Media briefing: proposal to restrict PFAS chemicals in the EU

Подписаться 8 тыс.

Просмотров 28 тыс.

50% 1

Scientific evidence clearly demonstrates the negative effects that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) have on people, nature and animals. Once in the environment, PFASs hardly degrade. Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden have drawn up a proposal to restrict PFASs in Europe (currently more than
10 000 substances). This means companies will need to seek alternatives to PFASs.
On Tuesday 7 February, the five countries presented their proposal for restricting PFASs to European media. This is a recording of their media briefing.
The restriction proposal has been published on the ECHA website: echa.europa.eu...
The proposed restriction on PFASs is set to be one of the largest ever on chemical substances in the EU. The media briefing explains the details of the proposal. Experts also discussed the timeline for companies to find alternatives and the formal steps required before a restriction could be in place.
**************
Subscribe to our channel: bit.ly/321VQgE
Subscribe to our Safer Chemicals Podcast: echa.europa.eu...
Subscribe to our news: echa.europa.eu...
Follow us on:
*Twitter: / eu_echa
*Facebook: / euecha
*LinkedIn: / european-chemicals-agency
Visit our website: echa.europa.eu/

Опубликовано:

18 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 9

@guidofurlotti5969 Год назад

Very important step. It will introduce deep modifications in our industrial and day-by-day approach.

@schleimkeim1019 Год назад

It is clearly said that only some PFAS are toxic and bioaccumulative. Others are to be investigated. Chemistry sais that a majority of the PFAS are "only" persistant. Is only persistant enough to ban a product like Fluoropolymers that are not toxic, not bioaccumulative and do not degradate to any such product. Fluoropolymers are essential to fight against the global climate crisis!!!!

@ChielScape Год назад

This is correct. Fluoropolymers are essential, for example, in high performance, high capacity and high efficiency industrial refrigeration and heat-pump installations. Alternative rubber types are not suitable for the natural, low/zero GDP refrigerants that allow these machines to reach their high efficiency at the pressures and temperatures at which they operate. If we ban PFAS completely, we lose access to these high efficiency machines and much more CO2 will need to be expelled for cooling and heating purposes, the necessity of both of which I hope are obvious. And this is one of many examples in the energy sector. Rubber O-rings also tend not to end up in the water supply or in my Big Mac, so the point of banning these escapes me entirely.

@victormendoza4816 Год назад

Good morning, is the presentation available anywhere? Thanks in advance!

@ECHA Год назад

You can find the slides here: echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/2082415/2023-02-07_pfas+media+briefing_en.pdf/1661579d-353a-2fb0-1062-38fc3eb4bd78?t=1675849038730. You can also find the slides for our recent webinar on the PFAS restriction with the 5 Member States here: echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/21388210/2023_04_05_ECHA_UPFAS_infosession_all_presentations.pdf/e4d9932e-4c6f-5950-601c-0cb8b5d8c441?t=1680595024744

@MrCharles538 10 месяцев назад

Good morning, where can find the official proposal document? Thanks

@ECHA 10 месяцев назад

Hi, you can find the full report and annexes at: echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18663449b. More info in our news: echa.europa.eu/-/echa-publishes-pfas-restriction-proposal

@Legolas3509 Год назад

Dear Sir/Madam, as mentioned in slide 3, there are roughly 10 000 PFASs. May i know where can we get a list of PFASs that containg "10 000 PFASs" that ECHA has identified? and is it the same list that what have in EPA PFAS Master list?

@ECHA Год назад

Thank you for your question. The restriction proposal does not contain a list of PFAS because the substances in scope are defined by their chemical structure rather than by their numerical identifiers. Therefore, we recommend that you refer to the definition provided in the Annex XV restriction report. Note that the proposal has been prepared by the national authorities of Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Norway - not ECHA.