PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and is colloquially known as "forever chemicals" due to its persistence in the environment. PFOS is not the only "forever chemicals" regulated by the Convention, as PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) were added in 2019 and 2022, respectively.

Despite the international reach of the Stockholm Convention, its inclusion of only three PFAS chemicals barely scratches the surface of the PFAS family, which, according to the OECD definition of PFAS, includes nearly 5,000 substances. As research increasingly identifies risks that various PFAS pose to human health and the environment, activists and policymakers worldwide are beginning to take a more proactive approach to regulating PFAS.

With the possibility of a new international regulatory framework for PFAS emerging, it is essential for companies to understand the new regulatory landscape to determine its potential impact. This is especially important for companies in emerging high-tech industries, whose technologies may rely on the use of PFAS. The IDTechEx report, “Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) 2024: Emerging Applications, Alternatives, Regulations,” provides an in-depth look at the regulations surrounding PFAS in eight different countries/regions, enabling companies in five key emerging markets to understand their impact on their respective industries. This article offers a brief overview of the global regulatory landscape for PFAS in three key regions: Asia-Pacific, the US, and Europe.

Asia-Pacific (APAC): Adaptation to the Stockholm Convention

In major APAC countries, such as China, Japan, and South Korea, there appears to be a general trend toward adopting and implementing the restrictions on specific PFAS outlined in the Stockholm Convention. This is most notable in the case of China, a major producer of chemicals (including PFAS such as PFOA). However, China also appears to be strengthening regulations on its chemical industry more broadly, having published its first Priority Management List of New Pollutants in 2023.

Even so, for the most part, APAC countries do not appear to be moving toward broader bans on PFAS beyond those identified in the Stockholm Convention. However, there are some cases where PFAS regulations are being introduced for specific sectors. For example, South Korea proposed a ban on eight PFAS in the cosmetics industry in 2022.

Europe: The most aggressive approach to PFAS regulations

The European Union's (EU) proposed universal restriction on PFAS was by far the most aggressive approach to PFAS regulation ever considered. This restriction would prohibit the manufacture, import, and use of all PFAS in the EU, with very specific exceptions. The European Commission is currently debating the proposal, having received input from more than 5,000 stakeholders last year.

The universal PFAS proposal includes time-limited exceptions, allowing certain industries that lack a suitable alternative to PFAS or need time to scale up production of an alternative more time to comply with the regulations. For example, in the initial proposal, proton exchange membranes for fuel cells were identified as an area requiring a time-limited exception. PFSA (perfluorosulfonic acid) membranes are key materials in this field, and the IDTechEx report examines potential alternatives to this key fluorinated material.

United States: A mixed approach to PFAS at the federal and state levels

The United States is a key economic market for PFAS, but the regulatory landscape for PFAS in this country is far from settled. For starters, it is not technically a signatory to the Stockholm Convention. At the federal level, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for regulating and managing harmful chemicals, and one of its current priorities is monitoring PFAS levels in municipal water supplies. Even so, at the federal level, no PFAS is outright banned; instead, the U.S. EPA has regulations in place to prevent companies from resuming the manufacture, import, and use of phased-out PFAS. Programs also exist to encourage companies to voluntarily phase out certain PFAS.

However, much more aggressive regulations on PFAS are being adopted at the state level. Both Maine and Minnesota have adopted universal restrictions on PFAS similar to those being debated in the EU. Other states are restricting PFAS in key consumer sectors, such as food packaging.

Author: Sona Dadhania, technology analyst at IDTechEx