Per- and perfluoroalkylated substances (PFAS) are a class of around 14,000 chemicals whose non-stick and grease/water repellent properties have made them useful since the 1940s in a huge range of manufacturing applications. The strength of the classic PFAS structure - a PFAS molecule usually features either a perfluorinated methyl, or a perfluorinated methylene group - is key to the function of many modern products, including non-stick pans, food contact materials, textiles and firefighting foams. But these same PFAS properties are also causing human and environmental health problems globally - as the enormously strong carbon-fluorine bonds in PFAS’ chemical structure enable them to resist degradation indefinitely, and to bioaccumulate in water, plants, wildlife, and people. In this article, we discuss how - despite the considerable difficulties involved in achieving a future free from harmful “forever chemicals” – recent PFAS analysis and research is prompting governments around the globe to introduce meaningful PFAS regulations aimed at safeguarding our future.

Is turning the tide on PFAS a hopeless task?

At times, it seems that getting on top of the world’s PFAS problem could be a hopeless task. While there are thought to be around 14,000 PFAS chemicals, we know little – scientifically speaking - about most of them. And catching up on the shortfall in knowledge is also practically impossible, because the overall number of PFAS products in use and in the environment is growing fast. By the time any serious PFAS test programme has been completed, says Dr David Megson, a senior lecturer in chemistry and environmental forensics at Manchester Metropolitan University, “it’s almost obsolete.” In terms of cleaning up the environment, new PFAS treatment technologies – including methods that break them down chemically or by using ultrasound – frequently show promise, but so far it has not been possible to find a satisfactory and affordable method that can be rolled out at scale. As things stand, says Kobe Nagar, chairman of the US-based waste destruction company 374Water, we are looking at “multiple decades of cleanup”.

Global progress on PFAS testing methods and regulation

More positively, tangible progress has been made on establishing preliminary PFAS testing methods and regulations in many parts of the globe – particularly the European Union (EU) and the United States (US). In the US, scientists at agencies such as ASTM International (ASTM), AOAC International (AOAC), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have developed PFAS testing methods and guidelines for several food, environmental and biological matrices. The increased pace of EPA PFAS regulation over the last decade in particular has resulted in a broad range of methods – including EPA 533 and 537.1 for PFAS water testing, plus EPA 1633 for a number of environmental matrices - as well as UCMR5, a key recent regulation that requires public water systems to test for 29 PFAS in drinking water. A year ago, the EPA also introduced America’s first ever National Drinking Water Standard – claiming that it would “reduce PFAS exposure for approximately 100 million people, prevent thousands of deaths, and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses.” Leading EU PFAS regulations meanwhile include the Drinking Water Directive, which specifies a maximum limit of 0.5 µg/l for all 20 PFAS listed, and the Groundwater Directive, which sets testing requirements for 24 PFAS compounds. PFAS regulation has also gathered pace in China, which set limits of 40 ng/L and 80 ng/L for PFOS and PFOA in drinking water in 2023, while Australia and New Zealand have been busy introducing focused regulations, researching PFAS contamination, and preparing a joint PFAS management plan.

Keeping PFAS in the public eye

Despite the difficulty of finding a solution to the world’s PFAS problem, there is the sense that positive scientific, political and regulatory momentum is beginning to build. Published research, frequently picked up by mainstream media outlets, continues to highlight the dangers that PFAS present to both human and environmental health – whether the focus is on drinking water in France, wastewater in the US, the PFAS-related health risks of eating from fast food containers, or contaminated rain. In October last year, the first survey of public attitudes to PFAS in the UK not only established that ordinary people are keenly aware of the “forever chemicals” issue, but also revealed that nine out of 10 respondents felt it was “very important” to control PFAS in food, drinking water, and the environment. According to the Japan Times, public sentiment was also a factor in Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba promising to introduce tougher regulations on PFOA and PFOS in drinking water last December. Back in the UK, the newly-elected Labour government responded in November to widespread concerns about water quality by introducing tougher standards for PFAS in drinking water in England and Wales than those that currently apply in neighbouring Scotland and the EU. Meanwhile, France became just the second EU country to unilaterally ban PFAS from certain products, including cosmetics, ski wax, and certain clothing textiles.

While these small regulatory steps could justifiably be described as piecemeal progress, it’s also true that more substantial PFAS regulatory action is expected around the world in the next few years. Firstly, the EU Packaging and Waste Regulation (PPWR), which came into force in February, will protect help to consumer health by banning the use of PFAS above certain thresholds in food contact packaging from August 2026. Meanwhile, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) is slowly working through the detail of ambitious plans to ban an estimated 10,000 PFAS chemicals from being made, sold, or used in the EU. Canada has also just set out plans for a three-stage phase-out of PFAS in (1) firefighting foams, (2) consumer goods like cosmetics and food contact materials, and (3) items where there is currently no alternative to PFAS. The process – which will treat PFAS as a class of substances rather than individually – is expected to produce its first regulatory proposal by 2027.