Communities of Color More Likely to Drink PFAS-Contaminated Water in San Francisco Area

A study published in the peer-reviewed journal of Environmental Science & Technology found that water wells serving communities of color in the U.S. across 18 states, including California, have much higher levels of PFAS when compared to wells serving white populations. The study, conducted at Harvard University, also reports on a direct link between socioeconomic factors and increased likelihood of drinking PFAS-contaminated water.

PFAS are man-made chemicals with a significant persistence in the environment and detrimental effects on human health. Prior to knowledge of these health effects, PFAS were extensively used across industries, including in the military as aqueous foam-forming film or AFFF for fire drill exercises. Now, these substances are much better regulated yet getting them out of the environment, and more importantly, out of the water, is quite difficult.

Double marginalization within PFAS context

As concerning as this finding is, the explanation is in fact quite simple. Populations of color and ethnic minorities are marginalized figuratively but also in the literal sense, one limitation feeding into another in a constant vicious cycle. With reduced opportunities for education and equitable development, these communities have limited access to employment that would ensure a decent lifestyle. In return, people are forced to reside in city peripheries, where life expenses are more affordable. This phenomenon is not new and is well documented by the social sciences. However, its consequences seem to emerge as different each time with new impacts being uncovered consistently. 

In this case, city peripheries are also where military bases, airports, landfills and water waste treatment plants are located. All these facilities are known to discard significant amounts of PFAS in the environment that contaminate groundwater and eventually end up in public and private wells. In the latest analysis published by the San Francisco Estuary Institute, seven out of 40 dangerous PFAS were found in 50% of the water samples collected in 2021 from the Bay. Now, the new Harvard study confirms that approximately 30% of the Bay’s population30% of the Bay’s population consisting of Blacks, Hispanics and other ethnic minorities, are more likely to consume water from these contaminated wells.

The San Francisco Estuary Institute also draws attention to the fact that current research tends to monitor a specific number of PFAS in a specific number of places. This particular disregard for contaminants that could potentially pose a danger to human health, allows PFAS-generators to further pollute the areas and hamper decontamination efforts.

Massive PFAS lawsuits

As contamination reached significant levels across the U.S., class action lawsuits have been triggered across the country setting precedents for billions in compensation. This year, the 3M company settled to pay $10.3 billion to public water suppliers, while in 2023, DuPont and its related entities, Chemours and Corteva, agreed to a $1.185 billion settlement. In the State of California, an ongoing liability litigation with over 10.000 cases is ongoing and judging by the precedents, will most likely end in the favor of the plaintiffs.

The trial in California is also most likely to gather even more cases, with an astonishing 320 being added within just 30 days. Moreover, despite current limitations on PFAS, AFFF is still used in the region, while other PFAS continue to pollute the area. This implies that in the long run, more and more people will become affected and sue for compensation.

Is compensation enough?

One issue with these compensations is that they do not actually solve systemic issues that lead to disadvantaged communities sustaining the majority of the PFAS impact. Another issue is that, as reported by the San Francisco Estuary Institute, we don’t even know for sure what and where to measure. So, by the time these liability compensations are in place, local communities and water suppliers are not even fully aware of the extent of the issue. As PFAS decontamination is very costly, compensations may be underestimated.  Concomitantly, companies agree to pay these fees in installments. Fractured payment and the extensive cost of decontamination may thus result in fragmented efforts or surface-level solutions such as water filtration.

Considering these aspects, it is safe to assume that litigation and continued use of PFAS are not helpful to anybody in the long run. Concentrated efforts to ban these substances entirely, develop alternatives, and decontaminate the environment seem like viable solutions to this ongoing issue.

About Author

Jonathan Sharp serves as the Chief Financial Officer at Environmental Litigation Group, P.C., a Birmingham, Alabama-based law firm specializing in assisting individuals affected by toxic exposure. In his capacity, Jonathan oversees financial operations and conducts case evaluations to advance the firm's mission of advocacy and support.