Non-polymer PFAS can build up in blood protein of animals, and is not always removed quickly. This means that predators eating PFAS-contaminated food will have higher levels in their bloodstream, and concentrations can increase up the food chain. Studies suggest that build up of PFAS is similar to those of other Persistent Organic Pollutants such as DDT.PFAS are estimated to be settling in arctic regions at rates of tens to hundreds of kilograms per year (25-850kg per year), depending on the specific PFAS chemical in question. Certain PFAS are released as gases to the environment and are blown a long way by wind and air currents in the atmosphere,. These gas PFAS will over time degrade to more persistent chemicals like PFOS and PFOA. This may be one reason why PFAS of environmental concern have been found in remote regions such as the Arctic as well as near PFAS production sitesPFAS including PFOS and PFOA have been found in air samples around Europe. The chemicals are found in small quantities, but appear in almost all samples tested. PFAS enters the atmosphere both from factories and the air inside our homes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17554424 PFAS is found in treated waste water from industrial and domestic sources and has been found in both rivers and groundwater. Conventional drinking water processes will not remove PFAS.PFAS-coated clothes that are thrown away will often end up either incinerated or in landfill. Unless incinerated at very high temperatures (>1000oC), fluorinated polymers could release more harmful PFAS during burning. PFAS of environmental concern have also been found in landfill leachate. Non-polymer PFAS are used in the production of fluorinated polymers. The manufacture of stain-resistant finishes generally releases these PFASs into the environment, both by air and water emissions. They are very hard to remove during water treatment. Workers in textiles factories are some of the population most exposed to these potentially harmful chemicals. Small quantities of PFAS will be removed during wash and wear of products containing PFAS. This includes fluorinated polymers used on stain-resistant coatings, and non-polymers that remain on clothes after production (Lassen et al. 2015).Most UK waste still ends up in landfill, and this includes PFAS-containing products. Studies have shown that the liquid coming from landfills (known as leachate) often contain non-polymer PFAS chemicals. In the USA the total quantities were estimated at 563-638 kg in 2013. To properly break down PFAS chemicals high temperature (1000oC or more) incineration is recommended. Incineration of municipal waste does not necessarily reach these temperatures (min temp. required is 850oC), and the incomplete breakdown could release non-polymer PFAS.Wash and wear of clothing that contains PFAS-based stain-resistant or water repellent finishes release PFAS to the environment. Coatings are thought to lose effectiveness after 20-30 washes. This can include non-polymer PFAS, remnant from production or as a break-down product of side-chain polymers (Lassen et al. 2015). The manufacture of stain-resistant finishes releases PFAS into the environment, both by air and water emissions. PFAS are very hard to remove during water treatment. Industrial emissions are estimated to be the biggest source of these chemicals to the environment.

Fluoropolymers, F-Gases, and PFAS – unpacking the ‘F’amily Ties

Fluoropolymers and fluorinated gases (or F-gases), frequently come up in the PFAS conversation – but what exactly are they? In simple terms, think of fluoropolymers as “plastic PFAS” and some F-gases as “PFAS gases.” Curious to know how these specific PFAS are used and why? Read on to find out more!  

F-gases ‘PFAS gas’

Fluorinated gases or ‘F-gases’ are used for cooling in fridges, air conditioners, heat pumps and cars, and are a major source of PFAS pollution, contributing to more than half of all PFAS emissions [1]. However, PFAS free natural refrigerants like CO2 and ammonia are already widely available, safe, and cost effective [2], [3], [4].

These natural alternatives can easily replace PFAS F-gases in most applications without breaking the bank or compromising efficiency. So why is PFAS still used in F-gases?

To help explain this, it’s useful to look back at the history of F-gases.

The history of F gases – a story of regrettable substitution

1930
January 1
1930s – Ozone damaging F-gases invented (CFCs)

In the 1930s, the chemical industry introduced Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which quickly became popular for their use in refrigeration and aerosols. However, by the 1980s, scientists discovered that these gases were causing serious environmental damage, particularly by creating a hole in the ozone layer[5]. In response, CFCs were restricted through the 1987 Montreal Protocol, an international agreement aimed at protecting the ozone layer[6].

1980
January 1
Late 1980s – Global warming F-gases introduced (HFCs)

To replace CFCs, industries turned to Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HFCs). While HFCs don’t harm the ozone layer, they have another environmental impact: they are extremely potent greenhouse gases, with a global warming potential (GWP) up to 1,000 times greater than carbon dioxide[7]. As a result, many countries including the EU and UK committed to phasing down the use of HFCs[8], [9].

2000
January 1
Early 2000s – PFAS F-gases introduced (HFOs)

Hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) were then introduced as a solution with lower global warming potential (GWP). One of the most widely used HFOs in Europe, HFO–1234yf, is marketed as environmentally friendly due to its low GWP [10]. However, there’s a hidden downside.
When HFO-1234yf leaks into the atmosphere, it breaks down within 10-14 days into trifluoroacetic acid (TFA ), a type of short-chain PFAS[11]. This TFA then makes its way into rainwater, eventually contaminating water sources on Earth. While HFO-1234yf may help reduce greenhouse gases, TFA is raising serious environmental concerns.

Current use of F-gases

TFA from F-gases has become an alarmingly huge source of PFAS pollution. A study in 2021 found that the switch from HFCs (the global warming F-gases) to HFOs (the PFAS F-gases) resulted in a 33-fold increase in the global burden of TFA, and up to a 250-fold increase of TFA in surface water concentrations in some parts of Europe[10]. Additionally, it should be noted that HFCs and HFOs fall under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) definition of PFAS themselves[12], [13].

What's the solution to PFAS in F-gases?

It is possible to move away from F gases – natural refrigerants (e.g. CO2 and ammonia) are already well established and can be used successfully, safely, and with little cost for most applications and importantly they don’t contain PFAS [4], [14]. The only reason they haven’t been more widely adopted is because the chemical industry has long dominated this space with synthetic options.

Where are we with regulating PFAS F-gases in the UK?

The UK is still to review its F-gas Regulation and although the UK government has committed to a phase-down of HFCs (the global warming F-gases)[8], there is a lack of urgency compared with our European neighbours and we have yet to act on HFOs (PFAS F-gases). With heat pump installations expected to increase in the near future[15], there is a huge risk industry will shift to using more HFOs in this country, leading to more PFAS pollution[11].

The hopeful news is PFAS F-gases can easily transition to less harmful solutions as safer alternatives are already widely available[14], [16], ready for the industry to make a positive step. It is essential that F-gases are included in a single set of overarching PFAS regulations within the UK. Sector-specific rules run the risk of only focusing on a product’s function and miss the broader impact of a PFAS-containing product’s entire life cycle on health and the environment. A unified approach to regulation would close these gaps and better control PFAS risks.

Fluoropolymers ‘Plastic PFAS’

Fluoropolymers represent a distinct subgroup of PFAS, and include one of the most famous types of PFAS – polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) also known as Teflon commonly used in non-stick frying pans. Fluoropolymers are essentially plastics made of PFAS often used for creating nonstick surfaces and offering high-temperature resistance in a range of products.

Nonetheless, while fluoropolymers may be convenient, they come with a heavy environmental cost. Not only are they PFAS themselves, but their production, use, and disposal contribute significantly to PFAS pollution[17]. As if that weren’t concerning enough, fluoropolymers also emit microplastics, which makes them even more problematic.

However, increasingly there are safer alternatives being produced for the use of fluoropolymers across all different sectors, read on to discover the emissions associated with fluoropolymers and the innovative solutions.

Pollution during production

To produce fluoropolymers, other types of PFAS are commonly used as ‘processing aids’ to stabilise them and make their production easier*[18]. For decades PFOA – one of the most harmful PFAS known was used as a processing aid to make Fluoropolymers. Unfortunately, this led to widespread pollution, with an estimated 72% of global PFOA/PFO emissions tied to fluoropolymers from 1950 to 2004 [19]. PFOA was banned under the Stockholm Convention in 2019 due to its harmful effects [20], prompting the industry to shift to a newer PFAS for a processing aid called GenX. However, GenX is already being detected in the environment and drinking water near fluoropolymer production plants, raising new concerns[21], [22].

Pollution doesn’t just stop with processing aids during the production of fluoropolymers, emissions from monomers (molecules that form polymers), other fluorinated by-products and PFAS such as, F-gases still occur[17]. Additionally, some of these emitted PFAS can transform into other PFAS once in the environment[18]. Alarmingly, we still know very little about the quantity and the structural identities of the numerous additional PFAS emitted during fluoropolymer production.

* Fluoropolymers made through the emulsion polymerization process require fluorosurfactants or ‘processing aids’ to emulsify and stabilize aqueous dispersions.
Credit: Chris Leboutillier, Unsplash
Credit: Chris Leboutillier, Unsplash

Pollution during use

The level of pollution coming from fluoropolymer products once made varies substantially across different fluoropolymer substances and products, due to differing production and treatment processes. Additionally, research is lacking on emissions for all the different fluoropolymer products available [17].

However, when it comes to fluoropolymers used in cookware, if an item has not been properly pre-treated, research has shown this can result in the leaching of PFAS residues into food during cooking [17]. There is also evidence that PTFE can leach microplastic and nanoplastics from cookware. For example, a recent study found that new and old PTFE & plastic cookware could be contributing nearly 5000 microplastics per annum into homecooked food [23].

Credit: James Hoey, Unsplash

Pollution during disposal

Fluoropolymers are very persistent, so there are huge concerns when dealing with their disposal. The disposal of fluoropolymers in landfills can result in the contamination of leachates with PFAS and can contribute to the release of plastics and microplastics into the environment [17]​​.

Additionally, the alternative option of disposal through incineration is not well understood, may not fully destroy the PFAS and can create harmful by-products[17]. For example, when PTFE is heated to extreme temperatures (between 250 and 600 degrees) it can produce TFA, a short chained PFAS ​[24]. Additionally, one study found incineration of a common fluoropolymer (PCTFE) led to the production of over 50 by products [25]​​.

Credit: Collab media, Unsplash

Current use of fluoropolymers

Fluoropolymers are the second most produced subgroup of PFAS after fluorinated gases and are used in a wide range of products[18]. The industry often claims that their larger chemical structure makes them harmless and insists they are essential for various applications, including green technologies. However, research suggests that these plastic PFAS is not harmless and production statistics reveal that only 8% of fluoropolymers produced are used for critical applications, like medical devices [26].

Where are we with regulating fluoropolymers in the UK?

Given the widespread use and potential environmental impact of these substances, it is essential that fluoropolymers be incorporated into a single set of overarching PFAS regulation within the UK. Doing so presents a huge opportunity to effectively reduce emissions of highly persistent chemicals and safeguard people and the environment.

Are there safer alternatives to fluoropolymers?

Increasingly there are safer alternatives being produced for the manufacture and use of Fluoropolymers across all different sectors, hover over the images below to discover the innovative solutions to some common products that use fluoropolymers.

Alternatives for frying pans

Stainless steel frying pans without a plastic coasting are PFAS-free, additionally, Sol-Gel nonstick is a recent alternative that still creates a non-stick surface in pans but is PFAS free[27].

Alternatives for solar panels

Companies like Endurans solar have created several PFAS-free alternatives for solar back-sheets used in solar panels[28].

Alternatives for electric cars

Companies such as E-lyte Innovations and Nanoramic Technologies provide solutions to avoid PFAS used in lithium-ion batteries for electric cars[28].

Alternatives for waterproof clothing

There are many waterproof clothing brands that are PFAS free, such as, Alpkit[29], Polartec[30], and Lowe Alpine[31].

What are PFAS?
PFAS in our products

References

[1]        “ANNEX XV RESTRICTION REPORT PROPOSAL FOR A RESTRICTION SUBSTANCE NAME(S): Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs).”

[2]        ATMOphere, “Natural Refrigerants: State of the Industry,” 2023.

[3]        “F-GASES, AN UNPRECEDENTED CASE OF CHEMICAL POLLUTION  – META.” Accessed: Oct. 24, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://meta.eeb.org/2024/05/29/f-gases-an-unprecedented-case-of-chemical-pollution/

[4]        “Stop using F-gases! Here are the alternatives.” Accessed: Oct. 24, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://chemsec.org/stop-using-f-gases-here-are-the-alternatives/

[5]        P. A. Newman et al., “What would have happened to the ozone layer if chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) had not been regulated?,” Atmos Chem Phys, vol. 9, no. 6, 2009, doi: 10.5194/acp-9-2113-2009.

[6]        “About Montreal Protocol.” Accessed: Oct. 24, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.unep.org/ozonaction/who-we-are/about-montreal-protocol

[7]        United Nations, “Global Warming Potentials (IPCC Second Assessment Report).”

[8]        UK Government, “Guidance Fluorinated gases (F gases).”

[9]        “Climate-friendly alternatives to HFCs – European Commission.” Accessed: Nov. 18, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/fluorinated-greenhouse-gases/climate-friendly-alternatives-hfcs_en

[10]     R. Holland et al., “Investigation of the Production of Trifluoroacetic Acid from Two Halocarbons, HFC-134a and HFO-1234yf and Its Fates Using a Global Three-Dimensional Chemical Transport Model,” ACS Earth Space Chem, vol. 5, no. 4, 2021, doi: 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.0c00355.

[11]     “HFO TFA Report 2022 – ATMOsphere.” Accessed: Nov. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://atmosphere.cool/hfo-tfa-report/

[12]     OECD, “About PFASs – OECD Portal on Per and Poly Fluorinated Chemicals.” Accessed: Jun. 12, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/portal-perfluorinated-chemicals/aboutpfass/

[13]     OECD, “Reconciling Terminology of the Universe of Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances: Recommendations and Practical Guidance Series on Risk Management No.61 JT03479350 OFDE,” 2021.

[14]     “Approved Companies – ATMOsphere.” Accessed: Nov. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://atmosphere.cool/approved-companies/

[15]     “Heat pump net zero investment roadmap – GOV.UK.” Accessed: Nov. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/heat-pump-net-zero-investment-roadmap

[16]     “Stop using F-gases! Here are the alternatives.” Accessed: Nov. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://chemsec.org/stop-using-f-gases-here-are-the-alternatives/

[17]     R. Lohmann et al., “Are Fluoropolymers Really of Low Concern for Human and Environmental Health and Separate from Other PFAS?,” Environ Sci Technol, vol. 54, no. 20, pp. 12820–12828, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1021/ACS.EST.0C03244/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/ES0C03244_0002.JPEG.

[18]     J. Dalmijn, J. Glüge, M. Scheringer, and I. T. Cousins, “Emission inventory of PFASs and other fluorinated organic substances for the fluoropolymer production industry in Europe,” Environ Sci Process Impacts, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 269–287, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1039/d3em00426k.

[19]     J. Armitage et al., “Modeling global-scale fate and transport of perfluorooctanoate emitted from direct sources,” Environ Sci Technol, vol. 40, no. 22, 2006, doi: 10.1021/es0614870.

[20]     UNEP, “Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), PFAS overview.” Accessed: Oct. 21, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://chm.pops.int/Implementation/IndustrialPOPs/PFAS/Overview/tabid/5221/Default.aspx

[21]     E. O’rourke et al., “Persistence of PFOA Pollution at a PTFE Production Site and Occurrence of Replacement PFASs in English Freshwaters Revealed by Sentinel Species, the Eurasian Otter (Lutra lutra),” Cite This: Environ. Sci. Technol, vol. 58, pp. 10195–10206, 2024, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.3c09405.

[22]     S. H. Brandsma, J. C. Koekkoek, M. J. M. van Velzen, and J. de Boer, “The PFOA substitute GenX detected in the environment near a fluoropolymer manufacturing plant in the Netherlands,” Chemosphere, vol. 220, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.135.

[23]     M. Cole, A. Gomiero, A. Jaén-Gil, M. Haave, and A. Lusher, “Microplastic and PTFE contamination of food from cookware,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 929, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172577.

[24]     J. Cui, J. Guo, Z. Zhai, and J. Zhang, “The contribution of fluoropolymer thermolysis to trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) in environmental media,” Chemosphere, vol. 222, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.01.174.

[25]     A. L. Myers, K. J. Jobst, S. A. Mabury, and E. J. Reiner, “Using mass defect plots as a discovery tool to identify novel fluoropolymer thermal decomposition products,” Journal of Mass Spectrometry, vol. 49, no. 4, 2014, doi: 10.1002/jms.3340.

[26]     “Slam debunkin’ three myths about fluoropolymers.” Accessed: Nov. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://chemsec.org/slam-debunkin-three-myths-about-fluoropolymers/

[27]     “Sol-Gel non-stick food safe ceramic coating – Surface Technology UK.” Accessed: Nov. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.surfacetechnology.co.uk/surface-coatings/sol-gel-non-stick-ceramic-coating/

[28]     CHEMTrust, “Frequently Asked Questions: PFAS and the green transition,” Jul. 2024.

[29]     “What Is PFC-Free Clothing and Equipment? | Alpkit.” Accessed: Nov. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://alpkit.com/blogs/spotlight/pfc-free-outdoor-gear?srsltid=AfmBOoqajH-tGKZXIzTiUCStu2xu7BGmKq7eWlGrsk1lzdF_uhBn97NZ

[30]     “Announcing Full Use of Non-PFAS DWR Treatments | Polartec®.” Accessed: Nov. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.polartec.com/news/polartec-announces-full-use-of-non-pfas-dwr-treatments

[31]     “All Lowe Alpine Packs – Rab® EU.” Accessed: Nov. 20, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://rab.equipment/eu/backpacks/all-lowe-alpine-packs?pf_select_claims=Fluorocarbon%20%28PFAS%29%20free%20fabric