(TNS) — For years, Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) has been the gold standard for suppressing and extinguishing petroleum-based fires.

But its effectiveness has come with a cost: the presence of PFAS, so-called “forever chemicals” that don’t break down and are linked to health and environmental risks.

One potential contender to replace the PFAS-laden foam comes from Cross Plains Solutions LLC, based in Dalton, Ga., where chief technology officer and managing partner Dave Garlie has led development of a foam made from U.S.-grown soybeans.

“It’s nice to have something that’s actually effective on the fires that we need it to be, but also is not killing the people that are using it, or killing the people that it’s supposed to be protecting,” Garlie said.

Because he serves on the board of the American Soybean Association, third-generation Kentucky farmer Jeff King was invited to a demonstration of the foam at work a few years ago.

Also a volunteer firefighter for 34 years, King said, from what he saw, SoyFoam has shown potential in the same scenarios where AFFF has long been used.

“[SoyFoam] spreads across the surface really well, and they suppress vapors,” he explained.

The difference, both men noted, is what happens after the flames are out.

Unlike AFFF, the soy foam doesn’t persist in soil or water. It’s biodegradable and breaks down without the threat of PFAS — forever chemicals — sticking around indefinitely.

“It just started checking a lot of boxes. And I think about my guys that are all volunteers back home, they do this out of the goodness of their heart to serve the community,” King said.

Add to that concerns over keeping PFAS out of fields where produce and animal feed are grown and runoff into streams and ground water supplies, and he said SoyFoam eases plenty of worries for him and many others in his community.

Last year, his department became the first in the country to fully switch to SoyFoam.

“I just knew that … there’s one less thing that I have to worry about [firefighters] coming in contact and potentially becoming sick over.”

“It’s the only product on the market that is certified gold in the GreenScreen certification,” he noted. “That says a lot about the safety of this product.”

GreenScreen is a program that assesses and certifies products based on the safety of their chemical ingredients, ensuring they are free of chemicals of concern and promoting safer alternatives.

The change over to SoyFoam didn’t require new equipment — just a thorough flushing of old foam from the system.

Since then, they’ve used the foam on grass, brush, structure and vehicle fires, and even grain elevator and farm equipment blazes.

In one grain bin fire, tests later confirmed the corn was “free of any potential toxins,” King said. The foam’s versatility — effective on both natural materials and Class B liquid fuel fires — makes it “two products in one.”

On fuel fires, it’s also been more affordable: “When we were looking at strictly Class B products, it was substantially cheaper.”

With Pennsylvania lawmakers weighing a PFAS ban, King has advice for departments on the fence: “It’s safe, it’s biodegradable. Basically, in 180 days it’s gone. You’re not going to find it … and it’s easy to use.”

While the foam has proven versatile, it isn’t a perfect replacement yet, King and Garlie agreed.

One limitation is ethanol. Fires fueled by ethanol, a highly flammable alcohol present in some fuels and solvents, require a different suppression chemistry than SoyFoam currently provides.

Diesel and jet fuel do not contain ethanol. However, standard automobile gasoline and flex-fuel does.

That means departments with ethanol-handling facilities or transport routes nearby may still need to keep a separate foam on hand. Cross Plains researchers are continuing to test soy-based formulations with the goal of making them effective against ethanol fires as well, Garlie said.