PFAS – Poisoned for Eternity? (documentary film review)

PFAS: Poisoned for Eternity?
A Film Written and Directed by Roland Schenke

Presented by Lena Ganschow; camera by Paul-Georg Busse and Julian Kiesche; edited by Nikola Hauswald; music consultant: Robert Ammer

Produced by Bayerischer Rundfunk for Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Released in United States July 2024, Running time 42 minutes

Roland Schenke’s documentary PFAS: Poisoned for Eternity? provides a recent, solid examination of the PFAS contamination crisis. Through interviews with scientists, industry experts and affected farmers, the film explores how these synthetic “forever chemicals”–widely used in products such as nonstick cookware, firefighting foams and waterproof clothing–have infiltrated soil, water and everyday products. The documentary explains the serious health risks associated with PFAS exposure, traces PFAS’ environmental impact, examines legal efforts to hold companies accountable for their PFAS pollution, and highlights both the challenges of cleaning up PFAS contamination and the search for alternatives.

The acronym PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These chemicals have long been used in a vast array of industrial and consumer products due to their resistance to heat, water and oil. Unfortunately, they remain indefinitely in the environment and the human body, posing significant environmental and human health risks. They have been linked to increased risks of cancer, immune system dysfunction and thyroid disease, among other serious health issues. Efforts are underway to phase them out, but progress is slowed by vested interests and the fact that for some applications, PFAS are currently irreplaceable.

Guiding us through the troubling and complex world of PFAS is German television journalist Lena Ganschow, known for her in-depth environmental reporting and investigative work. Ganschow is excellent. She presents a wide range of perspectives and asks her subjects probing questions that continually drive the film deeper into the complexities of the issue. She draws us in with her ability to convey scientific data in a clear and accessible way and her personal story of coming to grips with the unsettling discovery of elevated PFAS levels in her own body. And she brings us face to face with those on the frontlines of the PFAS crisis through compelling on-the-ground perspectives from researchers, industry workers and cleanup teams.

In the film’s opening scenes, Ganschow visits two farms in an area of Germany severely impacted by PFAS. One farmer has already lost three hectares of crops to PFAS contamination and can no longer grow one of his key staples, strawberries, which could spell the end of his farm. We then meet Martin Scheringer, a PFAS expert at the Swiss research institution ETH Zurich, who explains that PFAS’ persistence and tendency to “leak” from products means they are spread far and wide by wind and water without breaking down. Worse still, there’s no registry of PFAS-containing products and manufacturers aren’t required to disclose their presence, making it difficult to identify which products do and don’t contain them without sifting through patents or industry documents.

We get a sense of the daunting challenge of PFAS remediation during a scene in which Ganschow visits a site where heavy machinery is being used to wash PFAS from 700,000 to 800,000 tons of contaminated soil. While this process is technically feasible, it is prohibitively expensive and can’t be implemented universally; for example, it is ineffective in claylike soils that clump together.

We’re then hit with even more bad news, including a list of PFAS-containing everyday products we’ve long been putting into our bodies–things like toothpaste, dental floss and even medical implants. Moreover, we learn how PFAS are being spread through the water cycle, leaching from contaminated soil into the water table, and eventually making their way into farms and the crops we eat. Facts like these prompt Ganschow to conclude, “We need not just an energy transition, but a chemicals transition, too: another way of looking at chemical products and thinking about what we’re using them for and in what amounts.”

A ray of hope emerges as Ganschow tells us about a radical new initiative to do just that: a proposed EU ban on the production, marketing and use of all PFAS throughout Europe. If enacted, this would mark the first time an entire category of substances, rather than just a single substance, has been banned. However, there are concerns about the potential economic impacts on industries reliant on PFAS and the challenges of finding suitable PFAS alternatives. The European Chemicals Agency is currently reviewing the proposal, and the final decision will rest with the European Commission.

The film highlights one major company that is already shifting away from PFAS. 3M, one of the chief manufacturers of PFAS-containing products—including adhesives, laminates and window films—has announced plans to phase out PFAS by the end of 2025. This decision comes in the wake of a substantial financial judgment against the company linked to lawsuits over PFAS contamination in drinking water. The documentary reasonably suggests 3M’s move away from PFAS is driven not by ethical considerations but by a desire to avoid further litigation and financial liability that could threaten its future.

We learn of some exciting advancements in the search for PFAS alternatives when Ganschow visits a company developing non-PFAS-containing fuel cells and an institute researching the use of natural refrigerants like propane, rather than PFAS, in heat pumps. The fuel cell company has developed a viable PFAS alternative and expects it to be market-ready by 2026, though scaling production remains a challenge.

While removing existing PFAS from the environment may still pose a daunting challenge, developments like these provide hope that we can at least curtail future PFAS contamination.

Ganschow also speaks with those opposed to banning PFAS. She visits a plant run by a 3M subsidiary in Bavaria that is about to be shut down and talks with a spokesman from a lobby group that wants it to stay open. The spokesman explains that closing the plant will lead to significant job losses and hurt European industry. He also argues that modern industrial society is so reliant on PFAS that a successful energy transition can’t occur without them.

While most of the film’s experts disagree with this view, Scheringer admits that PFAS are essential for certain applications, such as dialysis machines and heart valves. This is why he supports a near-total ban on PFAS, with exceptions for these vital uses.

PFAS – Poisoned for Eternity? deftly illuminates one of today’s most troubling environmental issues. It is thorough and balanced in its presentation of the facts, cites credible firsthand sources, and breaks down complex scientific and regulatory issues in a way that is both accessible and thought-provoking. Its narrative is well paced, its cinematography is visually interesting and engaging, and its perspective is both personal and universal.