×

Regulation should be based on clear evidence

When it comes to environmental regulation, should the notion that something “could” cause harm ever be a reasonable standard? Shouldn’t regulators be able to point to actual problems resulting from a perceived contaminant?

And given that such oversight can subsequently lead to massive fines and lawsuits against individuals or businesses, shouldn’t society favor the rights of the accused over scary supposition?

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says PFCs (perfluorochemicals) could pose long-term health risks to human or the environment. It noted this in 2002. About 15 years later, it lowered the recommended maximum levels of PCF concentrations for drinking water, sowing panic.

The state of Minnesota, for instance, filed a massive lawsuit against 3M, seeking $5 billion. That suit was settled this week for $850 million.

3M denies any wrongdoing, and the settlement does not change this. The company began producing PFCs in the 1950s, and legally disposed of them in landfills for decades. The chemicals were used in popular products like Scotchguard, fire retardants, paints and non-stick cookware. The company stopped making PFCs in 2002, after negotiating a deal with the EPA.

In 2007, 3M also reached a deal with the state to spend millions to “clean up” landfills and provide “clean” drinking water to affected communities. But in 2010, Minnesota sued 3M anyway.

3M to this day maintains there is no known PFC-related health issue.

Many cities are scrambling to “clean up” their water under the EPA’s 2016 recommended PFC guidelines. About two dozen lawsuits have popped up around the country against 3M because of PFCs.

We do not have a problem with sensible environmental regulation. We have a problem with its rarity. It would be nice to see solid science and subsequent problem-solving be the central tenets of environmental oversight. As opposed to punitive blame games led by government.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

[vivafbcomment]

Starting at $4.65/week.

Subscribe Today