EU Guidance on ‘Essential Use’ of Dangerous Chemicals Draws Mixed Reactions
The European Commission has developed guidelines to determine when the use of dangerous chemicals is deemed essential. These guidelines aim to steer manufacturers toward safer production methods and inform future policy decisions.
The criteria for ‘essential use’ specify that a restricted chemical is essential if it is necessary for health or safety or is ‘critical for the functioning of society.’ The guidelines emphasize that the use of such chemicals should only be permitted when there is ‘no acceptable alternative.’
The guidelines have sparked mixed reactions. Industry representatives express concern about the potential for increased regulatory complexity, while environmental groups argue that they fail to adequately address pollution and health risks.
The European Chemicals Agency is currently considering a proposal to ban per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as ‘forever chemicals’ due to their persistence in the environment and accumulation in living organisms. Research indicates that around 30% of PFAS applications, primarily in industrial processes, may not have viable alternatives.
Despite the lack of readily available alternatives for certain PFAS applications, advocates maintain that stricter regulations would incentivize companies to develop safer substitutes. They point to evidence that legislation has historically driven innovation in the chemical industry.
A report by the European Environmental Bureau found that only one of the 13 objectives outlined in the Commission’s Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability has been fully achieved. The report highlights flaws in the REACH regulation, including unreliable hazard data provided by chemical companies and a lack of stringent enforcement mechanisms.
The European Parliament has recently approved a reform of the Classification, Labelling, and Packaging Regulation, which requires producers to display more detailed hazard information on their products. The reform also prohibits companies from making ‘green claims’ about products that contain hazardous chemicals.
As the PFAS restriction proposal progresses and group restrictions on other harmful chemicals are considered, the chemical industry is expected to mount significant resistance. Industry representatives argue that the exclusion of non-critical uses of dangerous chemicals would add complexity to regulations without necessarily accelerating the restriction process.
However, experts suggest that excluding substances that are not essential would streamline the regulation of groups of harmful chemicals with similar properties, allowing for a more focused search for viable substitutes.
