Chemical companies are not doing enough to produce less hazardous substances to reduce risks to people and the environment. The production and distribution of substances such as perfluorinated and polyfluorinated alkyl substances, PFAS or PFC for short, must be scaled back quickly. Large investors and the Swedish environmental organization Chem Sec are now pushing for this together.
PFAS are water, oil and dirt repellent, they are chemically and thermally stable. It’s a big group of chemicals with thousands of substances – and it’s good business for the corporations. The substances are found in textiles and cosmetics, pesticides and fire extinguishing agents and many other products. In the environment, however, the PFAS are hardly degraded, writes the Federal Environment Agency on its Website: “Some PFAS accumulate in the environment and in organisms and are also harmful to health.” Humans and animals ingest them with food or drinking water, the substances are distributed in the blood plasma, in the liver and in the kidneys. They have even been found in algae, seabirds and penguins in polar regions.
However, the chemical companies do not want to give up such dangerous substances, according to a study by the international environmental organization Chem Sec based in Gothenburg. For the past three years, it has published a ranking of the world’s largest chemical companies based on their impact on the environment and use of hazardous chemicals. For the Chem Score, points are converted into different categories awarded, for example for how many dangerous substances the company still has in its portfolio. The organization is based on the classification of the EU Chemicals Agency ECHA for “substances of very high concern”. Substances that are carcinogenic, change the genetic material and are particularly long-lived like PFAS are considered such, says ChemSec expert Sonja Haider. For each group, the Results published in detail.
The Thai company Indorama did best this year with 30 points. None of the 54 corporations achieved the full score of 48. The list also includes German companies such as BASF (19th place), Bayer (39th place) and Covestro (10th place). Only four companies have an exit strategy for hazardous substances, according to Chem Sec: Indorama, Sabic, Yara and Solvay.
“I also have PFAS in my blood”
ChemSec expert Haider’s verdict on the efforts of the corporations is correspondingly harsh: the global chemical industry is turning a blind eye to the spread of chemical pollution. “Most companies take little or no action to phase out hazardous chemicals, despite the risks to public health, the environment and corporate value.” Haider had herself tested: “I also have PFAS in my blood,” she says.
In the US, lawsuits against corporations related to PFAS are mounting, the news agency reports Bloomberg. There are thousands against companies like Dupont – in last place in the Chem-Sec ranking – and 3M (38th place). Bloomberg quotes a judge as saying that the verdicts, if they were against the defendants, could be life-threatening.
45 fund managers, eight trillion euros in assets under management
In its statement, Chem Sec quotes a letter from 45 fund managers, who together represent $8 trillion in assets under management, urging the world’s largest chemical companies to publicly disclose which hazardous chemicals they produce and in what quantities. In the EU, companies already have to register chemicals and provide information on their fate in the environment. In addition, rather than waiting for the stricter legal regulations that are looming on both sides of the Atlantic, companies should actively develop exit strategies. The letter of September 16 is also available to the SZ. Signatories include Axa Investment Managers, Bailard and Trillium Asset Management.
At the same time as the letter, Chem Sec companies received the preliminary ranking. “More than 30 companies have reacted, more than ever before,” says Haider: There was a very intensive exchange with some. “They fought for every point and a better placement.” Haider, who also sits on the Munich City Council, is a trained investment banker but decided more than 20 years ago to advise environmental organizations.
The pressure on the corporations is growing from the ranks of the investors, not only from those who signed the letter. The dangers associated with the production and processing of PFAS are great, says Martina Weber, sustainability analyst at Union Investment: “The long-term damage to people and nature is immense.” According to her, certain PFAS have contaminated soil and groundwater on a “large scale”, especially in the USA. Union Investment excludes the main producers of PFAS for sustainable retail funds.