USF’s water has elevated chemical levels but still meets safety standards – usforacle.com

Report on Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in University of South Florida (USF) Drinking Water

Executive Summary

A recent national report indicates that the drinking water at the University of South Florida (USF) Tampa campus contains Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) at levels six times higher than recommended limits. These persistent, artificial chemicals, known as “forever chemicals,” pose significant challenges to achieving key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning public health, clean water, and sustainable communities. While the university maintains that its water supply complies with all current state and federal safety regulations, the findings highlight a critical gap between existing standards and emerging health advisories, directly impacting the well-being of the campus community and the environmental integrity of its resources.

Key Findings and Analysis

• Contamination Levels: According to a USA Today report, PFAS concentrations in the USF Tampa campus drinking water are six times the recommended health advisory limit.
• Water Source: The campus water is primarily sourced from five on-campus underground wells that draw from the Florida Aquifer. The water undergoes disinfection with chlorine and anti-corrosion treatment, which are not effective for removing PFAS.
• Regulatory Status: There are currently no legally enforceable federal or state drinking water standards for PFAS. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is studying the chemicals to determine if regulation is warranted. USF participates in the EPA’s Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule to contribute data for future regulatory decisions.
• Regional Context: The issue of PFAS contamination is not isolated to USF. Other water systems in the Tampa Bay area, including Tarpon Springs and Holiday, have reported even higher levels, indicating a widespread environmental challenge that impedes regional progress toward SDG 6.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

1. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The presence of persistent chemical pollutants directly compromises the safety of the water supply (Target 6.1) and fails to address the reduction of pollution from hazardous chemicals (Target 6.3). The difficulty in removing PFAS underscores the technological and infrastructural challenges in ensuring clean water for all.
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: PFAS exposure is linked to adverse health effects, including liver damage, immune system suppression, and developmental issues. The contamination represents a direct threat to community health, conflicting with the objective of Target 3.9 to substantially reduce illnesses from water pollution and contamination.
3. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The contamination is a direct result of industrial production and consumption patterns that utilize and release “forever chemicals.” This situation highlights the urgent need for the environmentally sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle to minimize their release into the environment, as called for in Target 12.4.
4. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: A fundamental component of a sustainable community is access to safe and reliable basic services. Contaminated drinking water undermines the safety and resilience of the campus community, challenging the principles of Target 11.6 concerning the reduction of the adverse environmental impact of cities and human settlements.

Expert Commentary and Recommendations

According to Qiong Zhang, a professor of civil and environmental engineering, the reported levels are concerning, though official laboratory results and sampling methods should be reviewed for verification. Professor Zhang highlighted the significant technical challenges associated with PFAS remediation, as the chemicals are difficult to remove from water and can only be destroyed at very high temperatures. The disposal of contaminated filter materials presents a further environmental problem.

In alignment with achieving the SDGs, the following actions are recommended:

• Enhanced Monitoring and Transparency: USF should continue its water testing protocols and maintain full transparency with the campus community regarding the results and associated health risks.
• Exploration of Treatment Technologies: The university should investigate and invest in advanced treatment options capable of removing PFAS from the water supply, thereby making direct progress toward SDG 6.
• Strengthened Partnerships: Continued collaboration with regulatory bodies like the EPA is crucial for developing science-based regulations. This aligns with SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), fostering cooperation between academia and government to address complex environmental challenges.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

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

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article directly addresses health concerns related to water contamination. It discusses the presence of “forever chemicals” (PFAS) in drinking water and mentions potential health risks such as “developmental issues, immune system suppression and effects on the liver,” as cited by a professor and the EPA. This connects the issue to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The core subject of the article is the quality of drinking water on the USF Tampa campus. It highlights that the water contains PFAS at levels “six times the recommended limit.” The discussion revolves around the source of the water (Florida Aquifer), its testing, treatment, and the challenges in removing these contaminants, which are all central to the goal of ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water.

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

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

1. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
   • The article focuses on the contamination of drinking water by hazardous perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It explicitly links these chemicals to potential adverse health effects, including “liver damage, developmental issues and weakened immune systems,” thereby directly addressing the aim of this target to reduce illness from water pollution.

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

1. Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
   • The article questions the safety of the drinking water provided to the USF campus community. Although the water currently “meets all current state and federal safety requirements,” the presence of PFAS at six times the recommended level raises significant concerns about whether it is truly “safe” for consumption, which is the central theme of this target.
2. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials…
   • The presence of PFAS, which are described as artificial “forever chemicals,” in the campus water drawn from the Florida Aquifer is a clear example of water quality degradation due to pollution by hazardous chemicals. The article discusses the difficulty of removing these chemicals, which relates directly to the challenge of improving water quality as outlined in this target.

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

Indicators for SDG 3 and SDG 6

• Concentration of PFAS in drinking water: The article provides specific, quantifiable data that can be used as an indicator. It states that the PFAS level in USF’s drinking water is “six times higher than the recommended limit.” It also provides comparative data for other locations, such as “nine times the recommended limit” in Tarpon Springs and “19 times the limit” in Holiday. This measurement is a direct indicator of water pollution (Target 6.3) and exposure to hazardous chemicals (Target 3.9).
• Water Quality Reports: The article mentions “USF’s 2024 Water Quality Report.” These reports serve as a formal indicator and data source for assessing the safety and quality of the drinking water supply, which is crucial for monitoring progress towards safe drinking water access (Target 6.1).
• Water Testing and Monitoring Programs: The article notes that USF participates in the EPA’s “Fifth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule,” which includes “additional testing for 29 PFAS compounds.” The implementation and results of such monitoring programs are an indicator of the effort to identify and manage hazardous substances in the water supply, contributing to both Target 3.9 and Target 6.3.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: usforacle.com