AI boom increases demand for PFAS, report warns
ChemSec sees plans for additional capacity at many major producers, as European restrictions are being prepared.
The growth of artificial intelligence could further drive demand for PFAS, according to an analysis by the Swedish organisation ChemSec. The substances are used in areas including chip production and some cooling systems for data centres, while governments are trying to reduce their use.
PFAS is a collective term for thousands of man-made substances that resist heat, water, oil and chemical attack. As a result, various PFAS compounds are used in a wide range of industrial processes. The substances are not all the same and do not all have the same properties, but many of them break down very slowly in the environment.
ChemSec examined the ten largest PFAS producers and concluded that eight companies are investing in expanding production. According to the organisation, some of these plans are linked to the growth of data centres, semiconductors and batteries. The analysis is based on publicly available company information and data on producers; exact global production volumes are not available for all companies.
The AI sector demands PFAS in two ways. PFAS compounds are used in various stages of semiconductor production. In addition, data-centre companies are looking at fluids and materials that can remove heat efficiently, so that servers are less dependent on water or traditional air cooling.
That does not mean that every data centre uses PFAS or that PFAS is necessary in every cooling system. ChemSec itself points out that alternatives exist and that applications vary by product and process. The conclusion that AI would be the sole cause of additional production is also too strong: the organisation additionally mentions electric vehicles, batteries and general demand for chips.
The development conflicts with European policy. The Netherlands is working with other European countries on a broad restriction of PFAS under the REACH rules. The Dutch government states that companies that make or use PFAS must register the substances and limit emissions where environmental rules apply. A European ban is not yet a finalised decision, and any exceptions are part of the ongoing process.
This creates a double pressure for companies. They want to respond to demand for chips and data centres, but must also demonstrate which substances they use, how they limit emissions and whether alternatives are available. For the surrounding area, it is particularly important that additional production does not automatically amount to additional pollution: that depends on permits, process control, waste streams and oversight.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- PFAS are used in various industrial processes.
- ChemSec reports expansion plans among many major producers.
- AI infrastructure and semiconductors are cited as demand factors.
- A broad European restriction on PFAS has not yet been definitively established.
Left
Arguments The growth of AI must not lock in new chemical pollution. Producers and data-centre companies must demonstrate that alternatives do not work and bear the costs of emissions control and remediation themselves.
Values Health, precaution, environmental justice and the responsibility of large companies.
Consequences Faster phase-out could limit risks, but could make the construction of chips, batteries and data centres more expensive or slower.
Centre
Arguments A broad restriction is defensible, but must take account of essential applications for which no replacement yet exists. Clear exemptions, transition periods and measurable emissions standards could give industry time without abandoning the objective.
Values Precaution, feasibility, innovation and a level playing field in Europe.
Consequences A phased approach could combine production with environmental protection, but requires robust oversight and would not eliminate all uncertainty.
Right
Arguments Strategic industries must not become dependent on rules that shift European production to countries with less oversight. It must first be established which applications are genuinely harmful and which alternatives are technically viable.
Values Competitiveness, technological sovereignty, property rights and proportionate regulation.
Consequences More room for production could support economic growth, but increases the risk that environmental damage becomes visible only later and is costly to remedy.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The text stays close to ChemSec’s analysis and the official Dutch information on PFAS. Claims about applications and environmental effects are phrased cautiously and are not extended into unsubstantiated health conclusions.
- confirmed ChemSec examined the ten largest PFAS producers. — This is described in the report summary. source
- confirmed Eight of the producers examined are investing in expansion. — ChemTrust summarises ChemSec’s findings in these terms. source
- confirmed PFAS are used in semiconductor production and industrial applications. — RIVM describes several industrial applications; ChemSec links demand to chips and data centres. source
- confirmed The Netherlands is working within Europe on restrictions for PFAS. — The Dutch government describes the European restriction process and Dutch involvement. source