Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been the subject of increased regulatory and public scrutiny in recent years. This is due to their exceptional chemical stability and persistence, meaning they degrade very slowly in the environment and within organisms. In both the European Union and Switzerland, PFAS are being phased out through regulation; at the same time, many companies are reviewing their material and coating strategies.

In the field of industrial coatings, the discussion centers particularly on fluorinated polymer systems, which are technically established due to their non-stick, lubricating, and durable properties. At the same time, interest is growing in alternatives that do not contain PFAS yet still meet application-specific requirements.

This page provides a factual overview: What are PFAS? What role do they play in coatings? What regulatory developments are relevant? And what technical approaches exist for PFAS-free solutions?

What are PFAS & why are they currently such a hot topic?

PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) refer to a large group of synthetic organic compounds that contain at least one fully fluorinated carbon unit (e.g., –CF₂– or –CF₃). International expert bodies such as the OECD describe PFAS as a group of substances comprising several thousand individual compounds that differ in structure, molecular size, and properties.

A characteristic feature of many PFAS is the highly stable carbon-fluorine bond. It is one of the strongest bonds in organic chemistry and gives the substances high thermal and chemical resistance. While this stability is often desirable from a technical standpoint, it also means that many PFAS degrade very slowly or practically not at all in the environment.

It is important to note that PFAS are not a single substance but a heterogeneous group of substances. Regulatory assessments and restrictions are correspondingly differentiated.

Why are PFAS considered critical?

The current discussion focuses primarily on three aspects:

1. Persistence: Many PFAS are extremely long-lived and accumulate in environmental compartments.
2. Mobility: Certain PFAS are water-soluble and can spread over long distances.
3. Health assessment of individual substances: For certain PFAS (e.g., individual long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids), toxicological assessments are available that have led to limit values or bans.

At the regulatory level, therefore, the focus is increasingly shifting from individual substances to larger groups of substances. In the EU, a comprehensive restriction procedure is underway under the REACH Regulation. At the same time, specific bans and limit values already exist for individual PFAS or subgroups. Switzerland has also enshrined corresponding regulations in the Chemicals Risk Reduction Ordinance (ChemRRV).

For companies, this means: The regulatory landscape is in flux. Material decisions are increasingly being evaluated with a view to long-term legal certainty and substitutability.

PFAS in Coatings: The Technical Aspects

Fluorinated polymers such as PTFE, FEP, or PFA have been used in industrial coatings for decades. Depending on the system, they are applied as liquid or powder coatings.

The technical appeal of such systems is primarily based on the following properties:

• Very low surface energy → low adhesion (non-stick effect)
• Low coefficient of friction → improved lubricity
• High chemical resistance to many media
• Temperature resistance in industrial applications
• Easy cleaning in process-related applications

These properties are directly attributable to the structure of fluorinated carbon chains. The strong C–F bond gives the materials exceptional stability and inertness.

In certain industries—such as food processing, mechanical engineering, or the chemical industry—such coatings have therefore become technically established. However, their suitability always depends on the specific application and is tied to concrete operating parameters (temperature, medium, mechanical stress, cleaning cycles).

What does “PFAS-free” mean in the context of coatings?

The term “PFAS-free” is not a uniformly standardized technical term. In practice, it can be based on different interpretations:

• No intentional use of PFAS in the formulation system
• Free of certain regulated individual substances (e.g., defined subgroups)
• Not analytically detectable up to a certain limit of quantification
• Exclusion of fluoropolymers in the strict sense

Which definition is used depends on the regulatory context, customer specifications, and testing and detection methods. A blanket statement without reference to limit values, substance lists, or testing procedures is not technically sound.

The following is therefore decisive for the evaluation of a coating:

• Which substance definition is applied?
• What limit values or targets apply?
• Which analytical methods are used?

Only on this basis can a transparent assessment be made as to whether a system can be classified as “PFAS-free.”

Regulation and Market Trends: What Companies Need to Know

The discussion surrounding PFAS is no longer exclusively an environmental policy issue but influences strategic material and coating decisions in industrial companies. Regulatory initiatives in the EU and Switzerland, changing customer specifications, and increasing transparency requirements along the supply chain mean that PFAS-related applications are increasingly being reviewed. For companies, this raises not only the question of technical suitability but also that of long-term compliance and planning certainty.

EU Developments Under REACH

In the European Union, PFAS are evaluated under the REACH Regulation (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals). In addition to existing individual restrictions on certain substances or subgroups, a comprehensive group-based restriction is currently under review.

The aim of this approach is not only to regulate individual problematic substances but also to systematically cover larger groups of substances. The rationale is that, in the case of bans targeting individual substances, structurally similar substances were often used as substitutes (“regrettable substitution”).

At the same time, specific regulations already exist, for example regarding certain perfluorocarboxylic acids or PFAS in defined applications. Implementation generally includes transition periods to allow for industrial adjustments.

For companies, this means:

• Early analysis of substances used
• Assessment of long-term regulatory risks
• Examination of possible substitution strategies
• Documentation of substance compliance throughout the supply chain

Detailed legal assessments should always be conducted with the involvement of qualified expert bodies.

Switzerland: ChemRRV and national regulations

In Switzerland, PFAS are regulated under the Chemicals Risk Reduction Ordinance (ChemRRV). Here, too, bans and limit values already exist for certain subgroups, such as individual long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids and their precursors.

Swiss regulations are largely based on European developments but are implemented independently. For companies operating internationally, it therefore makes sense to consider both legal frameworks in parallel.

What does this mean for industrial coatings?

Regulatory developments are leading to material decisions being evaluated increasingly from a strategic perspective. In addition to purely technical criteria, the following aspects are gaining importance:

• Long-term availability of raw materials
• Compliance with future substance restrictions
• Ability to provide documentation to customers and authorities
• Sustainability and compliance requirements

The selection or substitution of a coating system is therefore not only a technical decision, but also a regulatory and economic one.

PFAS-free alternatives: Starting points and typical trade-offs

The substitution of fluorinated coating systems is technically feasible, but always application-dependent. PFAS-free alternatives must meet specific requirements for temperature resistance, chemical resistance, abrasion resistance, or non-stick properties. There is no generic substitute; rather, different material classes must be evaluated.

Sol-gel and ceramic-like systems

Sol-gel coatings are based on inorganic networks, often utilizing silica structures. They are applied using a wet coating process and form thin, hard layers.

Typical properties:

• Good surface hardness
• High abrasion resistance
• Temperature resistance in the medium to high range
• Partially good non-stick properties

Compared to fluoropolymer-based systems, chemical resistance or the durability of the non-stick effect may vary depending on the application. Coating thickness and repairability must also be taken into account.

Silicone-based systems

Silicone coatings are used in specific applications where flexible, temperature-stable surfaces are required. They may exhibit anti-adhesive properties, but do not necessarily achieve the extremely low coefficients of friction of fluorinated systems.

Possible features:

• Good temperature resistance
• Elastic surfaces
• Resistance to certain media

Limitations depend on mechanical stress or chemical exposure.

Other non-fluorinated high-performance polymers

In addition to sol-gel or silicone systems, other polymer-based coatings may also be considered depending on the requirements. The following should be examined in particular:

• Mechanical strength
• Continuous temperature exposure
• Media contact (e.g., alkalis, acids, solvents)
• Cleaning cycles and process conditions

In practice, simply substituting materials without adapting the overall system often does not lead to the desired result. In many cases, design modifications, process optimizations, or changes to maintenance intervals are part of the solution.

How to systematically evaluate alternatives

A structured requirements analysis is recommended for selecting a PFAS-free coating. Key evaluation criteria include:

• Maximum continuous and peak temperatures
• Type and concentration of contact media
• Mechanical stress (abrasion, impact, pressure)
• Hygiene or cleaning requirements
• Expected service life and maintenance strategy

Only on this basis can it be assessed whether a PFAS-free solution is technically and economically viable.

What does this mean for your application?

The decision for or against a PFAS-containing coating system is not purely a regulatory issue. It directly affects the technical function, process reliability, and service life of an application. At the same time, requirements for transparency and traceability along the supply chain are increasing.

Before considering a potential substitution, key framework conditions should therefore be systematically clarified.

Key Questions for Clarifying Requirements

A structured analysis includes the following points in particular:

• What are the maximum continuous and peak temperatures encountered during operation?
• What media (e.g., acids, alkalis, fats, solvents) does the surface come into contact with?
• What mechanical stress is to be expected (abrasion, pressure, impact)?
• What cleaning methods are used (e.g., steam, chemicals, high pressure)?
• What service life is expected, and what maintenance strategy is planned?
• Are there specific regulatory or customer requirements regarding the absence of certain substances?

These parameters are key in determining whether a PFAS-free alternative is technically suitable or whether adjustments to the overall system will be necessary.

Documentation and Traceability

Regardless of the chosen solution, transparent documentation is becoming increasingly important. This includes, among other things:

• Material data sheets and manufacturer specifications
• Declarations of conformity in accordance with applicable substance regulations
• Test results regarding temperature, chemical, or abrasion resistance
• Information on composition in accordance with legal disclosure requirements

A reliable basis for decision-making can only be established through a combination of technical testing and regulatory assessment.

Still unsure?

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions About PFAS-Free Coatings

What exactly does “PFAS-free” mean?

The term is not uniformly standardized. Depending on the context, it can mean: no intentional use of PFAS, no use of certain regulated subgroups, or no analytically detectable content above defined thresholds. The underlying definition should always be clearly stated.

Are fluoropolymers like PTFE automatically considered PFAS?

According to broad, internationally used definitions (e.g., OECD), fluorinated polymers such as PTFE also fall under the umbrella term PFAS. However, regulatory assessments distinguish between individual substances, subgroups, and areas of application.

Are PFAS generally prohibited in coatings?

No. Bans and limit values already exist for certain PFAS or applications. A comprehensive group-based restriction is being considered at the EU level. The regulatory situation is dynamic and application-dependent.

Are there technically equivalent PFAS-free alternatives?

That depends heavily on the application. For certain applications, PFAS-free systems such as sol-gel or silicone-based coatings are available. However, blanket equivalence cannot be assumed; properties such as chemical resistance or long-term stability must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Is “PFAS-free” automatically more sustainable?

Not necessarily. The assessment of sustainability encompasses several factors, such as service life, maintenance cycles, energy consumption, and overall system efficiency. A well-founded evaluation requires an application-specific analysis.

Does Buser already offer PFAS-free coatings?

Buser AG also offers PFAS-free coating alternatives. We are available at any time to provide personalized consultation on technical feasibility and potential developments.