Make no mistake, Russia fears the United States. After living and working in Russia and Ukraine for a decade and my prior service in the U.S. Army, I know this is largely based on our air supremacy. Our military can control the skies over conflict areas, allowing our ground forces to operate when and where they choose.
American national security sector experts paying attention to environmental activism fear this could change: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and some in Congress may soon ground our capacity to dominate air combat.
Despite severe consequences from such activism, few people know about how the EPA’s proposed regulations of a class of chemicals known as Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) will also negatively impact our nation's health. This is all driven by the EPA’s political agenda, not science.
PFAS are chemicals widely used to manufacture everyday goods like cookware, clothes and carpets. According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there are nearly 5,000 types of PFAS. They are also used in electronics, aerospace and military products. Proponents of these ill-conceived regulations say PFAS exposure may cause altered metabolism or fertility, reduced fetal growth, diminished immune systems, and increased risk of obesity and cancer.
But very little of this research is conclusive; much of it is questionable. One thing we know for certain: U.S. national defense and semiconductor industries will be hit hard by the EPA’s excessive regulations.
For example, our matchless F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter jets have recently been deployed to the Baltics and Black Sea. Their presence near Russia and Ukraine has helped to contain this brutal conflict from spilling over to other countries.
Because we live and work in the real world, not in a video game or “meta-verse,” F-35 production relies on PFAS to make them battlefield resilient. The jet depends on an adhesive film for corrosion protection called EC-3917, containing a variant of PFAS called phenol-formaldehyde polymer. The aircraft also uses aerospace sealants to keep its fuel tank from mid-flight malfunction and core composite materialsfor resistance to hostile conditions – two more components that include PFAS.
If the EPA and Congress successfully curb PFAS use in our defense manufacturing like they’re trying to do through the PFAS Action Act approved by the House of Representatives last year, they will undermine our most vital military capabilities.
While the U.S. Air Force and more than a dozen allied and partner nations plan for thousands more F-35s giving us the capability to massively outgun Russia and China in the skies, the EPA regulations will shoot down that strategy. In response, Russia and China could quickly increase production and purchase of combat aircraft. The balance of power would change. This is a serious global threat.
That’s certainly bad enough to sound the alarm, but I recently discovered more: beyond the threat to national security, the proposed regulations will delay or destroy emerging virus countermeasures. Scientists I'm working with on pathogen detection innovation may be forced to go back to the drawing board on electronic components, printed circuit board fabrication and packaging of a sensor in development to detect COVID and other, even more deadly viruses.
One expert with a storied career in national defense research told me the proposed PFAS regulations could set us back many years. “We may not even be able to go back to the drawing board, as one or more critical components may be denied to us,” he said. “These regulations are high risk and will definitely limit product development and implementation.”
“In fact,” he said, “advances in many countermeasures will be hindered or suppressed.” Like many scientists, he’s deeply concerned.
And we must remember the importance of common life-saving drugs which also rely on PFAS – like Lipitor to lower cholesterol, Cipro antibiotics to combat bacterial infections, Flonase which fights allergies and so many other everyday pharmaceuticals.
Congressional efforts against PFAS have been as politicized as EPA attempts, and both lack adequate scientific backing. Pushed by environmentalists, legislators are only one step away from tearing a hole in global health and defense countermeasures.
Regulations for a group of substances as ubiquitous and useful as PFAS cannot only consider environmental and health implications that may or may not exist. Efforts by the EPA and Congress to limit the use of PFAS must be tempered by considerations of how these regulations will threaten our national security, adversely impact our health and wellness, plus hobble efforts to protect our population in the new pandemic era. It is abundantly clear this political agenda may harm us all.
Washington policymakers must accept – not deny – our country’s current reliance on PFAS. As we face down Russia in its invasion of Ukraine and work to fight a global pandemic, we have no choice.