news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

Producers of PFAS chemicals and semiconductors — key components in most electronics — have formed a group dedicated to developing industry-friendly science aimed at blocking regulation of facilities that emit high levels of toxic waste, The Guardian reports.

The group, called the PFAS Coalition, was formed amid a boom in domestic semiconductor production spurred by the Chips and Science Act, which has brought in $825 billion in investments aimed at shoring up the industry.

However, experts worry that if left unchecked, the semiconductor boom will also generate large amounts of toxic waste.The semiconductor industry is a highly polluting industry and a major source of unregulated and unmonitored toxic PFAS (or “forever chemicals”), some of which also convert into powerful greenhouse gases.

“Almost no one is paying attention to the toxic waste generated by industry, even though it’s growing at an alarming rate,” said Lenny Siegel, a member of Chips Communities United.The organization works with industry and government officials to try to enact environmental protections.

“The next time you do a Google search or a chat, the chip you’re using … is produced in a way that releases PFAS into the environment in an irreversible way.”

《Testing data from a US production plant in 2022, seen by the Guardian, showed PFAS levels in some samples of wastewater as high as 78,000ppt. The US Environmental Protection Agency's legal limit for several common compounds is 4ppt.

Public health advocates have increasingly sounded the alarm, calling for simple safeguards to curb semiconductor PFAS waste while pushing the industry to find safer alternatives, but manufacturers are already taking action.

The coalition’s white papers circulated among policymakers argue against regulations. In a document titled “Implications of potential PFAS restrictions,” the coalition acknowledged that PFAS contamination exists but repeatedly stressed that regulations are few and opposed proposals to monitor or restrict the waste.

Finding safer alternatives "may be impossible in some cases," the paper noted, adding that finding replacements would require "setting back technological progress by decades."

The document touts industry efforts to reduce waste and says the industry will continue to voluntarily reduce pollution “if [regulatory] exemptions are granted.”

This seems to have caught the attention of lawmakers:A bipartisan amendment to a defense bill that could be approved would exempt new semiconductor manufacturing projects from environmental review-- The Semiconductor Industry Association trade group, which organized the PFAS Coalition, lobbied for the legislation, federal records show.

The coalition "is a purely technical effort made up of industry experts from around the world working to gather the data needed to develop a science-based industry response to PFAS," Laurie Bowe, executive director of the Semiconductor Industry Association, said in a statement.

Siegel said the CHIPS Act contradicts the Biden administration's comprehensive plan to control PFAS pollution in 2021, and that policymakers have largely ignored the impact on public health.A group of U.S. senators, including Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, recently urged the Commerce Department to impose stricter regulations on chip makers.

"The public has invested more than $50 billion in this industry and they should have a reasonable expectation that they will not be exposed to toxic chemicals ... or breathe polluted air," Markey said.

PFAS are a class of about 15,000 chemicals that are often used to make products water-, stain-, and heat-resistant. They are called "forever chemicals" because they do not break down naturally and are associated withCancer, liver problems, thyroid problems, birth defects, kidney disease, weakened immune system, and other serious health problemsrelated.

Industry documents note that producing semiconductors is a very complex process and PFAS are necessary ingredients used in up to 1,000 steps at the nanoscale, including photolithography and plasma processing.

Manufacturing plants are notorious for releasing a host of dangerous toxins, such as trichloroethylene, arsenic, and chloroform, into nearby drinking water and air. Silicon Valley became the nation’s “Superfund capital” in large part because of the industry’s toxicity problems.When public pressure prompted tech companies to open factories overseas, their production activities led to illnesses among employees in those countries.

“This is not just about PFAS, this is a very dirty industry,” said Arlene Bloom, president of the Green Science Policy Institute, a public health advocacy group.

Still, an amendment to the defense bill drafted by Democratic Senator Mark Kelly would eliminate environmental reviews for semiconductor production projects, under which companies must disclose the type and amount of pollution their proposed facilities would generate.

Environmental groups used the review as an opportunity to urge the Commerce Department to require monitoring and treatment of PFAS wastewater, which is not currently a legal requirement.

“Exempting these plants from regulation seems like a very bad idea,” Bloom added.

'It's a tough challenge'

Chip manufacturing releases PFAS into water and air. Industry uses fluorinated gases, or PFAS gases, in a range of processes, and the toxicological risks of these gases are largely unknown.

However, their impact on the climate is clear—Once in the atmosphere, the fluorinated gases are converted to trifluoroacetic acid, a greenhouse gas with a lifetime of more than 1,000 years.In recent years, researchers have become concerned about increasing levels of trifluoroacetic acid in the air, water, human blood and other environments.

Although industry captures some fluorinated gases, they cannot be destroyed. Sometimes manufacturers try to incinerate or thermally destroy the chemicals, but this usually fails to completely eliminate the compounds and can create dangerous byproducts.

“It’s a difficult challenge because they use so many different kinds of PFAS,” said Ariana Spentzos, a science and policy associate at the Green Science Policy Institute. “Industry says, ‘Incinerate and it’s fine,’ but it turns out … you’re just emitting different PFAS.”

Like other industries, chipmakers have shifted away from using PFOA and PFOS, the two most toxic PFAS compounds, toward smaller alternative chemicals. The PFAS Alliance touted the shift in its white paper as evidence of its environmental stewardship, but a growing body of research suggests that alternative PFAS chemicals are just as dangerous.

Siegel pointed out,PFBS is a common alternative compound found in industrial wastewaters that is relatively less toxic but still more toxic than most other regulated substances.

Some chipmakers ship captured PFAS to hazardous waste facilities. But deep-well injection facilities are prone to leaks, while other shipments end up in incinerators, where the chemicals are simply released into the surrounding environment.

That’s why public health advocates are pushing for alternatives to PFAS rather than waste management, Siegel said.

“They want to ship PFAS to a licensed treatment facility, butMy understanding is that in the absence of more data, they are sending it to communities of color to be burned, which could have toxic byproducts.,” he added.

Chipmakers lobby Congress to repeal regulations

The chipmakers in the PFAS Alliance are primarily part of the Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade group that fights legislative and regulatory battles for producers.

Chipmaker TSMC, a Taiwanese multinational corporation, pays about $160,000 a year in membership fees to the trade group and $50,000 a year as a member of the alliance, documents show.Federal election records detail how the Semiconductor Industry Association used its PFAS Coalition science to highlight the industry’s case for avoiding PFAS regulation, spending about $1.5 million last year lobbying Congress and the Biden administration.

This year, the number is expected to far exceed that, including lobbying for a defense bill to repeal environmental reviews.

“The coalition is vehemently opposed to these measures,” Siegel said, adding that while the industry is working to find alternatives, “they are struggling to figure out what measures can be taken without affecting production.”

The consortium's Beu said in a statement it could not comment on the lobbying practices of individual members.

“We remain committed to providing the tools needed to support industry commitments to tracking and reducing PFAS, the availability of alternatives, and the development of further abatement technologies,” she said.

The coalition also claims in the white paper that removing PFAS from some parts of the production process would take years or even decades, and that it might be impossible to remove some chemicals.

That may be the case, Sponzos said, "but they can't just sit back and do nothing" and should instead step up research and development of alternatives.She noted that in 2022, UMass will work with high-tech materials manufacturer Transene to quickly and successfully develop alternatives to PFAS in semiconductor etching processes.

“They really had to innovate and create safer alternatives to PFAS … but this is a great example of it taking a lot less time than they expected,” Spentzos said.