Environmental Groups Urge EPA To Reject Chemours’ Fast-Tracked PFAS Coolant for Data Centers

A coalition of 17 environmental and public-health organizations, led by Earthjustice, has formally asked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to deny Chemours’ application for Opteon 2P50 — a PFAS-based coolant proposed for two-phase data center cooling — arguing the company’s submission downplays health and environmental risks and seeks undue speed under a White House initiative to accelerate reviews tied to data center development.

Why Advocates Oppose Opteon 2P50

The groups say Chemours relied on flawed or incomplete science that understates the compound’s toxicity and its climate impacts. They also warn that approving another PFAS product could increase the risk of local contamination, because PFAS persist in the environment and accumulate in people.

Closed-Loop Claims Vs. Real-World Risks

Chemours maintains these cooling systems operate in a “closed loop,” limiting routine emissions. Environmental advocates counter that accidental or fugitive releases, spills during transport or maintenance, and disposal at end of life remain realistic exposure pathways for workers and nearby communities.

Health and Environmental Concerns

PFAS — often called “forever chemicals” — resist degradation and can bioaccumulate. Exposure has been linked to immune suppression, elevated cholesterol, birth defects, kidney and liver damage, and some cancers. Public-health groups emphasize that many Americans already face PFAS-contaminated drinking water, which could be exacerbated by adding another widely used PFAS near data centers.

Atmospheric Transformation: The TFA Question

Industry has acknowledged that some PFAS gases may degrade in the atmosphere to form trifluoroacetic acid (TFA). Recent research and regulatory bodies in Europe have flagged TFA as a growing concern, and the coalition urges the EPA to consider this potential pathway and its environmental persistence when evaluating the application.

“We’re worried that the EPA may interpret ‘priority review’ as ‘priority approval,’ and we need to remind them that the executive order has no bearing on assessing health risk,”

Regulatory and Legal Stakes

The groups request the EPA apply existing hazardous-chemical rules and robust toxicological review rather than treating this filing as a routine or expedited administrative step. They also challenge a worker-exposure limit cited by Chemours, noting the benchmark came from a partially industry-funded organization and may not be protective enough.

Earthjustice and allied groups say approval could pave the way for broader industrial or consumer uses of the compound. They have signaled potential legal action if regulators bypass required safety reviews.

“The datacenter industry knows it is under fire for its enormous use of water, so they cast themselves as the good guys by using alternative cooling, but they're not telling the public that they're using hazardous chemicals,”

— Lenny Siegel, Director, Chips Communities United

Broader Context

Data centers are under pressure to curb heavy water consumption, and some operators are exploring two-phase cooling as a water-saving option. Critics caution that swapping water for PFAS-based coolants may trade one environmental stressor for another, disproportionately impacting communities near industrial facilities.

The coalition’s filing to the EPA encourages rigorous independent testing, transparent disclosure of toxicology data, and strict limits on workplace and environmental exposures before any approval is considered. If the EPA moves to fast-track or approve the chemical without those safeguards, the groups say they will pursue further legal and public-interest remedies.

Related resources: Advocates recommend materials on recognizing greenwashing — when companies emphasize an environmental benefit while downplaying other harms.