Why are EU ministers having blood tests for ‘forever chemicals’? – Euronews.com

 

Report on PFAS Contamination and European Policy Response in the Context of the Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

A high-profile initiative has been launched by the Danish Ministry of Environment, the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), and ChemSec, inviting EU environment and climate ministers to undergo blood testing for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). This action aims to underscore the widespread human and environmental contamination by these hazardous chemicals, highlighting significant challenges to achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, clean water, and responsible production.

2.0 The Human Health and Environmental Impact of PFAS

2.1 Alignment with SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

PFAS, a group of over 10,000 persistent synthetic chemicals, pose a direct threat to public health, undermining the objectives of SDG 3. The widespread contamination of European citizens, including vulnerable populations, is linked to severe health risks. This directly contravenes Target 3.9, which aims to substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution.

• Known Health Risks: Cancer, infertility, thyroid disease, and immune system suppression.
• Widespread Exposure: Contamination is confirmed in nearly all Europeans, including children and pregnant women.

2.2 Alignment with SDG 6, 14, and 15: Clean Water and Life on Land/Below Water

Referred to as ‘forever chemicals’, PFAS do not easily break down, leading to their accumulation in the environment. This persistence directly threatens the achievement of several environmental SDGs.

• SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation): The contamination of water sources by PFAS compromises Target 6.3, which calls for improving water quality by reducing pollution and minimizing the release of hazardous chemicals.
• SDG 14 (Life Below Water) & SDG 15 (Life on Land): The accumulation of PFAS in ecosystems harms aquatic and terrestrial life, impeding progress on goals to protect biodiversity.

3.0 European Regulatory Action and Institutional Responsibility

3.1 Progress Toward SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

In response to the crisis, a coalition of EU member states has proposed a comprehensive ban on PFAS, a critical step toward fulfilling the aims of SDG 12. This goal focuses on ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns, with Target 12.4 specifically calling for the environmentally sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle to minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment.

1. Joint Proposal: Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden have submitted a proposal to the European Commission to ban the production, sale, and use of most PFAS under the REACH regulation.
2. Scientific Assessment: The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is currently evaluating the proposal’s health, environmental, and socio-economic impacts to ensure a transition to safer alternatives.

3.2 Strengthening Institutions for Sustainable Development (SDG 16)

The proposed regulatory action represents an effort to develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16. By seeking to hold producers accountable and legislate against harmful substances, the EU is reinforcing the governance frameworks necessary to protect citizens and the environment from chemical pollution.

4.0 The Economic Case for Action and Corporate Accountability

4.1 The Unsustainable Cost of Inaction

The failure to regulate PFAS has resulted in staggering societal costs, which are fundamentally at odds with the principles of sustainable economic development. The financial burden of remediation and healthcare demonstrates an unsustainable model that prioritizes short-term profit over long-term well-being and environmental integrity.

• Environmental Remediation Costs: Estimated at €100 billion annually, with a potential total cleanup cost of up to €2 trillion over 20 years.
• Health-Related Costs: Estimated at an additional €52-84 billion per year.
• Total Societal Costs: The EEB reports that producers have contributed to an estimated €16 trillion in societal costs while avoiding accountability.

4.2 The Polluter Pays Principle and SDG 12

Reports indicate that major PFAS producers were aware of the associated health and environmental risks but concealed the evidence. This highlights a failure in corporate responsibility. The current push for regulation and accountability aligns with the “polluter pays” principle, a core concept for achieving SDG 12 by ensuring that those responsible for pollution bear the costs of managing it.

5.0 Conclusion: The Imperative of Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17)

The initiative to test ministers’ blood is a powerful example of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) in action. The collaboration between national governments (Denmark), intergovernmental bodies (EU), and civil society organizations (EEB, ChemSec) is essential for raising awareness, enhancing policy coherence, and driving the systemic change required to address the PFAS crisis. Urgent and coordinated action is necessary to mitigate this public health threat and advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article extensively discusses the adverse health effects of PFAS (‘forever chemicals’), directly linking them to “cancer, fertility issues, thyroid disease, and weakened immune system.” The initiative to test ministers’ blood for PFAS underscores the concern for human health, highlighting that these chemicals “contaminate the bodies of nearly all Europeans.” This directly connects to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being.

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• The article mentions that PFAS can “affect aquatic environments” and that there is a “growing PFAS pollution crisis.” The need to “clean up PFAS” and the high costs of “environmental remediation” point to the goal of ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water by tackling pollution from hazardous chemicals.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• This goal is central to the article. It discusses the production and use of over 10,000 man-made PFAS chemicals in “everyday products such as non-stick cookware, water-repellent fabrics, food packaging, and firefighting foams.” The proposed EU-wide ban on the “production, sale, and use of almost all PFAS under the EU’s REACH regulation” is a direct measure to achieve sustainable consumption and production patterns by managing chemicals responsibly throughout their lifecycle.

SDG 14: Life Below Water

• The impact of PFAS on “aquatic environments and animals” is explicitly mentioned. As PFAS pollution often originates from land-based activities and ends up in water systems, it poses a significant threat to marine and freshwater ecosystems, aligning with the goal of conserving and sustainably using the oceans, seas, and marine resources.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article highlights the role of institutions in addressing the PFAS crisis. It describes the actions of the “Danish Ministry of Environment,” the “EU Council Presidency,” and the “European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA)” in proposing and assessing a ban. It also touches on the theme of justice by mentioning that “producers continue to profit with minimal accountability” and the need to “hold polluters accountable,” which relates to developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Target 3.9: Substantially reduce deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and pollution

• This target is directly addressed by the article’s focus on reducing exposure to PFAS, which are described as “harmful ‘forever chemicals’ linked to cancer and other serious health risks.” The initiative to raise awareness and the proposed EU ban aim to prevent illnesses and deaths resulting from chemical pollution.

Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution

• The article’s discussion of the “PFAS pollution crisis” and its impact on “aquatic environments” aligns with this target. The call to “prevent, contain, and clean up PFAS” is a direct effort to reduce the release of hazardous chemicals into water bodies, thereby improving water quality.

Target 12.4: Environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes

• This is a key target identified in the article. The joint proposal by Denmark and other nations to “ban the production, sale, and use of almost all PFAS under the EU’s REACH regulation” is a clear action to achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.

Target 14.1: Prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds

• The article’s mention of PFAS affecting “aquatic environments and animals” connects to this target. Since PFAS are persistent and travel through water systems, efforts to ban their use and clean up existing contamination contribute to reducing pollution that ultimately affects marine ecosystems.

Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions

• The article describes institutional actions, such as the EU’s REACH regulation and the ECHA’s assessment of the PFAS ban proposal. It also implies a need for stronger accountability by stating that “producers continue to profit with minimal accountability” and “lobby against regulation,” highlighting the challenge of creating institutions that can effectively regulate powerful industries and hold them accountable.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Health-Related Indicators

• Presence of PFAS in the human body: The initiative to have ministers’ “blood tested for PFAS” directly implies that the concentration of these chemicals in the human population is a key indicator of exposure and risk. A reduction in these levels over time would indicate progress.

Environmental Pollution Indicators

• Concentration of PFAS in the environment: The article refers to the “PFAS pollution crisis” and the contamination of “aquatic environments.” Measuring the levels of PFAS in water, soil, and wildlife would be a direct indicator of progress in reducing environmental contamination.

Policy and Regulatory Indicators

• Implementation of chemical regulations: The status of the “joint proposal to the European Commission to ban the production, sale, and use of almost all PFAS under the EU’s REACH regulation” serves as a crucial indicator. Its successful adoption and enforcement would represent significant progress toward Target 12.4.

Economic Indicators

• Costs associated with pollution: The article provides specific figures that can be used as indicators. These include the “€52-84 billion in yearly health-related costs,” the “€100 billion annually” for “environmental remediation,” and the total “€16 trillion in societal costs.” A reduction in these costs would signify progress in mitigating the impacts of PFAS pollution.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs	Targets	Indicators
SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being	Target 3.9: Substantially reduce deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and pollution.	Concentration of PFAS substances in human blood samples. Yearly health-related costs (€52-84 billion).
SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution and minimizing the release of hazardous chemicals.	Level of PFAS contamination in aquatic environments.
SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production	Target 12.4: Achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle.	Adoption and implementation of the proposed EU ban on PFAS under the REACH regulation. Cost of environmental remediation (€100 billion annually).
SDG 14: Life Below Water	Target 14.1: Prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds.	Measured impact of PFAS on aquatic animals and environments.
SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions.	Progress of the ECHA’s assessment and the EU Commission’s decision on the PFAS ban. Measures to hold polluters accountable for societal costs (€16 trillion).

Source: euronews.com