WIREDGOV

The Government should urgently restrict non-essential uses of chemicals labelled as ‘forever chemicals’ MPs have warned.

• Read the report [HTML]
• Read the report [PDF]

The warning comes in a new report by the cross-party Environmental Audit Committee, published today, on ‘Addressing the risks from Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)’. 

The Committee also calls for the Government to take a stronger approach to regulating PFAS, to ensure that those who pollute waterways and soil pay for it to be cleaned up, establish a national fund for remediation and invest in technologies to destroy these chemicals safely. 

Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, are a family of more than 10,000 man-made substances. Due to their highly resistant qualities, they are often used by the military and emergency services, as well as in household products such as cosmetics and frying pans. 

But those same qualities mean PFAS can accumulate in the environment and in people’s bodies for decades, and some research suggests they could be linked to serious health issues such as decreased fertility, developmental delays and certain cancers. 

More details on the Committee’s recommendations follow below.

Chair comment

Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee Toby Perkins MP said: 

“From frying pans to fire extinguishers, PFAS are now central to every day and some lifesaving products, and nearly all of us will have some level of PFAS in our bodies. But evidence we heard throughout our inquiry suggests that our dependence on PFAS has come with a cost to the environment, and perhaps to human health too. 

The Government has already published a PFAS Action Plan, an important step that the Committee welcomes. But it does not go far enough. It appears to be a plan to eventually have a plan, rather than a concrete set of commitments to reduce and remediate PFAS. 

We do not need to panic, but we do need to take sensible precautions. 

Our report calls for the Government to phase out PFAS uses that are clearly non-essential, such as in kitchen equipment and school uniforms, and to take a precautionary approach to approving new PFAS. Rather than waiting for proof that a chemical is harmful before banning it, companies should need approval before they introduce a new PFAS substance.  

The Government must also ensure that those who pollute with PFAS pay for the damage they cause. It must consult on establishing a national PFAS Remediation Fund and explore options to truly hold polluters to account. Where no one can be held accountable, local authorities must be given the funds they need to clean up. 

Other nations in Europe have already taken stronger steps to ban PFAS than we have in the UK. We risk our citizens and environment continuing to have greater exposure than our European counterparts if we fail to catch up. 

The Government has all the information it needs to get PFAS out of the environment and deter future pollution. Waiting will only make the problem worse. Now is the time to act.” 

Restricting PFAS 

The Committee warns that the risk of new PFAS substances emerging faster than they can be assessed leaves regulators struggling to keep pace with industry, and can lead to banned substances being replaced by harmful alternatives. Without group-based restrictions, the Government risks taking a “whack-a-mole” approach to PFAS regulation, the Committee warns. 

MPs say the Government should adopt an essential-use approach to regulating PFAS and prioritise rapidly restricting the use of PFAS in non-essential applications. It should bring forward restrictions on PFAS in non-essential consumer products such as food packaging, cookware and school uniforms, with a phased restriction from 2027. 

They also warn that voluntary action on PFAS or self-regulation by industry are not sufficient to reduce PFAS emissions. They recommend the Government take preventative and precautionary action to reduce PFAS exposure. 

The Committee welcomes the Government’s action to set limits for PFAS in drinking water but warns that significant gaps remain in limiting exposure to PFAS through food and agriculture. 

It calls for the Government to set limits on the levels and types of PFAS permitted in food. While consumer products containing PFAS remain on the market, the Government should introduce interim limits and introduce standardised labelling to inform consumers. 

Remediation 

The Committee recommends that the Government applies the ‘polluter pays principle’, which sees those who cause pollution bearing the cost of cleaning it up, to prevent ongoing and historic PFAS contamination. It should consult by March 2027 on establishing a national PFAS Remediation Fund. 

As part of this Fund, it recommends that the Government explore the implications of an emissions levy for PFAS to hold polluters responsible, consider options for extending the polluter pays principle to products manufactured overseas and imported to the UK. And where no responsible party can be identified, it should provide dedicated central government funding for local authorities to remediate.

Destruction 

Once remediated or removed from the environment, PFAS must still be destroyed. However, the UK’s current capacity to destroy PFAS is reliant on high-temperature incineration and only two hazardous waste incinerators in the UK are permitted to destroy PFAS. 

The Committee therefore warns that the UK’s current incineration capacity is “insufficient”. It says that the Government should assess how much PFAS-containing waste it expects from future restrictions, and assess whether the UK’s high-temperature incineration capacity is sufficient. It should also commit within six months to fund the research and development of destruction technologies that use alternatives to incineration.