04.02.2025 | Fundamental right
Insufficient capacity at landfills, so 3M wants contaminated PFOS soil in roadside verges
This year starts in Zwijndrecht the remediation of gardens, fields and meadows that are contaminated with PFOS. It remains unclear where the more than 500,000 tons of contaminated soil will end up.”Cancel this cleanup until a real solution is found.”
Only left a temporary bridge build over the E34 motorway and then it can chemical company 3M in Zwijndrecht start the long-awaited redevelopment of hundreds of gardens, but also fields, meadows and orchards that pollution from its factory over the past decades with PFOS. The chemical belongs to the broader group of PFAS, which 'eternal chemicals' are called because they are very difficult to break down. The soil remediation, which is scheduled to start later this year and will take “roughly three to four years,” will involve excavating more than 500,000 tons, or 300,000 cubic meters, of contaminated soil.
The Flemish waste management company Ovam recently approved the remediation project good that 3M has submitted. It contains quite a few “important marginal comments” that can extend the duration of the remediation. The basis is mainly the pressing question of where half a million tons of contaminated soil should go.
The most desirable path, which is also urged by European regulations on hazardous chemicals, is to completely eliminate PFOS. This can be done by burning soil at extremely high temperatures, or “physical-chemical washing”. This has also been done in the past with contaminated soil from the Opel site in the port of Antwerp. But the techniques are still in their infancy. Due to the texture of the soil in Zwijndrecht, the vast majority of it does not qualify for such remediation, according to 3M's plans.
Heavy pressure on landfills
That's why the Ovam agreed that 3M will dump almost all the contaminated soil in designated places, as is done with waste. But even that way out is reaching its limits, due to the size of the operation in Zwijndrecht. "Consultations with the operators and owners of landfills have shown that there is little to no possibility of storing such volumes”, it sounds. The landfills in Flanders are currently under great pressure, partly due to the Oosterweel works, where even larger volumes of contaminated soil are being excavated and dumped.
That is why 3M is proposing “possible optimisations”. The first is “improving soil washing techniques”, so that larger quantities of soil can be used. A pilot project is being started. The second option that 3M is proposing is that of engineered solutions. This means: using contaminated soil “for the construction of berms, dike bodies, embankments and the like, in such a way that they do not pose a risk to the environment and to the groundwater”. In concrete terms, 3M is considering an “extension” of a noise barrier, constructed for the Oosterweel works.
Environmental law attorney Isabelle Larmuseau calls those plans ““flagrantly contrary” to European regulations on handling hazardous substances.”“Chemicals like PFOS are a huge threat to humans and the environment,” she says. “Only their complete destruction can guarantee that they do not move elsewhere in the environment – and I am thinking first and foremost of groundwater. That is why reuse is completely prohibited.”
Next generations
Grondrecht, a citizens' collective that grew up around the Zwijndrecht PFOS pollution, also says that contaminated soil should be stored in verges “should not be an option”. “Then you are not actually talking about a clean-up, but about shifting the problem to the next generations”, says Toon Penen. The Ovam disputes this. According to the waste company, the reuse of (slightly) contaminated soil in, among other things, verges is indeed safe and legitimate. This is also laid down in the so-called temporary PFAS action framework, which today determines the handling of “eternal” chemical substances in Flanders.
The auditor of the Council of State recently advised that to destroy temporary framework for actionThe standards used would be too lax in view of the health risks. A ruling is expected in June. Larmuseau In this light, the question arises whether the remediation is appropriate at this time.”The rush to action that has erupted following the outbreak of the PFOS crisis threatens to lead to suboptimal, and in my opinion even illegal, solutions that threaten to cause a different type of environmental damage elsewhere”, she says. “Then the soil will stay where it is even better. Cancel this cleanup until a real solution is available.”
According to Ovam, postponing “until the ideal remediation method has been found” would mean that “residents and the environment would be exposed to PFAS for longer, and the party responsible for remediation (3M, ed.) would escape liability”.
English 
Nederlands (België)