The Australian government has filed a lawsuit against US industrial giant 3M over the contamination of waterways with ‘forever chemicals’ from its firefighting foam. The case, launched in the Federal Court of Australia, alleges that 3M knew for decades about the health and environmental risks of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) but continued to market them without warning.
This action puts UK regulators under the microscope. The Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive have been monitoring the issue closely, with calls growing for stricter controls on PFAS in everything from non-stick pans to waterproof clothing. For communities in the North of England, where chemical plants and military bases have used these foams for years, the news is a stark reminder of the battle they face.
The lawsuit centres on aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) used at airports and defence sites. In Australia, PFAS contamination has been found at 90 sites including military bases and firefighting training grounds. One study detected elevated rates of testicular cancer among firefighters in Queensland. The Australian government seeks compensation for cleanup costs and natural resource damage.
3M has defended its record, stating it acted responsibly and will contest the allegations. But for campaigners in the UK, the lawsuit is a watershed. According to Dr. Anna Watson of the Wildlife and Countryside Link, ‘The chemical industry has known about the dangers of PFAS for over 50 years. The Australian case could open the floodgates for similar actions here.’
In the UK, PFAS contamination has been found in drinking water supplies in areas like the North West and Yorkshire. The government’s Drinking Water Inspectorate last year found ‘very low’ levels of PFAS in only 0.4% of tests, but campaigners argue the limits are too high. The UK has not yet banned PFAS in firefighting foam, though the European Union is moving towards a blanket ban by 2025.
For firefighters, the issue is personal. The Fire Brigades Union has long campaigned for safer alternatives. ‘Our members are being exposed to deadly chemicals every day,’ says union official Ben Selby. ‘The Australian lawsuit is a reminder that we need urgent action here, not just promises.’
The cost of cleanup is enormous. In the US, 3M has agreed to pay $10.3 billion to settle lawsuits from water suppliers. The Australian case seeks damages for the federal government and potentially states. In the UK, a similar case could cost billions, impacting public services and industry.
But the real cost is borne by ordinary people. In Northern towns like Runcorn, where a 3M plant previously produced PFAS, residents have reported higher cancer rates. ‘We’ve been ignored for too long,’ says local campaigner Yvonne Keenan. ‘This is about our water, our health, our future.’
The Australian lawsuit is the first by a national government against 3M over firefighting foam. It follows a class action by Australian firefighters and residents. The UK’s Health and Safety Executive is reviewing PFAS risks, but critics say the pace is too slow. Meanwhile, the Environment Agency has mapped 21,000 potential discharge points for PFAS across England and Wales.
For now, the case sends a powerful message: the era of ‘forever chemicals’ may be coming to an end. But as the UK grapples with its own legacy of industrial pollution, the question remains: will regulators act before it’s too late for our water and our communities?
