Trifluoroacetic acid: Should water utilities in Australia and New Zealand be paying closer attention?

For decades, the global conversation around per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has focused on well-known compounds such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), shaping regulation and investment in water treatment technologies around the world. Now, attention is beginning to shift. 

International researchers and regulators are increasingly examining TFA, an ultra-short-chain PFAS detected in water environments globally. While there’s currently no evidence that suggests TFA poses the same level of concern as legacy PFAS, its unique characteristics and growing environmental presence are raising important questions for the water sector. 

For Australia and New Zealand, the challenge is not known contamination or immediate risk. Rather, the question is whether we know enough to understand what TFA could mean for the future of our water systems. 

What is TFA? 

TFA is the smallest perfluorinated carboxylic acid within the PFAS family. It’s both persistent and mobile in the environment. TFA also behaves differently during treatment and environmental transport than many of the PFAS that have dominated environmental investigations over the past two decades. 

TFA is typically formed through the breakdown of fluorinated chemicals, including some refrigerants, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and some industrial compounds. Refrigerants are drawing particular attention because some can degrade in the atmosphere before it’s deposited in rainfall. Once present in the environment, TFA's persistence and mobility allow it to move through rainfall, rivers and groundwater, reaching catchments with little or no direct industrial influence. This makes TFA fundamentally different from many legacy PFAS contaminants that have traditionally been associated with specific sites such as airports, defense facilities or industrial locations. 

What do we know about human and environmental risks of TFA? 

The simple answer is that we’re still learning. 

Compared with PFOS and PFOA, there remains considerable uncertainty regarding the long-term health and environmental significance of TFA. Some recent international assessments have identified potential concerns that warrant further investigation, while global health and regulatory agencies continue to review the available evidence. The European Chemicals Agency has concluded that TFA has the characteristics of a Category 1B reproductive toxicant, a chemical or substance presumed to have potential adverse effects on fertility or harm unborn children. Importantly, hazard doesn’t necessarily mean real-world risk. Whether TFA presents a risk depends on factors such as exposure levels, which remains an active area of research. 

At present, there’s no broad scientific consensus that TFA presents the same level of concern as many of the legacy PFAS compounds that currently drive regulation and remediation programs.

Why utilities should be watching 

Much of the growing interest in TFA stems less from what we know about its health impacts today than from how it behaves in the environment. 

Evidence suggests that while concentrations of some legacy PFAS are declining following restrictions on their use, TFA concentrations are increasing in many parts of the world. 

Conventional PFAS treatment technologies are generally less effective for ultra-short-chain compounds, leaving reverse osmosis as one of the few treatment options demonstrated at scale for drinking water or wastewater systems. 

Should TFA ever become a regulated contaminant, these characteristics could present a more complex challenge for water utilities than traditional PFAS do today. 

What do we know about TFA in Australia and New Zealand? 

This is where the knowledge gap becomes more apparent. 

Research has confirmed that Australians are being exposed to TFA, with one study co-authored by Jacobs’ Senior Principal Environmental Scientist  Karl Bowles finding measurable concentrations in human urine. However, little is known about where and how exposure is occurring. 

A recent CSIRO study found TFA concentrations in Adelaide drinking water to be well below those reported in many Northern Hemisphere studies. Although encouraging, this study alone doesn’t provide a broader picture across Australia and New Zealand. 

At present, there is very limited publicly available information describing TFA concentrations across Australian and New Zealand catchments, reservoirs and drinking water supplies. Beyond the study in Adelaide, there are no published studies of TFA concentrations elsewhere in Australia and New Zealand, including major urban centers such as Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Auckland. 

The data gap doesn’t suggest an immediate TFA problem, but it leaves important questions unanswered.

Building the evidence base 

For water utilities, the opportunity lies in building a stronger understanding of TFA before future regulatory or community expectations demand answers. 

While the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed monitoring requirements for public water utilities covering a group of short-chain PFAS including TFA, a similar approach may not be necessary across Australia and New Zealand. However, targeted monitoring and research into sources, concentrations and trends would build the evidence base needed to determine whether TFA warrants greater attention in the region. 

Establishing baseline concentrations and understanding how TFA behaves across drinking water catchments, wastewater systems and water reuse schemes will support more informed decisions on future treatment strategies, investment planning and stakeholder communication. 

The possible presence of TFA in protected drinking water catchments and treated water also raises important questions for the sector. While there’s currently no established health risk of concern in the region, utilities may increasingly need to communicate what’s known and what remains uncertain to manage stakeholder expectations and maintain public confidence. 

Looking ahead 

Internationally, attention is shifting toward emerging PFAS such as TFA, even as the science continues to evolve. Whether TFA ultimately proves to be a relatively minor issue in Australia and New Zealand or becomes a more significant consideration for water utilities will depend on what future research reveals. 

Rather than waiting for regulations to drive action, there’s value in building an evidence base now. Better data will enable utilities to determine whether TFA requires greater attention and ensure future decisions are guided by science rather than uncertainty. 

For now, the most appropriate response is neither alarm nor complacency, but informed curiosity.