Europe moves closer to a full PVDF membrane ban following report

Five countries and thousands of submissions

The background dossier was updated following research conducted by five European Union member states – the Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Denmark and Sweden. The update also incorporated the views of more than 5,600 stakeholder responses to an earlier draft. Available scientific and technical publications were also examined as evidence.

All five countries had submitted an earlier dossier in 2023 proposing to restrict the use, production and marketing of hazardous substances in the European Union. These hazardous PFAS substances include PVDF, which is a key component of more than 80 per cent of all membranes used in wastewater treatment, as well as for filtering drinking water. 

Among the dossier's recommendations, it notes that there is ‘sufficiently strong’ evidence that the substitution potential is high for uses of PVDF in filtration and separation media for water treatment and purification.

 

Possible exemptions explored

Possible exemptions or delays to an outright ban are being explored as the EHCA considers the recommendations it will finally make to the European Commission. Any temporary or permanent exemption will come with recommendations for additional measures designed to prevent PFAS from entering the environment.

General topics were also considered, such as: what does the ban on second-hand products, recycling and spare parts mean? 

Reflecting the increased focus on PFAS in the scientific and regulatory communities, the original dossier has almost doubled in length to more than 3,000 pages. Information on alternatives, environmental impact and economic impact of banning and replacing products containing PFAS, among other things.

 

Have PVDF membranes already lost their market edge?

In 2024, Dr Graeme K Pearce, principal of Membrane Consultancy Associates, told Aquatech Online that the market was already moving away from PVDF towards ceramic membranes. He noted the example of the UK utilities market: “Some markets set their sights away from polymerics some time ago, prior to the PFAS discussion. For example, about half of the UK municipal market now specifies ceramics…”

Pearce noted that in a world tackling more unpredictable climate events, ceramic membranes were better able to cope with flooding, turbidity spikes, and algal blooms. 

Julius Gloeckner, chief growth officer at CERAFILTEC, told Aquatech Online that the pending ban on PVDF would accelerate the market’s move toward alternatives, such as ceramic membranes. He suggested that ceramic membranes have three advantages over PVDF: 

Total cost of ownership: Ceramic membranes provide a superior total cost of ownership for end-users. Their durability and extended lifespan translate into lower maintenance costs and fewer replacements.

Reliability: As source water conditions continue to worsen, ceramic membranes offer more reliable operation, withstanding the challenges that are increasingly common in today's environment.

Sustainability: With a longer service life and the ability to be reused and recycled, ceramic membranes do not contribute to plastic pollution. Instead, he said, they are a sustainable solution, designed to evolve with our environmental needs.

 

Challenges for the water treatment industry

An article from Global Water Intelligence (GWI) in 2024 titled 'Europe's planned PFAS ban threatens global membrane markets' highlighted the disruption such a ban could have on the membrane market. However, it also emphasised the opportunity for the industry to transition to more sustainable alternatives, such as ceramic membranes, which are seen as safer and more environmentally friendly in comparison to PVDF-based membranes.

Following the ECHA’s updated dossier announcement, GWI’s Christopher Gasson published an article titled ‘Has the EU declared war on advanced water treatment’ in which he stated: “It sounds like a worthy cause, but the unintended consequence is to create turmoil in the water treatment market.” Calling the potential ban a ‘big problem’ for the water treatment industry.

Gasson noted that PVDF is ideal for seals and fittings in UV disinfection systems, another important part of the wastewater treatment portfolio.

 

Opportunities for PVDF alternatives

However, as the earlier article noted, for every challenge there is an opportunity. Gasson stated: “The race is on to replace European PVDF membrane systems with alternatives. Ceramics are the obvious option for more aggressive wastewaters, while polyethersulphone and polysulfone will step up for drinking water and less aggressive feedwater applications.”

And while he states there may be a market in the US for PVDF membranes that will no longer be available in Europe, this, too, will come to an end. 

In a world trying to ban PFAS manufacture and busying itself with remediation efforts, it will be difficult to convince people that using a member of the PFAS family to treat drinking water is acceptable.