PFAS foam in a lake
Flickr Commons
Water has always carried the promise of life. It flows through rivers, fills wells, nourishes crops, and sustains cities. Yet hidden within this essential resource is a growing class of chemicals that may outlive generations. Known as “forever chemicals” or PFAS, these substances are now being detected in India’s rivers, groundwater, drinking water, seafood, and even human breast milk.
What makes this crisis deeply unsettling is not only the toxicity of these chemicals but also their persistence. PFAS do not easily break down in nature or inside the human body. They move silently through water systems, accumulate in food chains, and remain invisible to most people consuming them every day.
India’s rapid industrial growth, expanding consumer markets, weak regulation, and limited monitoring have created conditions where PFAS contamination can spread largely unnoticed. From textile hubs and airports to kitchens and cosmetic products, these chemicals have become embedded in modern life.
The challenge before India is no longer whether PFAS pollution exists. The real question is how long the country can afford to ignore it.
Q1. What exactly are "forever chemicals" and what makes them so persistent?
"Forever chemicals" is the common name for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a vast group of over 10,000 synthetic organic compounds. They are widely employed in producing various goods used in daily life, such as non-stick cookware, cleaning agents, and many industrial applications in aerospace, automotive, construction, electronics, and military sectors.
Their extraordinary persistence comes down to chemistry. PFAS molecules have a chain of linked carbon and fluorine atoms. Because the carbon-fluorine bond is one of the strongest in nature, these chemicals do not degrade easily in the environment. These chemicals are highly persistent with a half-life of three to five years, can bioaccumulate, and have been detected in human breast milk, drinking water, ground and river water, human tissue, and hair.
There are two broad generational categories: long-chain PFAS (like PFOA and PFOS, with more than seven carbons in their fluorinated chain), which are highly bioaccumulative and more toxic, and short-chain PFAS (like PFBS, PFBA, and GenX), which were introduced as "safer" replacements.
The hydrophilic nature of the short and ultra-short-chain alternatives has resulted in widespread occurrence due to higher solubility and mobility in the environment than legacy PFAS, which are comparatively less mobile and more bioaccumulative. In other words, the newer replacements travel further through water systems even if they accumulate less in human tissue.
Q2. Where do PFAS come from in India — what are the primary industrial and everyday sources?
India's PFAS problem is multi-sectoral and involves both large industries and everyday consumer products.
Industrial sources: India has rich industrial sectors — including textile, tannery, electrical and electronics, pulp and paper, and fluorinated aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) industries — which contribute significantly to PFAS as major sources. Firefighting foams used at airports and military bases are a particularly concentrated point source.
Domestic and consumer sources: The threat extends beyond industrial contamination to everyday household items such as cookware, cosmetics, and packaging, which contribute significantly to PFAS exposure. Everyday exposure to PFAS often begins at home. These chemicals can be found in a wide range of household and personal care products like waterproof makeup, sunscreens, and long-lasting cosmetics. Similarly, textiles treated for water and stain resistance, such as jackets, activewear, upholstery, and carpets, can gradually release PFAS into the environment.
Agricultural and waste-related pathways: Community practices in India, such as increased burning of waste materials (including plastics and electronics) and crop residue, along with use of inadequately recycled or reclaimed water from wastewater treatment plants for agricultural purposes, may lead to higher levels of PFAS exposure through contaminated air, soil, and crop foods.
Production for export: The industry phase-outs and tighter PFAS regulation in Western countries shifted the production of long-chain PFAS to Asia, mainly China, India, and Russia. This means India is not just a recipient of PFAS contamination — it is also generating it for global markets.
Q3. Where in India have PFAS actually been detected in water, and at what concentrations?
Detection is now documented across multiple major cities and river systems, and the picture is worsening.
Chennai: A 2024 study revealed PFAS levels up to 136.27 ng/L in both surface and groundwater samples from Chennai. The dominance of short-chain PFAS, coupled with abundant precursors and unidentified fluorinated compounds, indicates an ongoing shift towards alternatives. Groundwater and surface waters showed a predominant presence of PFOA and L-PFBS.
The Ganges and major rivers: Short- and long-chain PFAS have polluted major Indian rivers like the Ganges, Yamuna, Cauvery, and Krishna. A study of the Ganges basin detected 15 PFAS compounds frequently in river water, with the highest concentrations in hotspot locations downstream of Kanpur and Patna.
Assam: A comprehensive study in Kamrup, Assam, detected 12 PFAS compounds in groundwater samples from both Kamrup Metro and Kampur Rural. Perfluorohexanoic acid, PFNA, and PFOS were among the most prevalent, demonstrating widespread PFAS presence in a vital drinking water source for the region.
Concentration trends over time: CPCB data show that concentrations of PFOA and PFOS have considerably increased between 2006 and 2020. The concentration of PFOA in drinking water from South India was less than 0.005 ng/L in 2008 and rose to 2 ng/L by 2015. Similarly, PFOS concentrations rose from less than 0.033 ng/L to 1 ng/L over the same period.
Breast milk: PFAS contamination has even been detected in the breast milk of women from Chidambaram, Kolkata, and Chennai — evidence that these chemicals are already accumulating in the human body across multiple geographies.
Q4. How do PFAS enter the human body — what are the specific exposure pathways?
Humans can encounter these persistent chemicals through three primary pathways: inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact. PFAS can harm human health and ecosystems by infiltrating groundwater, exposure through dust, and bioaccumulation in plants, fish, and meat.
Drinking water is the most direct route, particularly for communities near industrial sites or AFFF-impacted zones.
The food chain is an increasingly important secondary route. PFAS can enter the food chain through contaminated water or soil, affecting both crops and livestock. In India, the concern now extends beyond agriculture to food packaging materials, particularly those used for processed and fast foods. This is especially critical in seafood, as PFAS contamination in coastal water bodies can accumulate in marine organisms, posing a significant health risk.
Shellfish, in particular, can accumulate PFAS due to their filter-feeding habits and close contact with contaminated sediments. Consumption of contaminated seafood is a major dietary pathway for PFAS intake, with PFOS often contributing the highest share of total PFAS exposure in seafood consumers.
Inhalation is relevant in India given the practice of burning plastics, electronics, and crop residues, which volatilises PFAS compounds that then re-deposit on water bodies and soil via rainfall.
Over time, people may take in more of the chemicals than they excrete, a process that leads to bioaccumulation in the body.
Q5. What are the detailed health consequences of PFAS exposure through water?
The health impacts are wide-ranging and affect multiple organ systems. PFAS mimic natural molecules like fatty acids, allowing them to enter the bloodstream and potentially disrupt vital functions. PFAS can interfere with the endocrine system, which regulates hormone production, leading to problems like thyroid disorders, fertility issues, and certain cancers. Additionally, PFAS may weaken the immune system by suppressing its response to infections and vaccinations. Research indicates that PFAS exposure may elevate bad cholesterol levels.
For specific compounds:
PFOA has been associated with kidney and testicular cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis, high cholesterol, and pregnancy-induced hypertension.
PFOS has been associated with reproductive, developmental, liver, kidney, and thyroid disease.
Children and pregnant women are particularly vulnerable. PFAS are potentially associated with endocrine and immune dysfunction, including reduced vaccine antibody response, leading to initiation and progression of reproductive and developmental disorders and early onset of chronic conditions such as thyroidism, obesity, diabetes, and cancer among children and adults. These chemicals can cross the placental barrier and perinatally expose the developing foetus to their toxic effects, leading to physiological distress for both mother and offspring.
A study assessing PFAS health risks in India using hazard quotient calculations found that children faced the highest risk among all age groups and that PFBS was more cytotoxic than PFOS when tested on human kidney epithelial cell lines, with significant alterations in lipid metabolism at the cellular level.
Q6. How do PFAS behave once they enter India's rivers and groundwater — what is their environmental fate?
PFAS do not degrade in natural water systems; they move and accumulate. PFAS are enduring organic nonbiodegradable contaminants with widespread occurrence and exceptional environmental stability.
Groundwater contamination: Research on the Ganges basin showed that concentrations and trends in groundwater closely mirrored those in surface water, suggesting the aquifer was being contaminated by river water seeping into it — meaning surface contamination directly degrades drinking water sources in rural areas dependent on wells.
Bioaccumulation up the food chain: The persistence of PFAS in terrestrial and aquatic environments has resulted in bioaccumulation in plants, animals, and humans. Long-chain PFAS like PFOS accumulate with greater efficiency at each step up the food chain, reaching the highest concentrations in top predators — including humans who consume contaminated fish.
30-year contamination forecast: A predictive model covering 2024 to 2054 revealed a strong positive correlation between initial contamination levels and projected PFAS concentrations in surface water, with some Indian states anticipated to exceed safe limits within this period. Cumulative daily intake analysis demonstrated substantial long-term exposure risks, incorporating both water and dietary source contributions.
Q7. Does standard municipal water treatment in India remove PFAS?
No — and in a troubling finding, conventional treatment can make matters worse. Conventional water treatment is ineffective in eliminating PFAS from the water system; rather, it can increase PFAS concentrations from raw water to treated water, necessitating advanced polishing steps.
This occurs because standard treatment processes like chlorination and ozonation can actually convert PFAS precursor compounds — which are less harmful — into more stable and toxic PFAS end products. The result is that tap water may have higher PFAS concentrations than the raw source water.
What actually works: The three technologies demonstrated to be effective are the following:
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC): GAC has been shown to effectively remove PFAS from drinking water when it is used in a flow-through filter mode after particulates have already been removed. It adsorbs PFAS until saturated, at which point it must be replaced or regenerated.
Anion Exchange Resins (AER): AER has shown a high capacity for many PFAS; however, it is typically more expensive than GAC. Specialist single-use AER resins followed by incineration of the spent resin are considered particularly promising.
Reverse Osmosis (RO) and Nanofiltration (NF): High-pressure membranes such as nanofiltration or reverse osmosis have been extremely effective at removing PFAS, and research shows these membranes are typically more than 90% effective at removing a wide range of PFAS, including shorter-chain PFAS.
A major challenge for all these technologies is the management of the concentrated PFAS waste stream they generate — the PFAS are removed from the water but must then be safely destroyed, typically by high-temperature incineration.
Q8. What do India's major rivers and hotspot regions look like specifically — which states are worst affected?
PFAS pollution is growing in India, particularly in industrial regions with limited environmental monitoring. Human exposure estimation through fish consumption highlighted elevated PFAS exposure in states with high fish consumption rates, such as West Bengal and Tamil Nadu.
Industrial clusters are the key risk zones. India's major PFAS-emitting sectors — textile, tannery, electrical and electronics, pulp and paper, and AFFF industries — are heavily concentrated in Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Punjab, and Maharashtra. Tamil Nadu in particular is doubly exposed: it hosts significant textile and electronics industry discharges, and its coastal populations also consume marine seafood from waters receiving industrial runoff.
More than approximately 5,000 PFAS are used in the market for various applications. Comprehensive data essential for both prospective and retrospective risk assessments remain lacking for most of these substances, with no regulatory standards established, leaving the extent of human exposure in India uncertain.
The absence of a systematic national monitoring network means the true extent of contamination is almost certainly under-reported. States without significant industry are not necessarily free of PFAS — atmospheric deposition and river transport carry contamination far from source points.
Q9. What is India's regulatory and policy status on PFAS — how does it compare to the US and EU?
India's regulatory response is significantly behind developed nations.
No legal limits: India is one of the most populous countries and presently lacks environmental quality standards or specific directives for managing PFAS. The Bureau of Indian Standards has not prescribed any limits for PFAS in drinking water.
Stockholm Convention: India signed the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which has added PFOS (2009) and PFOA (2019) and PFHxS (2022) to its restricted chemicals lists. However, India is among the countries that have not yet fully ratified the 2019 amendment to the Stockholm Convention that would make these restrictions legally binding domestically.
NGT proceedings: India's National Green Tribunal has taken cognisance of the issue. The NGT ordered MoEF&CC and CPCB to file a report on forever chemicals in water. CPCB stated in its reply that only a limited number of monitoring studies have been conducted for perfluoroalkyl substances, and that monitoring of PFOA and PFOS in tap water, drinking water, and surface water was done for a maximum of two years — between 2006 and 2008 only.
Research initiatives: According to a report submitted by IIT Madras to MoEF&CC, detected concentrations of PFAS in India have been documented. CSIR-NEERI is carrying out a countrywide survey and inventory of manufacturing and usage of persistent organic compounds by industries, including PFAS manufacturing industries.
Contrast with US and EU: In the US, the EPA has set enforceable maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for six PFAS compounds in drinking water as of 2024, some as low as 4 parts per trillion. The EU's Drinking Water Directive sets a combined limit for 20 PFAS compounds. Comparing guideline limits globally, India's regulatory framework remains in its early stages compared to the United States and the European Union, underscoring the urgent need for systematic monitoring and robust remediation strategies.
Q10. What practical steps can individuals and communities in India take to reduce their PFAS exposure right now?
Given the absence of national regulation and the limitations of municipal treatment, individuals must take precautionary steps.
At home:
Point-of-use reverse osmosis filters installed at the kitchen tap are the most effective household solution, capable of removing over 90% of most PFAS compounds, including shorter-chain variants. Ensure the filter is certified for PFAS removal.
Granular activated carbon (GAC) filtration, which is the dominant PFAS treatment approach, adsorbs PFAS until it is saturated and must be replaced with new or regenerated media. Counter-top or under-sink GAC filters can provide meaningful reduction, though they are less comprehensive than RO for short-chain PFAS.
Switch away from non-stick (PTFE/Teflon) cookware, particularly older or scratched pans, to stainless steel or cast iron alternatives.
Avoid microwave popcorn bags, greaseproof food packaging, and fast-food containers wherever possible.
Dietary choices:
States with high fish consumption rates, such as West Bengal and Tamil Nadu, face elevated PFAS exposure risks. Residents should be aware that seafood from industrial coastal areas may carry higher PFAS loads. Variety in diet and sourcing fish from non-industrial waters reduces cumulative exposure.
Advocacy and awareness:
Scalable interventions for increasing public and political awareness, along with behavioral change at the individual and population level for restricting availability and use of products containing PFAS, could help in reducing persistent exposure.
Support NGT petitions and civil society campaigns calling for legally binding drinking water standards for PFAS in India. Demanding that manufacturers disclose PFAS content in consumer products is a key lever.
For policymakers and communities: The evidence-based roadmap recommended by researchers calls for implementing stronger regulations, expanding monitoring systems, increasing public and stakeholder awareness, and deploying advanced water treatment technologies as critical steps for India to address the growing threat of PFAS contamination.