Beginning of the end for ‘forever chemicals’ as companies phase out production
Groups such as BASF and Ecolab are responding to the risk of rising PFAS litigation and increased regulation
Leading chemicals companies have quietly begun to phase out “forever chemicals” from their production as the risk of litigation grows and the EU looks to impose broad restrictions on their use.
The group of chemicals known as PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, totals more than 10,000 and is found in everything from waterproof clothing to frying pans. They are dubbed “forever chemicals” because of their persistence in the environment and human bodies, where they have been linked to increased cancer rates and infertility.
As the health risks have become better understood, concerns around the accumulation of PFAS have led to an increasing number of lawsuits against companies in the US. The EU is currently working on a potential PFAS ban, with some allowances for those materials that cannot easily be replaced.
German chemicals company BASF told the Financial Times it will “remove” products formulated with PFAS chemicals from its portfolio covered by the EU’s proposal, without specifying when the process would be completed.
BASF is facing more than 4,500 lawsuits in relation to PFAS contamination, the bulk of them in the US, according to its most recent annual report. The cases generally relate to the use of a firefighting foam produced by Swiss chemicals company Ciba before it was acquired by BASF in 2008.
Ecolab, the US-based chemicals company, also said it will phase out products manufactured “intentionally” with PFAS from its portfolio by the end of 2026.
US chemicals manufacturer 3M, which is facing multiple lawsuits in the US, was one of the first to make the move, announcing in 2022 that it would exit PFAS manufacturing globally by the end of this year. “We are on schedule to do so,” said Maxime Bureau, its European director for government affairs.
The group’s decision was based on consideration of multiple factors such as “accelerating regulatory trends focused on reducing or eliminating the presence of PFAS in the environment and changing stakeholder expectations”, Bureau said.
According to an annual survey of the industry released this week from campaign group ChemSec, one-third of chemicals producers planned to end their use of PFAS.
Many chemical companies were “trying to phase out fast” but would face litigation risk from PFAS for “many years, if not decades to come”, as the number of personal injury claims could grow, warned Jonas Weisbach, an ESG analyst at Union Investment.
The decision to exit PFAS use put BASF on the “right course”, he said, adding that for many companies the economic opportunity was small compared with the reputational risk.
Both BASF and Ecolab had published position papers on their websites earlier this year without widely publicising their moves.
Ecolab said it had been sharing its paper with customers privately but, following increased inquiries, had decided to publish it online.
BASF said it had discussed the policy with its stakeholders before sharing its position. The German group said it only produced a “limited number” of products made with PFAS, adding that it planned to offer alternatives to customers “in the coming years”.
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) said in August that it would prioritise its work on the PFAS ban in several specific sectors including technical textiles, military uses and some medical applications. Alongside an assessment for a full ban, ECHA said that it would consider the effects of time-limited exemptions to the restriction or allowing the continued use of PFAS in certain circumstances “where the risks can be controlled”.
Jessika Roswall, the EU’s environment commissioner, told the FT that Brussels wanted to “simplify and at the same time modernise” its core chemicals legislation “and give clarity on the use of PFAS”.
“Insights and experience from industry frontrunners who have already shifted to sustainable alternatives can help shape our initiatives successfully,” she said.