Balancing Fire Safety and Environmental Protection: The Shift Towards Fluorine-Free Firefighting Foams

August 5, 2023

Firefighting foams have long been relied upon as a crucial tool in combating liquid fuel fires. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been an integral component of aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) since the 1970s. However, concerns about the harmful effects of PFAS on both human health and the environment have triggered a quest for safer alternatives.

Firefighting foams work by creating a protective "blanket" over liquid fuel, effectively smothering the fire and preventing the escape of flammable vapors. This foam barrier plays a vital role in extinguishing the fire and reducing the risk of re-ignition. The longevity and stability of the foam blanket significantly impact the foam's effectiveness in containing flammable vapors and ultimately quelling the fire.

While PFAS-containing foams have exhibited high firefighting efficacy, extensive scientific research has linked PFAS substances to harmful effects on both human health and the environment. PFAS compounds are known to persist in the environment without degrading naturally, posing potential risks to ecosystems and water sources.

Acknowledging these concerns, the Department of Defense took action in January 2023 by issuing a new performance specification for firefighting foams used by the military. This specification mandates that foams used on military bases must effectively combat class B hydrocarbon liquid fuel fires without containing PFAS.

In response to the call for PFAS-free options, intensive efforts are underway to identify effective alternatives to PFAS-containing firefighting foams. Researchers are working towards finding additives that can enhance the firefighting capabilities of commercially available PFAS-free fire suppressants, allowing for a quicker deployment of safer foam formulations in the field.

One notable initiative is being conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in Laurel, Maryland. They are diligently testing and evaluating additives that can enhance the performance of PFAS-free foam formulations, specifically tailored for military applications. By exploring these additives, they aim to maintain high firefighting effectiveness while minimizing environmental impact.

The search for safer firefighting foams goes hand in hand with evolving legislation and growing awareness of the urgent need for effective alternatives. Researchers, industry professionals, and regulatory bodies continue to collaborate in pursuit of innovative solutions that strike the right balance between firefighting efficacy and environmental responsibility.

As efforts progress, it is crucial to remain updated on the latest developments in this field. To learn more about the ongoing research and advancements concerning firefighting foams and PFAS alternatives, you can visit the Johns Hopkins APL website or consult reputable scientific publications dedicated to the subject.

 If you or anyone you know has been affected or come directly in contact with AFF Foam, please reach out to Jason J. Joy & Associates at 713-221-6500 to discuss your possible right to compensation.


While this article provides general legal information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer.

Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

By Rebecca Rivera December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post
By Rebecca Rivera November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 
By Rebecca Rivera November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.