It is hypothesized that environmental contamination by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) defines a separate planetary boundary and that this boundary has been exceeded. This hypothesis is tested by comparing the levels of four selected perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) (i.e., perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)) in various global environmental media (i.e., rainwater, soils, and surface waters) with recently proposed guideline levels. On the basis of the four PFAAs considered, it is concluded that (1) levels of PFOA and PFOS in rainwater often greatly exceed US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Lifetime Drinking Water Health Advisory levels and the sum of the aforementioned four PFAAs (Σ4 PFAS) in rainwater is often above Danish drinking water limit values also based on Σ4 PFAS; (2) levels of PFOS in rainwater are often above Environmental Quality Standard for Inland European Union Surface Water; and (3) atmospheric deposition also leads to global soils being ubiquitously contaminated and to be often above proposed Dutch guideline values. It is, therefore, concluded that the global spread of these four PFAAs in the atmosphere has led to the planetary boundary for chemical pollution being exceeded. Levels of PFAAs in atmospheric deposition are especially poorly reversible because of the high persistence of PFAAs and their ability to continuously cycle in the hydrosphere, including on sea spray aerosols emitted from the oceans. Because of the poor reversibility of environmental exposure to PFAS and their associated effects, it is vitally important that PFAS uses and emissions are rapidly restricted.

https://zenodo.org/record/6957898/files/Cousins_2022_Outside%20the%20safe%20operating%20space%20of%20a%20new%20planetary%20boundry%20for%20PFAS.pdf

Outside the Safe Operating Space of a New Planetary Boundary for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)

The concept of one health highlights that human health is not isolated but connected to the health of animals, plants and environments. In this Review, we demonstrate that soils are a cornerstone of one health and serve as a source and reservoir of pathogens, beneficial microorganisms and the overall microbial diversity in a wide range of organisms and ecosystems. We list more than 40 soil microbiome functions that either directly or indirectly contribute to soil, plant, animal and human health. We identify microorganisms that are shared between different one health compartments and show that soil, plant and human microbiomes are perhaps more interconnected than previously thought. Our Review further evaluates soil microbial contributions to one health in the light of dysbiosis and global change and demonstrates that microbial diversity is generally positively associated with one health. Finally, we present future challenges in one health research and formulate recommendations for practice and evaluation. One health links human, animal and environmental health, and microorganisms have a central role in this connection. In this Review, Banerjee and van der Heijden outline the central role of the soil microbiome for one health and its detrimental or beneficial effects. 

/pdf/soil-microbiomes-and-one-health-1idj5x2q.pdf

Soil microbiomes and one health

Green water — terrestrial precipitation, evaporation and soil moisture — is fundamental to Earth system dynamics and is now extensively perturbed by human pressures at continental to planetary scales. However, green water lacks explicit consideration in the existing planetary boundaries framework that demarcates a global safe operating space for humanity. In this Perspective, we propose a green water planetary boundary and estimate its current status. The green water planetary boundary can be represented by the percentage of ice-free land area on which root-zone soil moisture deviates from Holocene variability for any month of the year. Provisional estimates of departures from Holocene-like conditions, alongside evidence of widespread deterioration in Earth system functioning, indicate that the green water planetary boundary is already transgressed. Moving forward, research needs to address and account for the role of root-zone soil moisture for Earth system resilience in view of ecohydrological, hydroclimatic and sociohydrological interactions. The planetary boundaries framework outlines a safe operating space for humanity according to key Earth system dynamics. This Perspective proposes the addition of a green water planetary boundary based on root-zone soil moisture and demonstrates that widespread green water modifications now present increasing risks to Earth system resilience. 

/pdf/a-planetary-boundary-for-green-water-2mi6x6yj.pdf

A planetary boundary for green water

In March, the UN Environment Assembly adopted a resolution to combat plastic pollution with a global and legally binding plastics treaty by 2024 (1). In his News In Depth story “United Nations to tackle global plastics pollution” (25 February, p. 801), E. Stokstad discusses many of the ambitious provisions that were included, such as a consideration of the whole plastic life cycle and binding targets. However, it is unclear whether the treaty will include a cap on production or cover plastic chemicals. Despite interventions by the industry (2) and objections from the United States and other delegations, reducing plastics at the source by curbing production is critical. The current mass of plastic production is at about 450 million tons annually and set to double by 2045 (3). The immense quantity and diversity of both plastics and plastic chemicals, the total weight of which exceeds the overall mass of all land and marine animals (4), already poses enormous challenges. Ensuring the safety of every available plastic and chemical is impossible, as their rates of appearance in the environment exceed governments’ capacities to assess associated risks and control problems (5). Plastic pollutants have altered vital Earth system processes to an extent that exceeds the threshold under which humanity can survive in the future (i.e., the planetary boundary) (5). Because legacy plastics in the environment break down into microand nanoparticles (6), this form of pollution is irretrievable and irreversible (6). In addition to the risks for human and environmental health, the whole life cycle of plastic accounts for 4.5% of our current greenhouse gas emissions (7) and could consume 10 to 13% of our remaining CO2 budget by 2050 (8). The growing production and inevitable emissions of plastics will exacerbate these problems (6). Failing to address production will lead to more dependence on flawed and insufficient strategies. Some waste management technologies, such as forms of thermal and chemical recycling, cause socioeconomic and environmental harm (9). Much of the plastic waste is currently exported from the North to the Global South, which poses a substantial threat to marginalized and vulnerable communities and their environments (10). Even when applying all political and technological solutions available today, including substitution, improved recycling, waste management, and circularity, annual plastic emissions to the environment can only be cut by 79% over 20 years; after 2040, 17.3 million tons of plastic waste will still be released to terrestrial and aquatic environments every year (11). To fully prevent plastic pollution, the path forward must include a phaseout of virgin plastic production by 2040 (12). Melanie Bergmann1*, Bethanie Carney Almroth2, Susanne M. Brander3, Tridibesh Dey4, Dannielle S. Green5, Sedat Gundogdu6, Anja Krieger7, Martin Wagner8, Tony R. Walker9

https://arro.anglia.ac.uk/id/eprint/707541/3/Bergmann_et_al_2022.pdf

A global plastic treaty must cap production

http://www.thelancet.com/article/S2542519622000444/pdf

National responsibility for ecological breakdown: a fair-shares assessment of resource use, 1970-2017.

We submit that the safe operating space of the planetary boundary of novel entities is exceeded since annual production and releases are increasing at a pace that outstrips the global capacity for assessment and monitoring. The novel entities boundary in the planetary boundaries framework refers to entities that are novel in a geological sense and that could have large-scale impacts that threaten the integrity of Earth system processes. We review the scientific literature relevant to quantifying the boundary for novel entities and highlight plastic pollution as a particular aspect of high concern. An impact pathway from production of novel entities to impacts on Earth system processes is presented. We define and apply three criteria for assessment of the suitability of control variables for the boundary: feasibility, relevance, and comprehensiveness. We propose several complementary control variables to capture the complexity of this boundary, while acknowledging major data limitations. We conclude that humanity is currently operating outside the planetary boundary based on the weight-of-evidence for several of these control variables. The increasing rate of production and releases of larger volumes and higher numbers of novel entities with diverse risk potentials exceed societies’ ability to conduct safety related assessments and monitoring. We recommend taking urgent action to reduce the harm associated with exceeding the boundary by reducing the production and releases of novel entities, noting that even so, the persistence of many novel entities and/or their associated effects will continue to pose a threat.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158

Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVCorrespondence/Rebut...Correspondence/RebuttalNEXTResponse to Comment on “Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities”Linn Persson*Linn PerssonSwedish Society for Nature Conservation, SSNC, Åsogatan 115, Box 4625 116 91 Stockholm, Sweden*(L.P.) Phone: +46 (0) 76 319 3679; email: [email protected]More by Linn Perssonhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7110-7089, Bethanie M. Carney AlmrothBethanie M. Carney AlmrothDepartment of Biology and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Box 465, 405 30 Gothenburg, SwedenMore by Bethanie M. Carney Almrothhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5037-4612, Christopher D. CollinsChristopher D. CollinsDepartment of Geography and Environmental Sciences, University of Reading, PO Box 217, Reading, Berkshire, RG6 6AH, United KingdomMore by Christopher D. Collinshttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8282-2803, Sarah CornellSarah CornellStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, SwedenMore by Sarah Cornellhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4367-1296, Cynthia A. de Wit*Cynthia A. de WitDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden*(C.d.W.) Email: [email protected]More by Cynthia A. de Withttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8497-2699, Miriam L. DiamondMiriam L. DiamondDepartment of Earth Sciences; and School of the Environment, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada M5S 3B1More by Miriam L. Diamondhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6296-6431, Peter FantkePeter FantkeQuantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Environmental and Resource Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Produktionstorvet 424, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, DenmarkMore by Peter Fantkehttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7148-6982, Martin HassellövMartin HassellövDepartment of Marine Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Box 100, 405 30 Gothenburg, SwedenMore by Martin Hassellöv, Matthew MacLeodMatthew MacLeodDepartment of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, SwedenMore by Matthew MacLeodhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2562-7339, Morten W. RybergMorten W. RybergQuantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Environmental and Resource Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Produktionstorvet 424, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, DenmarkMore by Morten W. Ryberghttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2589-8729, Peter Søgaard JørgensenPeter Søgaard JørgensenStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, SwedenGlobal Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Lilla Frescativägen 4A, 104 05 Stockholm, SwedenMore by Peter Søgaard Jørgensen, Patricia Villarrubia-GómezPatricia Villarrubia-GómezStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, SwedenMore by Patricia Villarrubia-Gómez, Zhanyun WangZhanyun WangEmpa – Swiss Federal Laboratories for Material Science and Technology, Technology and Society Laboratory, 9014 St. Gallen, SwitzerlandMore by Zhanyun Wanghttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9914-7659, and Michael Zwicky HauschildMichael Zwicky HauschildQuantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Environmental and Resource Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Produktionstorvet 424, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, DenmarkMore by Michael Zwicky HauschildCite this: Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 10, 6788–6789Publication Date (Web):May 6, 2022Publication History Published online6 May 2022Published inissue 17 May 2022https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c02265Copyright © 2022 American Chemical SocietyRIGHTS & PERMISSIONSArticle Views1338Altmetric-Citations1LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit PDF (783 KB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Planets,Plastics,Risk assessment,Testing and assessment,Toxicity Get e-Alerts 

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.2c02265

Christopher D Collins

Papers

Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities

Response to Comment on "Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities".