4 Comments

Good one. Its all about exposure risk! You can blame Maine for creating the intentionally added PFAS into products maelstrom.

The glossier the paint the more PFAS it has in it too. But think about the exposure risk? They literally use it to cover lead-based paint. What you do not want to do is put it in an incinerator!

The only technology that has been shown to effectively destroy PFAS is pyrolysis with flameless thermal oxidation (FLOX) - it literally atomizes it, dioxins too. PYREG is leading the way in managing the biosolids problem. What is next? Other solids wastes?

Expand full comment

Or is the issue that it's bio-accumluative and this is just one more additional place that PFAS lives? Although I wouldn't be surprised that PFAS isn't in the material and it's more an issue of manufacturers using some type of PFAS mold release in their injection molding. While these studies seem silly, for things that our body doesn't get rid of, I think that's the general worry.

Expand full comment

Studies like this might be distracting...while fluorochemicals do disintegrate via volatilization, our focus should be on known sources of ingestion...food including fish, eggs, meat, and dairy via animal feeds and soil; food containers and wrappers; and water supply- all in need of better surveillance and regulation

Expand full comment

You ?

Expand full comment