By Colin Lever
THE Island has been informed by the chief executive of Jersey Water that to remove PFAS chemicals from our existing water supply could cost in the region of £210million and have a profound effect on our water bills, raising them by 70%-100%, thereby pushing up our cost of living. The money is to pay for a reverse osmosis plant that will remove said chemicals.
There are other ways to achieve the same objective at much less of a cost to the public. The cost of buying and installing a reverse osmosis unit in the home would be around £1,000. There are roughly 50,000 dwellings in the Island, so the total cost of installing one in every home would be about £50 million pounds. That is less than a quarter of the price quoted for building a plant at Jersey Water.
In this discussion no mention has been made about where the PFAS is coming from. We are told that these, potentially life threatening, “forever chemicals” are in lots of everyday products from Teflon and stain protection on fabrics to plastic packaging. We cannot avoid them. It is a fait accompli. Or is it? The biggest culprit is intensive agriculture. There are at least four identified types of PFAS used on the land; Fluazinam, Fluopyram and Trifloxystrobin are fungicides. Flufenacet is an herbicide. These are used regularly to grow crops, principally potatoes. When such chemicals are dispersed as a fine spray, as they are when crop spraying, they find their way into the groundwater, streams and eventually our reservoirs.
The EU are actively seeking to ban the production of PTFE. We could just avoid these products but because their PFAS is locked into solids and not ingested, their absorption into the body is less likely. A government document (PFAS scientific advisory panel) indicated that skin absorption of PFAS is around 1.4%. Ingestion absorption is between 66-100% and inhalation, via the soft lining of the lungs, is 100%. They are inhaled and absorbed through the lung lining directly into the blood stream. People who use their own private water supply and live in the countryside are doubly at risk. So, as you cycle, walk or drive around the Island your risk of contamination by PFAS increases.
As quickly as the water flows from the land down to the sea, the concentration of PFAS in the Island is being maintained, year after year. Organic and regenerative farming uses no such chemicals, so the farmers could, in theory, switch to these methods and maybe, eventually reduce PFAS to a negligible level. But it would take years to flush out the contaminants. There is a group of plants, called bio accumulators. Sunflowers are a good example. They have the capability to draw out pollutants such as heavy metals, and PFAS via a process called phytoextraction. They can clean up a field in around two years.
Needless to say, the plants would then have to be disposed of safely, as they will become toxic. What is the cost of a few tonnes of sunflower seeds? The profit from our potato industry is around £28 million per annum and falling. Compare that to the cost of Jersey Water’s proposed installation plant. Where does our government place most value. People’s health or government wealth? Swapping to organic and/or regenerative farming could double the profits from the land, if the government were brave enough to facilitate the change.
The States is a major shareholder in Jersey Water, owning 100% of the ‘A’ ordinary shares and 50% of the ordinary shares, giving it 83.33% voting rights. So one would have thought that the government could just absorb the cost. However, the Companies Act 2006, section 994:
“allows shareholders (minority or majority) to petition the court if the company’s affairs are being conducted in a manner that is “unfairly prejudicial” to their interests. This statutory remedy addresses harm – usually financial – caused by actions like improper share dilution, exclusion from management, or asset misuse”.
So, although dividends from Jersey Water are hardly eye watering, minority shareholders have a right to a premium, meaning that paying shareholders has to come before the Island’s needs. That is why Jersey Water are expecting the government to stump up the cost of paying for the new absorption/filtration plant.
Jersey Water have estimated the cost of this plant, they have also indicated how much this will add to future water bills. The Island has to take their word for this as we do not have an ombudsman to ensure that Islanders get the best value for money.
Colin Lever is a retired teacher and education specialist, SEND consultant, and commentator on educational and community issues. He also contributes musically to Repair Cafés and charity events and is currently writing and producing a comedy sitcom podcast.
