Challenges in the management of POPs waste in the UK will continue for years to come but regulatory changes offer hope. Read about the Office for Environmental Protection’s new POPs in waste research and Fidra’s calls to accelerate regulatory reform and other solutions to address this growing problem.
Persistent organic pollutants (POPs)
The UK is party to the Stockholm Convention which is a global treaty to eliminate or restrict the use of persistent organic pollutants (POPs)1. Waste streams such as waste upholstered domestic seating (WUDS), waste electrical and electronic equipment and construction and demolition waste often contain high levels of POPs banned under the Stockholm Convention. New substances get listed as POPs when evidence of harm arises. Examples of POPs found in consumer products and therefore domestic waste include chemical flame retardants (e.g. decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE), short and medium chain chlorinated paraffins) and the PFAS or ‘forever chemicals’ (e.g. PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, LC-PFCAs).
Regulators across the UK are responsible for enforcing POPs regulations that require the separation of POPs contaminated waste from general waste streams and disposal via incineration to destroy harmful POPs to protect environmental and human health. Compliance places additional financial and resource burdens on local authorities responsible for managing this waste 2. This blog summarises findings from new ‘POPs in Waste: Regulatory Review and Capacity Modelling’ research commissioned by the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), conducted by experts from WRc and Tolvik3.
UK POPs waste estimates, treatment and costs to Local Authorities
The amount of WUDS in the UK currently requiring incineration was estimated and reported recently by Fidra and the Environment Agency 2,4: “approximately 250,000 tonnes of upholstered domestic seating waste is produced every year”
To understand the UK’s ability to handle POPs waste, OEP’s research modelled the UK’s available treatment capacity for waste containing POPs up to 2030. Projecting future POPs waste arisings is challenging and Defra’s estimation that POPs waste could reach up to 3.8 million tonnes/year5 was excluded from WRc and Tolvik’s modelling as it was considered unrealistically high and far beyond any feasible treatment capacity. Projected total POPs waste arisings for 2030 ranged from 452,000 to 984,000 tonnes/year were estimated using data available for main waste streams3.
Under the Stockholm Convention the UK is required to manage POPs waste in accordance with best available techniques. The most common treatment to destroy or irreversibly transform POPs is through thermal treatment (incineration) and OEP’s research assessed Municipal waste incineration, High temperature incineration and Cement kiln treatment capacity. Destruction of the short and medium chain chlorinated paraffins remains limited but large-scale destruction of PFAS requires temperatures over 1,100°C using high temperature incineration6, rather than municipal waste incineration operating at ~ 850 °C. Research suggested that there should be sufficient capacity to treat POPs classified WUDS up to 2030, at an estimated cost of ~£135 million/year for Local Authorities. Being able to effectively segregate or separate the POPs items from non-POPs items could drastically reduce POPs waste tonnages and it was reported that current local authority costs could be reduced through a more pragmatic approach to upstream segregation requirements for WUDS containing POPs3.
For other POPs waste, by 2030 a potential shortfall or capacity gap of 31,000 to 441,000 tonnes/year was estimated. Furthermore, total disposal costs for other POPs wastes were estimated to be at least £300 million/year, excluding investment and infrastructure requirements3. Alternatives such as long-term storage need to be considered as an interim solution3.
POPs in waste detection challenges
Waste managers at Restructa successfully developed and implemented innovative systems to rapidly identify levels of POPs in waste electrical and electronic equipment using X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) technology7 . In this case XRF was used to semi-quantitatively measure the concentration of bromine. Defra advises the use of screening tools such as XRF to manage POPs waste but OEP’s research concluded that XRF are unlikely to be practical due to cost, safety concerns and lack of trained individuals. Furthermore, use for the detection of chlorinated or fluorinated POPs is currently not possible.
As well as reductions in the use of chemical flame retardants in upholstered furniture, Fidra and waste managers like those represented by NAWDO are calling for extended producer responsibility schemes2. These asks are aligned with furniture product policy options recently made in a report commissioned by Defra8. Technological developments in POPs contaminated waste detection and separation is needed but identification of harmful persistent chemicals in WUDS using XRF cannot be used as an excuse to keep using these chemicals and not put upstream solutions in place.
Future POPs and keeping pace with other European countries
Amplifying asks of Fidra and other environmental NGOs for the UK’s chemical restrictions to keep pace with the EU, e.g. aromatic brominated flame retardants9, OEP’s study highlighted that UK Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) is less extensive than EU REACH, with no new substances of very high concern (SVHCs) added to UK REACH since Brexit10. This effectively results in a situation where certain substances, including those which may be at risk of being listed as a POP in the future such as decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE), are restricted in the EU but not in the UK. Other issues such as the time lag between POPs being listed and regulated, as well as some product and waste regulations contradicting the UK’s POPs regulations were stressed11.
Research emphasized the need to prevent the repeated cycle of moving from one phased-out chemical to poorly studied alternatives (so called regrettable substitution). For example, the banned brominated flame retardants (e.g. decaBDE) was replaced with the structurally similar DBDPE. Unsurprisingly, DBDPE was recently confirmed to be persistent and toxic and classified as an SVHC in the EU and may be listed as a POP in the future9,12. Other regrettable substitutions include the organophosphate flame retardants that have been shown to have hazardous properties12. For example, the chlorinated tris chloropropyl phosphate (TCPP) which was recently classified as probably carcinogenic to humans13.
The EU’s POPs proposal list includes cyclic siloxanes (e.g. dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane) and to add to the concerns raised over contaminants found in sewage sludge, the OEP’s report suggested that the greatest risk from these SVHCs was the application of sewage sludge to land.
Although numerous non-POPs PFAS are still in use, further evidence of the UK and EU regulatory gap acknowledged in OEP’s report is the EU’s proposed universal PFAS restriction which should force the use of PFAS alternatives in products, with exception of essential uses and critical applications3. Furthermore, the UK’s product labelling regulations should be harmonised with the EU’s digital product passports to facilitate dynamic sharing of chemical information throughout supply chains. Chemical transparency would not only improve POPs waste management but encourage the elimination of POPs and SVHCs from products, halting the growing POPs waste crisis.
The UK Government’s Environmental Improvement Plan 2025 commitments14 were reviewed in relation to OEP’s new research findings and, alongside the chemical restriction considerations above, findings concluded that commitments will be challenging to meet and that the Government need a plan for increasing POPs waste treatment infrastructure or increasing storage.
Future outlook
Overall, OEP’s research confirms the UK faces growing challenges and that regulations urgently need updating to remove POPs from consumer products and stop never-ending POPs waste creation.
Key messages:
- There isn’t capacity to deal with all POPs waste by 2030 and the Government must plan future treatment infrastructure or storage.
- Costs to local authorities are staggering and flaws in the UK’s current POPs waste management system exist.
- POPs waste screening using technology currently available is costly and impractical.
Recommendations:
- Updated regulations and stronger chemical restrictions (matching those in the EU) are needed in the UK to remove POPs from consumer products (e.g. revision of the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations to enable reduction, or even elimination, of chemical flame retardants from soft furnishing).
The report acknowledged the ongoing challenges associated with chemicals classified as POPs that contaminate waste materials and hinder the UK’s circular economy ambitions. Recommendations align with Fidra’s other ongoing asks of UK Government to restrict PFAS use, prevent regrettable substitution, introduce extended producer responsibility initiatives and enforce chemical labelling for products such as furniture in the future.
Support our call for change
The road to destroying persistent organic pollutants (POPs), such as the chemical flame retardants lurking in domestic seating waste, is a bumpy one but hope lies ahead. Fidra are working to promote sustainable fire safety that doesn’t rely on harmful chemicals. Fidra welcomed the recently proposed regulatory reform15 to reduce the use of chemical flame retardants in domestic furniture. Support our call for safe and sustainable fire safety by responding to the UK Government’s furniture fire safety regulations consultation (Fidra’s response will be published after the 23 June 2026 deadline but is available upon request).
We also ask that the UK Government seeks upstream solutions such as the removal of persistent chemicals such as PFAS from consumer products to reduce future POPs waste at the same time as reducing contaminants found in sewage sludge that is spread on land 16,17.
Changes are urgently needed to protect public and environmental health, as well as our future circular economy.