Pentagon alarmed by Biden’s plan to raise household water expenses by $10,000
White House Proposal Could Cost Average Household Up to $10,000 in Water Costs
Without any resistance from Congress, the White House is moving forward with a regulatory proposal that has the potential to significantly impact American households. This latest forefront of President Joe Biden’s green agenda has not only raised concerns within his own campaign but has also caused panic within the Pentagon.
The Global Perspective on PFAS
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission recommend limiting polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as ”forever plastics,” to 100 parts per trillion (ppt). Japan and Sweden have set their limits at 50 ppt and 90 ppt, respectively. Canada aims to lower its limit to 30 ppt, while Denmark is working towards banning PFAS in specific sectors.
The EPA’s Proposed Standards
Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the United States is proposing to reduce the advisory limit for two prevalent types of PFAS, PFOA and PFOS, from 70 ppt to a hard limit of 4 ppt for all drinking water. This would decrease the Obama administration’s suggested limit by 94.3% and be significantly lower than the standards set by other countries.
The Financial and National Security Implications
A report commissioned by the American Water Works Association estimates that the EPA’s proposed standards could increase water costs for households by anywhere from $80 to $11,150 per year. The AWWA argues that the new standards would result in $3.8 billion in annual costs, contrary to the EPA’s estimate of $1 billion.
However, the Pentagon warns that it’s not just household budgets that are at risk. The Department of Defense relies on PFAS for various technologies and consumable items crucial to military readiness and sustainment. Losing access to PFAS due to strict regulations or market contractions would greatly impact national security and the DoD’s ability to fulfill its mission.
The Extent of PFAS Contamination
The DoD has identified PFAS in its infrastructure related to information technology, critical manufacturing, healthcare, renewable energy, and transportation. The Pentagon estimates that it would require $39 billion to clean up PFAS contamination beyond the Obama-era recommendation. Currently, 63 military bases have nearly 3,000 private wells considered contaminated, with PFOS and PFOA levels exceeding the EPA’s proposed standards by 2,500 times.
The Unprecedented Stringency of the Proposed Standards
Comparatively, the EPA limits arsenic in water at 10 parts per billion and cyanide at 200 parts per billion. The proposed PFAS standards are significantly more stringent, requiring taxpayers to spend billions of dollars to reduce the prevalence of these plastics to a fraction of a percent of what is allowed for literal poisons.
The White House Office of Regulatory Affairs is currently reviewing the final rule. If the standards are approved before the Congressional Review Act deadline of May 22, they will become law without any input from lawmakers.
What opportunities exist for individuals, organizations, and industries to provide input and suggest alternatives to the White House’s proposal on Antly limits
Antly stricter than international standards. The EPA argues that the current limit is not protective enough and that a lower limit is necessary to ensure the safety of drinking water.
Implications for American Households
The White House’s proposal, if implemented, could have a profound financial impact on American households. According to estimates, the cost of treating drinking water to meet the new limit could range from $2,000 to $10,000 per household annually. This substantial increase in water costs could place a significant burden on average American families, particularly those already struggling with financial challenges.
Furthermore, the proposed standards would require extensive upgrades and investments in water treatment infrastructure across the country. This additional expense would likely be passed on to consumers through higher water bills. Small communities and rural areas, with limited resources, may face even greater difficulties in meeting these new requirements.
The potential financial strain on households is a major concern, with critics arguing that the proposed limit is overly strict and unaffordable for most Americans. As the country slowly emerges from the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, adding an additional financial burden on families is seen by many as ill-timed and unfair.
Military Concerns
In addition to the financial implications, the Pentagon has expressed concern over the proposed limits. The military relies heavily on firefighting foams containing PFAS for training exercises and emergency responses. The strict regulations on PFAS could hamper the military’s ability to effectively respond to emergencies and protect national security. The Pentagon is currently exploring alternative firefighting foams but acknowledges that finding a viable substitute is challenging.
The Path Forward
The White House’s proposal is currently open for public comment, providing an opportunity for concerned individuals, organizations, and industries to voice their opinions and propose alternatives. In the face of mounting criticism, the Biden administration may consider revising the proposed limits to strike a balance between protecting public health and minimizing financial and operational burdens.
As the debate continues, it is crucial to find a solution that considers both the safety of drinking water and the economic well-being of American households. Striking the right balance is key to ensure that the goals of the green agenda are achieved without placing an unreasonable burden on everyday Americans. With collaboration and careful consideration, it is possible to find a path forward that protects both the environment and the pocketbooks of American families.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...