PFAS, the potentially cancer-causing chemicals known as ‘forever chemicals’, have become an increasing concern in home drinking water. Solutions to reduce the risk of exposure range from mandated municipal-level water treatment to under-the-sink home treatment systems.
But are consumers willing to foot the bill for an additional treatment system to help municipalities meet new federal drinking water regulations?
University of New Hampshire researchers set out to answer that question by surveying around 300 public water users across the state.
The Study and Its Findings
Research led by Scott Lemos, senior lecturer of business administration at UNH's Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics, and colleagues, published in the Journal of Water Resource Planning and Management, found that households on public water systems are willing to pay an average of $13.07 a month, or $156.84 annually, to protect themselves from PFAS.
Lemos emphasized the pragmatic importance of this research: "There must be economic research that measures what consumers are willing to pay for environmental remediation, like removal of PFAS from drinking water, as that is a key factor in the cost-benefit calculation for any piece of environmental legislation."
Key Insights and Implications
The amount users say they’re willing to pay wouldn’t add up to cover the cost of upgrades needed to filter PFAS at a system-wide level, according to researchers. Instead, the amount aligns more closely with the costs of home water treatment systems. For example:
-
An under-the-sink reverse osmosis filter for PFAS removal costs approximately $500, and the annual cost, including maintenance, is estimated at $100, lower than the $156.84 households are willing to pay.
Conclusion
-
Targeted, cost-effective solutions can be achieved at the hyperlocal level.
-
The findings suggest that future legislation doesn't always need to focus on system-wide treatments.
This research provides valuable insights into public willingness to pay for PFAS-free water and suggests potential policy directions. As Lemos states, "The challenge with PFAS is that it's an insidious problem. It's everywhere, undetectable by our senses, and its health effects may not appear for decades."
For more details on this study read UNH Today and New Hampshire Public Radio.
