PFAS and pesticide residues threaten our drinking water. However, the pollution does not start in the waterworks, but when chemicals are discharged into the environment. Therefore, municipal decisions are needed on permits, control and land use. Only in this way can we ensure clean drinking water in the future. For the benefit of citizens' health, the environment and the economy.

In Denmark, we have long taken clean drinking water for granted. We can no longer do that. Findings of PFAS, pesticide residues and other harmful chemicals in groundwater wells across the country have shown us that we face a challenge that is not only about technical handling and legislation – but also about will and prioritization, especially in municipalities.

When Ingeniøren now focuses on water in connection with the upcoming municipal elections, it is an obvious reason to ask: Who actually takes responsibility before the pollution hits our tap? All too often, chemical pollution has been something that people react to after the damage has occurred. A discovery in a borehole, a shutdown of a supply, a cleanup paid for by the citizens. But the pollution does not start in the waterworks – it starts on the ground surface, in old industrial areas, at fire drill sites, in fields, and in treatment plants, where municipalities have both regulatory responsibility, planning tools, and political influence. This is where the effort must be made if we want to secure our drinking water for future generations.

Municipalities must take stronger, proactive responsibility

The eternal chemicals – PFAS – have received well-deserved attention, and several municipalities have already acted quickly when detected. But that does not change the fact that large parts of the chemical effort are still characterized by firefighting and ad hoc solutions. What we lack is systematic prevention, and here it is crucial that the municipalities take on stronger responsibility.

This requires that the chemical threat be considered in both physical planning, environmental approvals and efforts around vulnerable groundwater areas. When permits are granted for facilities and activities close to extraction areas, much stricter requirements should be set for which substances may be used and how risks are assessed. It also requires that old maps of landfills, industrial sites and fire stations not just gather dust, but are actively used to map and monitor potential risk zones.

Municipalities today have both the knowledge and the data needed to prevent new pollution – but this requires proactive, not reactive action. Targeted monitoring and ongoing assessment of whether current uses and discharges pose a risk must be carried out. Municipalities should require extended analyses from waterworks and ensure that the relevant chemicals are tested – including those not yet covered by national limit values. And most importantly: there must be transparency about findings and risks, so that both citizens and professionals can act in a timely manner.

Clean water now or a sky-high bill later?

It is also crucial that municipalities start thinking long-term and financially responsible. Cleanup and remediation measures are expensive – and the longer we wait, the more expensive it will be. If municipalities do not invest in prevention now, the bill will hit. And it should not hit utilities and consumers as it does today. It should hit the polluter, so that it becomes what the law dictates; that the polluter pays.

In the Green Transition Denmark, we therefore call on municipalities to make chemical pollution a central theme in the election campaign. Politicians must take responsibility and set clear demands for their administrations and supplies. They must ensure that citizens' health comes before short-term economics or administrative convenience. Drinking water is not just a technical resource - it is a societal task. And if we want to avoid clean water becoming a luxury in the future, we must act now. Not the next time PFAS is found in a well - but today, in the municipal council, in the local plan, in the permit, in the election promise.

We know what is needed. And we know where the problems lie. So the question is no longer whether we can secure our drinking water. The question is whether we will. Whether the municipalities will.

This debate post was published in Ingeniørens WasteTech on November 11th.