THE GOVERNMENT has rejected calls to install PFAS-removal water and air filtration systems in Jersey’s schools and public buildings, saying the Island’s mains water is already safe and additional treatment is “not considered necessary”.
Responding to a petition signed by 1,146 people, ministers said: “Jersey’s mains water is safe, with PFAS levels below UK/EU guidelines. As schools and public buildings use the same monitored supply, PFAS air or water filtration is not considered necessary.”
The petition argued that European research had identified PFAS in school environments and noted that some private schools had already installed filtration systems, calling for the same protection to be extended across the public estate.
In their response issued this week, ministers said Jersey Water already undertook routine sampling across the public water network and that “the levels of PFAS recorded in mains water do not necessitate additional treatment in schools or public buildings”. They added that “any further treatment should be considered only where there is clear evidence of need, likely benefit and a proportionate use of public resources, none of which are currently demonstrated”.
The response also highlighted the drawbacks of installing reverse osmosis systems, saying they would waste significant amounts of water and bring additional environmental, maintenance and financial costs. Ministers further rejected the call for air filtration, stating: “There is currently no recommendation or recognised standard that would support a requirement for such systems in schools and public buildings.”
The government said it would continue “comprehensive monitoring of the public water supply” and consider further measures if evidence showed they were “necessary, effective and proportionate”.
It comes after a panel of scientists who have advised the government on its response to PFAS contamination in the Island published its final report last week.
Environment Minister Mary Le Hegarat said that ministers were now “arranging technical briefings” and would come up with “a considered and evidence-based government response”.
