The water flowing from taps in Wilmington, North Carolina, looked clean, tasted normal, and gave no indication that it carried an invisible threat. For decades the Cape Fear River had provided drinking water to hundreds of thousands of residents in the region. But in 2017 tests revealed what many had feared: high levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), chemicals linked to cancer, immune dysfunction, and reproductive issues, coursing through their water supply.
The contamination had been traced to Chemours, a spinoff of DuPont, which had been releasing PFAS chemicals from its Fayetteville Works plant for years.
The discovery sent shockwaves through the community, triggering lawsuits, emergency water-treatment plans, and a reckoning over how corporations and government regulators had failed to protect public health. But even as residents fought to hold polluters accountable, the company responsible for much of the contamination was tightening its grip on the agencies meant to regulate it.
A former DuPont and American Chemistry Council lobbyist, Nancy Beck, now holds a key position at the Environmental Protection Agency, shaping chemical safety policies that will determine how — or if — PFAS pollution is addressed. In the first days of the second Trump administration, the agency withdrew a proposed rule that would have imposed limits on PFAS discharges, a move that watchdog groups say amounts to giving polluters free rein to continue contaminating water supplies.
Across the Atlantic a similar threat looms. In Bentham, England, residents had unknowingly consumed water laced with a staggering 1.2 million nanograms per liter of PFAS — nearly 12,000 times the legal limit. The contamination originated from a nearby firefighting foam testing facility, a mirror to the industrial discharge in North Carolina.
View this post on Instagram
The crisis in Cape Fear and Bentham reveals the creeping, silent danger of PFAS, which has infiltrated groundwater, rivers, and drinking-water supplies across the world.
And yet, as the Trump administration accelerates its environmental rollbacks, the ability to regulate and mitigate this growing threat in the United States is being systematically dismantled.
“North Carolina is one area that I’m most familiar with where there’s an entire river system that serves hundreds of thousands of people [and] is very badly contaminated with PFAS,” Erik D. Olson, senior strategic director for health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told The Revelator. “A lot of people are drinking that water every day.”
From Miracle to Menace
When first introduced in the 1940s, PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, chemical company Dupont hailed them as “miracles of science.” Their unique properties — resistance to heat, water, and oil — made them indispensable in a variety of industries. From nonstick pans to waterproof clothing, PFAS became embedded in daily life.
But the very quality that made them so useful — resilience — also makes them a nightmare for the environment. They do not break down naturally, persisting in soil, water, and even the human body for decades.
View this post on Instagram
According to Andrea Tokranov, a researcher with the U.S. Geological Survey specializing in PFAS contamination, 71 to 95 million Americans rely on groundwater with detectable PFAS levels before any treatment. She was the lead author of a 2024 study, published in the journal Science, that found that 50 to 66% of people in the United States who rely on groundwater as their primary water source could be exposed to PFAS contamination.
The predictive modeling used in her research highlights a grim reality: millions of Americans may be drinking contaminated water without knowing it.
“This is a fairly large number,” Tokranov told The Revelator. “And the implications are striking.”
Meanwhile recent research from the Keck School of Medicine at USC, led by postdoctoral fellow in population and public health sciences Hailey Hampson, uncovered disturbing insights into PFAS’ effects on human health.
The study, which focused on young adults in Southern California, found that higher PFAS exposure was linked to worsened kidney function over time. The research also established that changes in gut bacteria and related metabolites mediated up to 50% of the kidney function decline.
“We saw that exposure to PFAS was potentially altering the composition of the microbiome, associated with lower levels of beneficial bacteria and lower anti-inflammatory metabolites,” Hampson told The Revelator. This disruption, the researchers suggest, may contribute to long-term kidney damage and other chronic health issues.
The study also highlights a troubling disparity: Hispanic young adults, already at a higher risk for chronic kidney disease, were disproportionately affected by PFAS exposure. The inequities in exposure, driven by geographic and economic factors, mean that the most vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt of the contamination crisis.
But what makes this crisis especially insidious is its uneven burden. Rural and low-income communities, already struggling with limited infrastructure and regulatory oversight, are disproportionately affected. The places with the least political clout are the ones most exposed to this creeping poison.
The situation is compounded by deregulation at the federal level.
Trump, PFAS, and the EPA
During Trump’s first term, the Environmental Protection Agency delayed action on PFAS, weakened oversight, and stalled cleanup efforts. Now, with a second Trump presidency, the rollbacks have already escalated.
A statement from the Environmental Working Group describes the latest policy changes as “a gift to polluters and a disaster for public health.” The group sounded the alarm when Trump’s EPA withdrew a proposed rule that would have limited PFAS discharges from chemical manufacturers into the water supply.
An EPA Instagram post from before the Trump administration took office:
View this post on Instagram
Trump’s executive orders have triggered sweeping environmental rollbacks, dismantling protections for clean air, water, and climate policy. Advocacy groups warn that his actions prioritize polluters over public health, leading to increased pollution, higher energy costs, and worsening climate-related disasters such as wildfires and extreme weather. Without intervention, communities will face greater exposure to harmful pollutants like PFAS.
As the administration continues its rollback of environmental protections, environmental advocates, scientists, and public health experts warn that PFAS contamination will only intensify, disproportionately affecting low-income and rural communities who have fewer resources for mitigation
Olson, who has spent decades advocating for clean water regulations, warned that “the more we continue to make this stuff and spew it out into the environment, the more those cleanup costs just exponentially continue to increase.” He estimates that the public will ultimately bear hundreds of billions of dollars in liability and cleanup costs due to the unchecked spread of PFAS.
Addressing PFAS Beyond Borders
PFAS contamination is not a crisis confined to the United States. It’s a global problem, requiring international collaboration and stricter regulations. While Europe has been at the forefront of addressing the threat, efforts to control PFAS are gaining momentum worldwide.
Megan Kirton, senior project officer at Fidra, a Scotland-based environmental nonprofit, pointed out that while the United Kingdom lags, other European nations are leading the charge in restricting PFAS use.
“The UK government should be doing more to safeguard our water sources from PFAS pollution,” Kirton told The Revelator. “We are seeing stricter PFAS standards across the EU, and some nations like Denmark and Germany are already taking major steps to ban certain PFAS compounds altogether.”
The European Union has proposed a comprehensive PFAS restriction under the REACH regulatory framework, which could lead to a near-total ban on PFAS use in consumer products. Countries such as Germany and Sweden are pushing for aggressive enforcement, with new PFAS limits in drinking water set at 100 nanograms per liter for a sum of 20 PFAS compounds — a much stricter limit than what exists in the United States.
But beyond Europe there’s a growing recognition that PFAS is a transboundary issue, affecting low- and middle-income countries disproportionately. According to Olson, the dumping of PFAS-contaminated waste in developing countries is a major concern.
“We’ve seen this pattern before — where wealthier countries tighten regulations, but companies shift their PFAS waste and contaminated products to lower-income countries that lack strong regulatory frameworks,” Olson told The Revelator. “It’s not just the dumping of waste; it’s also the continued sale of products laden with PFAS in these regions.”
Efforts to create a global coalition against PFAS contamination remain fragmented. While some organizations work under the Stockholm Convention, a global treaty aimed at eliminating persistent organic pollutants, Olson believes international coordination remains weak.
“There are groups that work on implementing the Stockholm Convention, but it’s not as effective as it should be,” he said. “I’d love to see more cooperation between the Global North and activists in developing countries because right now, I don’t think there’s very effective coordination.”
Meanwhile, some countries have begun exploring alternatives to PFAS-based products. The Toxic Use Reduction Institute in the U.S. is actively researching safer replacements, and some governments are investing in “green chemistry” solutions to eliminate reliance on PFAS altogether.
Despite these efforts enforcement remains a major challenge. Loopholes in international trade allow PFAS-laden products to continue circulating in markets with weaker regulations. And as the U.S. continues rolling back environmental protections, other nations are left to grapple with the consequences.
Olson believes that the only viable path forward is a global agreement on PFAS.
“We need a coordinated effort,” he said. “Countries must phase out nonessential uses of PFAS and push for a binding international agreement that holds companies accountable. Otherwise, the problem will just keep shifting from one part of the world to another.”
Fighting Back
For advocates and scientists, the fight against PFAS is far from over.
“We will be in court if we have to be,” Olson told The Revelator. “We don’t like to be in court, but if that’s the only way to do it, we will go to court and try to protect the public against these chemicals.”
Olson and his colleagues at NRDC are working with community activists to intervene in lawsuits challenging EPA’s PFAS regulations, ensuring that industry groups don’t weaken existing protections. He believes that public pressure remains critical.
“I don’t think anybody voted for more toxic chemicals in their drinking water… As the public learns about the extent of the problem, I think they are unhappy with efforts to roll back protections.”
But legal battles alone won’t solve the crisis. Scientists argue that the only way to truly curb PFAS contamination is to shut off the tap.
“We need to stop spewing these things into the environment and making this stuff,” Olson said. “But we still have to figure out a way to destroy these chemicals because right now, we don’t even have a good method for doing that.”
The scientific community is exploring alternative chemistry and biodegradability, with groups like the TURI researching safer replacements. But Olson warns that funding for green chemistry remains woefully inadequate.
“We would love to see the world move towards cleaner chemistry, green chemistry,” he said. “But the research is underfunded. The companies profiting from these chemicals should be the ones paying for their cleanup.”
Efforts are also underway to phase out nonessential uses of PFAS. Some U.S. states have banned PFAS in consumer products like cookware, dental floss, and ski wax. But Olson argues that industry lobbying continues to stall meaningful federal regulation.
“There are all these uses that are absolutely not necessary and that are still contaminating our bodies and our environment,” he said. “We need to move away from PFAS chemistry and towards safer alternatives.”
Despite the challenges, Olson remains optimistic.
“This isn’t going to be easy. But when people stand up and demand action, change happens. We’ve seen it before, and we’ll see it again.”
Previously in The Revelator:
PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ Are Everywhere: Here’s What That Means for Wildlife