15 km, i wonder if anyone has bothered to test the cheeses from that area.
- tremon 3y ago
  De Biesbosch is a tidal wetland, it's both upstream and downstream of Dordrecht.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
Call or email them. Media loves tips.
cassepipe 3y ago
Even better, discharge your waste somewhere then make it a national park : https://www.calanques-parcnational.fr/en/waste-discharge-sea-gardanne-factory https://www.calanques-parcnational.fr/en/waste-discharge-sea...

misja111 3y ago

I suspect that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Probably many more companies have been contaminating the environment with PFAS during the decades when it was not yet forbidden. If we would take PFAS samples across the country I bet that Dordrecht would not be an exception.

SoftTalker 3y ago
This is the problem. We need to start regulating these industrial chemicals with the assumption that they are unsafe to discharge into sewers/wastewater until proven otherwise. The opposite approach (banning or regulating discharge of specific chemicals) just leads to huge toxic messes that need to be cleaned up at great cost later.
- bjelkeman-again 3y ago
  But the chemical companies will complain. “Think about the jobs”. And the government with those jobs in the country will hesitate. > On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registration,_Evaluation,_Authorisation_and_Restriction_of_Chemicals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registration,_Evaluation,_Auth...
  - wiz21c 3y ago
    oh yeah, like the Titan sub that doesn't go through regulation because it stiffles its progress... how depressing...
  - hammock 3y ago
    >> On 8 June 2006, the REACH proposal was criticized by non-EU countries, including the United States, India and Brazil, which stated that the bill would hamper global trade.[18] You're quoting criticism from outside the EU for an EU regulation. I don't see what's at all unreasonable about that criticism. The regulation would cause major supply disruptions for the US, India and Brazil, and would not substantially help the water supply, health or safety of the US, India and Brazil either. In cases like these we need international treaties that create alignment and mutual interest before we can expect an EU regulation like this one to succeed

29athrowaway 3y ago

The government should attempt to fix the problem and send them the bill with all the expenses involved. If it costs 100 billions then so be it.

b3lvedere 3y ago
I see you are not familiar with Dutch government :) You're right of course, but i think hell will freeze over way way earlier.
- stevenwoo 3y ago
  I'm only somewhat familiar with how the Dutch people rose up in the 1970's and forced a change that seems unthinkable now in most automobile centric countries. Maybe it could happen again, one can dream. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422421000769 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221042242...
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    Holland is now more addicted to cars than most EU countries. Doesn't have to be that way because it's an ideal country for excellent public transport. But cars have been a status symbol there for decades. The 70s were really a very different time. From a predominantly socialist country to one of the most neoliberal ones in Europe (after the UK). Of course it's been half a century since the 70s, too.
tremon 3y ago
Like we did with the natural gas drillings in Groningen? The government is sure dragging their feet fixing that problem, and I don't see the companies behind the NAM paying bills any time soon.

bondarchuk 3y ago

>When asked about the extremely high concentration of PFOA and GenX in the waters around it, Chemours referred to a 2020 analysis by the RIVM that stated that there were no health risks. “Chemous did not mention that the RIVM used standards for this that are now outdated and have been significantly lowered by the RIVM,” Zembla said. Surely the limit wasn't 13000x as high previously?

toomuchtodo 3y ago

https://archive.is/Wayn5 https://archive.is/Wayn5

marstall 3y ago

any epidemiological data for the area? seems like a great source of data on health impact.

DoingIsLearning 3y ago

Isn't everyone in South Holland drinking from Maas sources? That is well within 15km of Dordrecht.

WouterSpaak 3y ago
Whipped up a quick little map: https://imgur.com/iMvuYz3 https://imgur.com/iMvuYz3 The purple/blue areas are drinking water (ground water) protection areas, the grey areas are protected wetlands. One of those drinking water areas is less than 1,500 meters away from the plant.
- Aeolun 3y ago
  I have to assume drinking water isn’t pumped into the system without monitoring safe levels of all detectable substances.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
jb1991 3y ago
I don’t know the answer to that, but even if it was true, wouldnt the water be significantly filtered and cleaned as part of the normal process before delivering it to household?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- curtis3389 3y ago
  I think you're right based on this article: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/health/pfas-water-filters-wellness/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/health/pfas-water-filters-wel... PFAS looks to be removable with activated carbon or reverse osmosis filters. EDIT: I think you're right that it's possible. idk if municipalities usually use these filters

jkellermann 3y ago

oh, nice :( ... Just a coincidence, but I read today about PFAS pollution around the Munich Airport caused by the foam used with fire drills... Very much the tip of the iceberg, I assume :(

shakes_mcjunkie 3y ago
Fire fighting foam is, surprisingly, one of the main ways pfas are spread. Recent majority report episode on the topic: https://majorityreportradio.com/2023/06/23/6-23-casual-friday-w-heather-digby-parton https://majorityreportradio.com/2023/06/23/6-23-casual-frida...
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  These foams are a good reason to never raise a family near an airport or military base. Particularly military bases, they're notorious for covering up chemical pollution for years and being dismissive of local concerns. They think their mission puts them above casual reproach.
berryg 3y ago
I was on vacation in Sweden last year. Along the lake near the town of Östersund there were signs that said: PFAS pollution, prohibited fishing. The reason: a fire department training ground where firefighting foam was being practiced. Östersund is a small town in a sea of nature. Madness. - https://ostersund-se.translate.goog/bygga-bo-och-miljo/kemikalier-miljogifter-och-farliga-amnen/pfas-i-vatten---svar-pa-vanliga-fragor.html?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=nl&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://ostersund-se.translate.goog/bygga-bo-och-miljo/kemik...

zachrip 3y ago

I live in the Netherlands, what is an easy (but accurate) way to test my water (including for PFAS)?

Aeolun 3y ago
Go to the nearest water purification plant? I’m sure they have at least their own numbers somewhere. Maybe a direct display on their website? Edit: Well, that was a depressingly long search only to find that the most recently available data is from 2021… but you can ask for current data it seems [1] scroll down to ‘Gegevens openbaar’. Edit2: evides.nl has monthly PFAS values for a few locations in the netherlands [2]. I kinda expect every different purification plant will have these, but apparently they’re hidden. [1]: https://www.agv.nl/onze-taken/schoon-water/waterkwaliteit-meten/ https://www.agv.nl/onze-taken/schoon-water/waterkwaliteit-me... [2]: https://www.evides.nl/uw-drinkwater/mijn-waterkwaliteit/pfas-en-drinkwater https://www.evides.nl/uw-drinkwater/mijn-waterkwaliteit/pfas...
- zachrip 3y ago
  I was hoping to test the water straight out of my taps, maybe I can find a place to send some samples to. I'm pretty sure at minimum I can ask for the standard tests but I'm unsure if they'll tell me the PFAS levels.
  - DoingIsLearning 3y ago
    From what I've read it is not a straightforward test to order in Europe as an individual person. Seems easier to convince your huisarts to perform a blood test if you are in an affected region.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Aeolun 3y ago

It’s kind of hidden at the end of the article, but if these numbers were considered fine in 2020, it’s a bit backwards to blame them for keeping to the original limit now that someone adjusted the numbers. Even if they don’t release any more PFAS than acceptable under the new standards that won’t clear up the earlier pollution. And I sorta agree that making people attentive to the fact their water is now at dangerous levels due to a fuckup by whoever set the 2020 levels is not the factories’ responsibility.

Kaotique 3y ago
Also mentioned in the article is that this company did know that about the toxic effects of these chemicals but just ignored it or kept it secret. They know it is toxic but still choose to dump it in the river because it below the limit or there is no limit.
englishrookie 3y ago
Except that Chemours, the company behind the pollution, already knew about the toxicity of PFAS in the 1990's. Source (in Dutch): https://www.bnnvara.nl/joop/artikelen/chemours-wist-dertig-jaar-geleden-al-van-ernstige-pfas-vervuiling-in-grondwater-dordrecht https://www.bnnvara.nl/joop/artikelen/chemours-wist-dertig-j...
- Aeolun 3y ago
  This still reads like a failure of governance to me. It’s up to Chemours whether to hold themselves responsible for not meeting their internal guidelines (from what I read here they did/do). Of course it’s less than ideal they keep everything silent but their incentives probably point them that way. If the government also knew, and chose not to do anything (and indeed, apparently wrote that it’s not financially feasible), then that’s a fault of government. The company won’t close itself if what they’re doing is morally dubious but legally perfectly fine (especially the people working at that location have a great incentive to not make waves, even if they’re the ones drinking the water).
  - piva00 3y ago

fifteen1506 3y ago

Tip the health insurance companies that they have to up the premiums or deny cancer coverage.

Run_DOS_Run 3y ago

>The Chemours factory, previously DuPont, in Dordrecht knowingly leached the toxic and carcinogenic PFAS variant PROA into the water and air for decades. There must be severe penalties for intentional serious crimes such as these for the company, if not for the natural persons in the management who intentionally violated applicable laws. Anyone who knowingly endangers the health of the general public, in any context, must be prosecuted. It does not matter whether he acted within the framework of a company or as a private individual. A way out, such as bankruptcy proceedings, must be excluded, as this undermines the rule of law and lowers the inhibition threshold to break the law.

nvrgngvup 3y ago

I saw the DuPont logo on the first image and I knew what was coming. This is not the first time they have contaminated natural resources with harmful forever chemicals. Their contamination of a site with PFOA in West Virginia, is covered in the movie Dark Waters. They not only dumped tons of that chemical in a landfill, they also tried their best to cover it up and delay discovery when they were caught. During the entire time they were fully cognisant of the fact that the chemical is carcinogenic and fatal for livestock and humans. The fact that these corporations are still solvent and allowed to operate near human settlements or wildlife is a failure of regulatory authorities.

xctr94 3y ago
I had the same reaction. In fact, it was in The Netherlands that I first saw the award-winning report in their decades-long chemical war on the community surrounding one of their plants in the US. It’s what made me stop buying Gore-Tex. Shame it’s always the same people, never held accountable. Shame.