PFAS at Board Level: Europe’s “Forever Chemicals” Moment Is a Test for Better Chemistry
PFAS has moved into Europe’s boardrooms. With a broad restriction under REACH now backed at EU level, the signal is clear: treating “forever chemicals” as a marginal side issue is no longer an option. For many, this still looks like a technical rule to be managed with derogations and transition periods. For the chemists, founders and investors we speak to at IGC, it is something else entirely – a test of which companies are ready to build PFAS‑free processes and smarter formulations, and whether Europe’s policy framework will actively support the innovators delivering that shift or merely document the status quo.
NEWS
Angela Kroll
4/24/20262 min read
PFAS is not just another rule
For many people, the new PFAS decisions sound like one more complex chemicals rule.
For chemists, founders and investors, they are something else: a stress test for who is already preparing for industrial chemistry without PFAS – and who is still counting on temporary exemptions to carry them through the next decade.
PFAS stands for persistence and long‑term risk, but also for an industry that has relied on transitional solutions for too long.
Now that Europe is moving towards a class‑based restriction, companies have a choice: invest mainly in navigating derogations, or treat this as a signal to redesign products, processes and supply chains.
Why this matters for innovators
At IGC, we support ambitious PFAS regulation – protecting health and ecosystems is a baseline, not a bonus.
But we also see where today’s debate stops too early.
Three points stand out:
Substitution: PFAS‑free chemistry is often mentioned, but rarely defined as a clear target pathway with expectations for sectors and key applications.
Innovation: Startups and young companies working on PFAS removal, destruction or substitution run into funding tools, certification routes and procurement rules that were designed around established suppliers.
Scaling: Even where technologies work, they struggle to move into routine industrial use because demand signals are weak and approval processes are slow.
If PFAS policy looks only at lists, limit values and derogations, one question remains open: who makes sure better chemistry actually reaches plants, products and supply chains?
What better PFAS policy should unlock
From IGC’s perspective, PFAS regulation should not end with bans.
It should actively pull better solutions into the market.
That means four things in practice:
Clarity on alternatives
Guidance that shows, for key use cases, where PFAS‑free or low‑PFAS alternatives already exist today – and what performance they actually deliver.Procurement that prices in risk
Tenders that do not only rank lowest upfront cost, but also liability, environmental impact and the availability of credible alternatives.Predictable pathways for new technologies
Transparent, timely routes for companies to get new PFAS‑free processes or treatment technologies approved, certified and integrated into regulated sectors.Targeted support for industrial deployment
Instruments that make it possible to finance large‑scale pilots, retrofits and first‑of‑a‑kind plants for PFAS solutions – especially for founders and SMEs.
How IGC and its members contribute
One of our members, Porelio, shows what this can look like in practice: PFAS removal in industrial systems is directly combined with the recovery of critical metals.
That kind of approach turns compliance and clean‑up costs into an opportunity to reduce pollution, manage risk and strengthen circular resource strategies at the same time.
This is the perspective we want to bring into the PFAS debate at IGC.
We represent founders and innovative companies who see PFAS not only as a problem to be managed, but as a catalyst to make production routes cleaner, more resilient and more future‑proof.
PFAS is more than another chapter in chemicals law.
It is a test of whether Europe is willing to move beyond transitional exemptions and systematically invest in better chemistry.