Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Advocates raise alarm over Pfas pollution from data centers amid AI boom

News Feed
Saturday, October 4, 2025

Data centers’ electricity demands have been accused of delaying the US’s transition to clean energy and requiring fossil fuel plants to stay online, while their high level of water consumption has also raised alarm. Now public health advocates fear another environmental problem could be linked to them – Pfas “forever chemical” pollution.Big tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon often need data centers to store servers and networking equipment that process the world’s digital traffic, and the artificial intelligence boom is driving demand for more facilities.Advocates are particularly concerned over the facilities’ use of Pfas gas, or f-gas, which can be potent greenhouse gases, and may mean data centers’ climate impact is worse than previously thought. Other f-gases turn into a type of dangerous compound that is rapidly accumulating across the globe.No testing for Pfas air or water pollution has yet been done, and companies are not required to report the volume of chemicals they use or discharge. But some environmental groups are starting to push for state legislation that would require more reporting.Advocates’ concern increased in mid-September when the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would fast-track review of new Pfas and other chemicals used by data centers. The data center industry has said the Pfas it uses causes minimal pollution, but advocates disagree.“We know there are Pfas in these centers and all of that has to go somewhere,” said Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, an attorney with the Earthjustice non-profit, which is monitoring Pfas use in data centers. “This issue has been dangerously understudied as we have been building out data centers, and there’s not adequate information on what the long term impacts will be.”Pfas are a class of about 16,000 chemicals most frequently used to make products water-, stain- and grease-resistant. The compounds have been linked to cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, high cholesterol, kidney disease and a range of other serious health problems. They are dubbed “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down in the environment.Environmental advocates say the data centers increase Pfas pollution directly and indirectly. The chemicals are needed in the centers’ operations – such as its cooling equipment – which almost certainly leads to some on-site pollution. Meanwhile, Pfas used in the equipment housed in the centers must be disposed of, which is difficult because the chemicals cannot be fully destroyed. Meanwhile, a large quantity of Pfas are used to produce the semiconductors housed in data centers, which will increase pollution around supporting manufacturing plants.The revelations come as the US seeks an edge over China as the industry leader in AI, and there has been little political interest in reining in the centers’ pollution.“The US and China are racing to see who can destroy the environment most quickly,” said Lenny Siegel, a member of Chips Communities United, a group working with industry and administration officials to try to implement environmental safeguards. “If we had a sensible approach to these things then someone would have to present some answers before they develop and use these systems.”Two kinds of cooling systems are used to prevent the semiconductors and other electronic equipment stored in data centers from overheating. Water cooling systems require huge volumes of water, and chemicals like nitrates, disinfectants, azoles and other compounds are potentially added and discharged in the environment.Many centers are now switching to a “two phase” system that uses f-gas as a refrigerant coolant that is run through copper tubing. In this scenario, f-gas is not intentionally released during use, though there may be leaks, and it must be disposed of at the end of its life.The data center industry has claimed that f-gas that escapes is not a threat because, once in the air, it turns into a compound called Tfa. Tfa is considered a Pfas in most of the world, but not the US. Recent research has found it is more toxic than previously thought, and may impact reproductive systems similar to other Pfas.Researchers in recent years have been alarmed by the ever-growing level of Tfa in the air, water, human blood and elsewhere in the environment. Meanwhile, some f-gases are potent greenhouse gases that can remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years. But f-gasses are lucrative for industry: about 60% of all Pfas manufactured from 2019 to 2022 were f-gas.Different Pfas are also applied to data centers’ cables, piping and electronic equipment. The chemicals are volatile, meaning they can simply move into the air from the equipment.Meanwhile, any of that equipment or Pfas waste that is intentionally removed from data centers either ends up in landfills, where it can pollute local waters, or is incinerated, according to industry documents. But incineration does not fully destroy Pfas compounds – it breaks them into smaller pieces that are still Pfas, or other byproducts with unknown health risks.Data centers are a “huge generator of electronic waste, with frequent upgrades to new equipment”, said Mike Belliveau, the founder of the Bend the Curve non-profit who has lobbied on toxic chemical legislation.“The processing and disposal of electronic waste is a major source of global harm,” he added.F-gas producer Chemours is using the boom in AI and data centers as justification for increasing production at its Parkersburg, West Virginia, and Fayetteville, North Carolina, plants.Both plants have been accused of polluting their regions’ water, soil and air, and poisoning drinking water. Residents in both regions say they’ve been sickened by Chemours’s pollution. Chemours’s expansion plans have been met with opposition over fears that its pollution will also increase.A new coalition of Minnesota environmental groups is working with state lawmakers to develop legislation that would require companies to report on their use of Pfas and other chemicals in the cooling process.Legislators in state hearings have asked tech companies which chemicals are used in data centers and how they are disposed of, but “the answers are not satisfactory”, said Avonna Starck, Minnesota state director for Clean Water Action, which is spearheading the effort.“There’s so much you just don’t know and we’re at the whim of these big corporations and what they’re willing to tell us,” Starck said. “We think the community has a right to know these things.”

Tech companies’ use of Pfas gas at facilities may mean data centers’ climate impact is worse than previously thoughtData centers’ electricity demands have been accused of delaying the US’s transition to clean energy and requiring fossil fuel plants to stay online, while their high level of water consumption has also raised alarm. Now public health advocates fear another environmental problem could be linked to them – Pfas “forever chemical” pollution.Big tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon often need data centers to store servers and networking equipment that process the world’s digital traffic, and the artificial intelligence boom is driving demand for more facilities. Continue reading...

Data centers’ electricity demands have been accused of delaying the US’s transition to clean energy and requiring fossil fuel plants to stay online, while their high level of water consumption has also raised alarm. Now public health advocates fear another environmental problem could be linked to them – Pfas “forever chemical” pollution.

Big tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon often need data centers to store servers and networking equipment that process the world’s digital traffic, and the artificial intelligence boom is driving demand for more facilities.

Advocates are particularly concerned over the facilities’ use of Pfas gas, or f-gas, which can be potent greenhouse gases, and may mean data centers’ climate impact is worse than previously thought. Other f-gases turn into a type of dangerous compound that is rapidly accumulating across the globe.

No testing for Pfas air or water pollution has yet been done, and companies are not required to report the volume of chemicals they use or discharge. But some environmental groups are starting to push for state legislation that would require more reporting.

Advocates’ concern increased in mid-September when the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would fast-track review of new Pfas and other chemicals used by data centers. The data center industry has said the Pfas it uses causes minimal pollution, but advocates disagree.

“We know there are Pfas in these centers and all of that has to go somewhere,” said Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, an attorney with the Earthjustice non-profit, which is monitoring Pfas use in data centers. “This issue has been dangerously understudied as we have been building out data centers, and there’s not adequate information on what the long term impacts will be.”

Pfas are a class of about 16,000 chemicals most frequently used to make products water-, stain- and grease-resistant. The compounds have been linked to cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, high cholesterol, kidney disease and a range of other serious health problems. They are dubbed “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down in the environment.

Environmental advocates say the data centers increase Pfas pollution directly and indirectly. The chemicals are needed in the centers’ operations – such as its cooling equipment – which almost certainly leads to some on-site pollution. Meanwhile, Pfas used in the equipment housed in the centers must be disposed of, which is difficult because the chemicals cannot be fully destroyed. Meanwhile, a large quantity of Pfas are used to produce the semiconductors housed in data centers, which will increase pollution around supporting manufacturing plants.

The revelations come as the US seeks an edge over China as the industry leader in AI, and there has been little political interest in reining in the centers’ pollution.

“The US and China are racing to see who can destroy the environment most quickly,” said Lenny Siegel, a member of Chips Communities United, a group working with industry and administration officials to try to implement environmental safeguards. “If we had a sensible approach to these things then someone would have to present some answers before they develop and use these systems.”

Two kinds of cooling systems are used to prevent the semiconductors and other electronic equipment stored in data centers from overheating. Water cooling systems require huge volumes of water, and chemicals like nitrates, disinfectants, azoles and other compounds are potentially added and discharged in the environment.

Many centers are now switching to a “two phase” system that uses f-gas as a refrigerant coolant that is run through copper tubing. In this scenario, f-gas is not intentionally released during use, though there may be leaks, and it must be disposed of at the end of its life.

The data center industry has claimed that f-gas that escapes is not a threat because, once in the air, it turns into a compound called Tfa. Tfa is considered a Pfas in most of the world, but not the US. Recent research has found it is more toxic than previously thought, and may impact reproductive systems similar to other Pfas.

Researchers in recent years have been alarmed by the ever-growing level of Tfa in the air, water, human blood and elsewhere in the environment. Meanwhile, some f-gases are potent greenhouse gases that can remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years. But f-gasses are lucrative for industry: about 60% of all Pfas manufactured from 2019 to 2022 were f-gas.

Different Pfas are also applied to data centers’ cables, piping and electronic equipment. The chemicals are volatile, meaning they can simply move into the air from the equipment.

Meanwhile, any of that equipment or Pfas waste that is intentionally removed from data centers either ends up in landfills, where it can pollute local waters, or is incinerated, according to industry documents. But incineration does not fully destroy Pfas compounds – it breaks them into smaller pieces that are still Pfas, or other byproducts with unknown health risks.

Data centers are a “huge generator of electronic waste, with frequent upgrades to new equipment”, said Mike Belliveau, the founder of the Bend the Curve non-profit who has lobbied on toxic chemical legislation.

“The processing and disposal of electronic waste is a major source of global harm,” he added.

F-gas producer Chemours is using the boom in AI and data centers as justification for increasing production at its Parkersburg, West Virginia, and Fayetteville, North Carolina, plants.

Both plants have been accused of polluting their regions’ water, soil and air, and poisoning drinking water. Residents in both regions say they’ve been sickened by Chemours’s pollution. Chemours’s expansion plans have been met with opposition over fears that its pollution will also increase.

A new coalition of Minnesota environmental groups is working with state lawmakers to develop legislation that would require companies to report on their use of Pfas and other chemicals in the cooling process.

Legislators in state hearings have asked tech companies which chemicals are used in data centers and how they are disposed of, but “the answers are not satisfactory”, said Avonna Starck, Minnesota state director for Clean Water Action, which is spearheading the effort.

“There’s so much you just don’t know and we’re at the whim of these big corporations and what they’re willing to tell us,” Starck said. “We think the community has a right to know these things.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

EPA urged to classify abortion drugs as pollutants

It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the drug.

(NewsNation) — Anti-abortion group Students for Life of America is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to add abortion drug mifepristone to its list of water contaminants. It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the abortion drug. “The EPA has the regulatory authority and humane responsibility to determine the extent of abortion water pollution, caused by the reckless and negligent policies pushed by past administrations through the [Food and Drug Administration],” Kristan Hawkins, president of SFLA, said in a release. “Take the word ‘abortion’ out of it and ask, should chemically tainted blood and placenta tissue, along with human remains, be flushed by the tons into America’s waterways? And since the federal government set that up, shouldn’t we know what’s in our water?” she added. In 2025, lawmakers from seven states introduced bills, none of which passed, to either order environmental studies on the effects of mifepristone in water or to enact environmental regulations for the drug. EPA’s Office of Water leaders met with Politico in November, with its press secretary Brigit Hirsch telling the outlet it “takes the issue of pharmaceuticals in our water systems seriously and employs a rigorous, science-based approach to protect human health and the environment.” “As always, EPA encourages all stakeholders invested in clean and safe drinking water to review the proposals and submit comments,” Hirsch added. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump’s EPA' in 2025: A Fossil Fuel-Friendly Approach to Deregulation

The Trump administration has reshaped the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing pollution limits and promoting fossil fuels

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has transformed the Environmental Protection Agency in its first year, cutting federal limits on air and water pollution and promoting fossil fuels, a metamorphosis that clashes with the agency’s historic mission to protect human health and the environment.The administration says its actions will “unleash” the American economy, but environmentalists say the agency’s abrupt change in focus threatens to unravel years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives that could be hard or impossible to reverse.“It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era” when the agency didn’t exist, said historian Douglas Brinkley.Zeldin has argued the EPA can protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. He announced “five pillars” to guide EPA’s work; four were economic goals, including energy dominance — Trump’s shorthand for more fossil fuels — and boosting the auto industry.Zeldin, a former New York congressman who had a record as a moderate Republican on some environmental issues, said his views on climate change have evolved. Many federal and state climate goals are unattainable in the near future — and come at huge cost, he said.“We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family” because of policies aimed at “saving the planet,” he told reporters at EPA headquarters in early December.But scientists and experts say the EPA's new direction comes at a cost to public health, and would lead to far more pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead and especially tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs. They also note higher emissions of greenhouse gases will worsen atmospheric warming that is driving more frequent, costly and deadly extreme weather.Christine Todd Whitman, a Republican who led the EPA for several years under President George W. Bush, said watching Zeldin attack laws protecting air and water has been “just depressing.” “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she said.The EPA was launched under Nixon in 1970 with pollution disrupting American life, some cities suffocating in smog and some rivers turned into wastelands by industrial chemicals. Congress passed laws then that remain foundational for protecting water, air and endangered species.The agency's aggressiveness has always seesawed depending on who occupies the White House. Former President Joe Biden's administration boosted renewable energy and electric vehicles, tightened motor-vehicle emissions and proposed greenhouse gas limits on coal-fired power plants and oil and gas wells. Industry groups called rules overly burdensome and said the power plant rule would force many aging plants to shut down. In response, many businesses shifted resources to meet the more stringent rules that are now being undone.“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said. Zeldin's list of targets is long Much of EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation road map that argued the agency should gut staffing, cut regulations and end what it called a war on coal on other fossil fuels.“A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period. So that’s why deregulating them looks like EPA is making major changes,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of Heritage's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment.But Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, said the regulations Zeldin has targeted “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness … bad things that would not happen because of these rules.”Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden who now works at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the revamped EPA: “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”Zeldin also has shrunk EPA staffing by about 20% to levels last seen in the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called staff cuts “devastating.” He cited the dismantling of research and development offices at labs across the country and the firing of employees who signed a letter of dissent opposing EPA cuts. Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff Many of Zeldin's changes aren't in effect yet. It takes time to propose new rules, get public input and finalize rollbacks. It's much faster to cut grants and ease up on enforcement, and Trump's EPA is doing both. The number of new civil environmental actions is roughly one-fifth what it was in the first eight months of the Biden administration, according to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” said Leif Fredrickson, visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.Hirsch said the number of legal filings isn't the best way to judge enforcement because they require work outside of the EPA and can bog staff down with burdensome legal agreements. She said the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible” and not making demands beyond what the law requires.EPA's cuts have been especially hard on climate change programs and environmental justice, the effort to address chronic pollution that typically is worse in minority and poor communities. Both were Biden priorities. Zeldin dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects that fell under the “diversity, equity and inclusion” umbrella, a Trump administration target.He also spiked a $20 billion “green bank” set up under Biden’s landmark climate law to fund qualifying clean energy projects. Zeldin argued the fund was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations with little oversight — allegations a federal judge rejected. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert and former director of the Environmental Law School at Vermont Law & Graduate School, said the EPA's shift under Trump left him with little optimism for what he called “the two most awful crises in the 21st century” — biodiversity loss and climate disruption.“I don’t see any hope for either one,” he said. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.