Our Proposal:

To tackle this problem , we need a multi stakeholder strategy. Below are five ideas to do that.

1) First and foremost, we need to involve the public at large. PFAS is still an issue that

the larger public does not know much about. Sure, there are certain people that have been

affected and are knowledgeable about the issue (for example communities near military sites),

but it’s not an issue like abortion or gun control that has garnered national attention, that most

people are aware of and have an opinion about. If we need to stop this problem, educating the

public about the dangers and omnipresence of these chemicals is a must. Once more people

know about this, there will be pressure on elected officials (at local, state, and federal level) to

do something about it. That in turn will hopefully create a bottom-up movement which, coupled

simultaneously with a top-down approach, will lead to immediate and stronger action.

2) Second, the companies producing these chemicals need to be penalized. Yes, there

have been lawsuits against these companies by some states, but that’s not enough. More legal

action needs to be taken against these companies, which is what will force them to phase these

chemicals out and figure out safer options. 3M announced in Dec. 2022 that it will stop making

products containing PFAS by the end of 2025. In 3M’s CEO’s own words they made this

decision because of shifting industry desires and accelerating regulatory trends. Plus 3M is

named as a defendant in more than 3500 PFAS related lawsuits. So holding these companies

accountable through legal action should continue to be part of the multi stakeholder strategy.

3) Third, we need to involve additional stakeholders in this fight. Retailers, restaurants,

cosmetic companies , and others need to step up and put pressure on the manufacturers of

these chemicals by not carrying their products. Retailers should stop carrying products that

contain PFAS in their stores. Restaurants should eliminate all the food packaging containing

PFAS in their outlets. And so forth.

4) Fourth, we need to leverage technology to “destroy” the existing PFAS all around us.

In a 2022 study in the “Journal of Environmental Engineering '' EPA found that a heat and

pressure based technique known as supercritical water oxidation destroyed 99% of PFAS in a

water sample. Alacrity, a startup based out of MA, uses a proprietary electrochemical process

technology to break down these contaminants. They work with treatment facilities, landfills,

municipalities etc. to solve large, cost prohibitive water problems upstream. Another startup,

Aquagga, uses hydrothermal alkaline treatment (HALT) for complete PFAS destruction. More

startups need to be encouraged to venture in this space. What if, a private corporation or

corporations came together to fund a prize (similar to the $10M Ansari XPRIZE for the creation

of a reliable, reusable, crewed spaceship, whose technology was later licensed by Richard

Branson to create Virgin Galactic) for the best startup in this field?

5) Finally, PFAS monitoring and remediation efforts are expensive. Bipartisan funding

needs to be increased for programs that monitor, destroy, or help stop the manufacture of these

chemicals in the first place. What if the government partnered with private companies and

invested in finding safer alternatives (to PFAS) that are not harmful and can be used in the

variety of products that currently use PFAS? If the government can do it for the Covid vaccine, it

surely can be done for PFAS alternatives.