This paper presents a qualitative sustainability assessment of an innovative, water-based, partially bio-based, and potentially removable screen-printing ink designed to replace conventional PVC-based inks in the textile industry. The assessment is conducted in alignment with the European Commission’s tiered Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) framework, applying a simplified screening approach suitable for innovations with limited sustainability data availability. The evaluation is conducted using the LCBROM (Life Cycle Based Risk and Opportunity Mapping) methodology, which is a structured approach designed to identify potential environmental, economic, and social drawbacks and benefits throughout the product’s life cycle, from production and use to end of life. The screening incorporates the MET+Ec+S matrix (Material, Energy, Toxicity, and Economic and Social dimensions), providing a comprehensive overview of the sustainability performance of the removable PVC-free ink at each stage of its life cycle. The novel removable PVC-free ink formulation incorporates bio-based pigments, thickeners, and plasticisers, and is designed to facilitate recyclability and reuse in textile applications. Compared to traditional plastisol inks, the screening indicates potential reductions in toxicity and environmental persistence compared to PVC-based plastisol inks, subject to validation in future quantitative studies. However, key trade-offs include reliance on fossil-based ingredients (as bio-based alternatives are still being developed), increased material costs, and durability concerns. Despite these issues, the removable PVC-free ink’s compatibility with existing printing infrastructure and alignment with emerging EU sustainability regulations indicate its potential relevance for circular textile production, subject to validation through quantitative life-cycle assessment and pilot-scale implementation. The results do not constitute a quantitative life cycle assessment but instead provide a structured qualitative basis for guiding further development, data collection, and future LCA modeling. By explicitly positioning the work within a simplified SSbD tier, this study demonstrates how early-stage screening can support innovation design while transparently addressing uncertainty and trade-offs

The development of safe and sustainable alternatives to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in textiles is urgently needed. During the early stages of innovation, when new alternatives are created and tested, sharing the information required for an initial Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) scoping assessment can be challenging. This first step of the SSbD framework is intended to define the scope of an innovation before more detailed safety and sustainability assessments are conducted. On the one hand, early information on potential hazards and life cycle impacts can support the (re)design and improvement of emerging alternatives. On the other hand, disclosing such information may risk the loss of intellectual property or the exposure of confidential business information, thereby compromising the innovation's competitive advantage. In this perspective, we illustrate how this dilemma can be addressed by applying an SSbD scoping assessment and an initial hazard assessment to support the development of bio-based durable water repellents (DWRs) as alternatives to PFAS, while sharing sensitive information with value chain stakeholders on a need-to-know basis. Our approach addresses a recurring challenge in PFAS substitution projects over the past decade: the lack of access to detailed information on industry-developed PFAS alternatives for independent assessment. We present an approach that aligns with existing industrial practices while enabling a sufficiently detailed evaluation and discussion of hazards and potential life cycle impacts for an initial SSbD scoping assessment. This journal is

This article presents a method for life cycle based evaluation of early-stage innovations, addressing the lack of tools for assessing environmental aspects of emerging technologies. This approach supports the development of clean technologies, chemicals, and materials by fostering dialogue between inventors and evaluators through information exchange and preliminary assessments, even when data are uncertain. Aligned with the EU Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability under the European Green Deal, the Joint Research Center (JRC) introduced a framework for Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) chemicals and materials, emphasizing application during early innovation stages when design choices can still be influenced. The proposed method, Life Cycle Based Risk and Opportunity Mapping (LCBROM), can be applied initially in an SSbD assessment to serve as scoping analysis and be revisited during the further stages of the SSbD process, promoting transparency and knowledge sharing among involved parties. Tested in four case studies focused on developing smart, safe materials and devices for clean air and water, LCBROM revealed that opportunity mapping is essential for engaging innovators but requires a benchmark technology or defined consequences of inaction; several screening methods exist for emerging technologies, yet none are widely adopted; and LCBROM meets four critical criteria for low-TRL tools: ease of use, inclusion of all relevant impacts, broad applicability, and low cost. The method enhances communication between developers, problem owners, and experts, improving mutual understanding, and continues to be refined and validated in ongoing research programs. This journal is

This report provides information about life cycle based assessments to be used for developing safe and sustainable chemistry as they have been used in the Mistra SafeChem research programme. The requirement to consider a variety of aspects which are anchored in different research communities is rather novel, therefore it can be expected that adjustments and iterations will be necessary based on results from research programmes such as Mistra SafeChem. Background on established assessment contexts for chemical alternatives assessment and life cycle assessment and the integrated chemical footprint assessment is provided. The key models applied for sustainability assessment are USEtox and the framework for life cycle alternatives assessment and ProScale – all of them are under development and testing for a selection of application cases is therefore intended as a contribution to identify user needs, drivers and barriers for application. Separate case study reports are made available through the programme website for further reading on the current state of implementation. This report includes a synthetic case study to showcase application of tools and current challenges providing data, modelling and interpreting results. The Mistra SafeChem research programme will continue with more case studies and address gaps that have been identified in interdisciplinary work so far to enable the implementation of safe and sustainable chemistry principles.

Total fluorine was determined in 45 consumer product samples from the Swedish market which were either suspected or known to contain fluorinated polymers. Product categories included cookware (70–550 000 ppm F), textiles (10–1600 ppm F), electronics (20–2100 ppm F), and personal care products (10–630 000 ppm F). To confirm that the fluorine was organic in nature, and deduce structure, a qualitative pyrolysis-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (pyr-GC/MS) method was validated using a suite of reference materials. When applied to samples with unknown PFAS content, the method was successful at identifying polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) in cookware, dental products, and electronics at concentrations as low as 0.1–0.2 wt%. It was also possible to distinguish between 3 different side-chain fluorinated polymers in textiles. Several products appeared to contain high levels of inorganic fluorine. This is one of the few studies to quantify fluorine in a wide range of consumer plastics and provides important data on the concentration of fluorine in materials which may be intended for recycling, along with insights into the application of pyr-GC/MS for structural elucidation of fluorinated polymers in consumer products.

The class-wide restriction proposal on perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the European Union is expected to affect a wide range of commercial sectors, including the lithium-ion battery (LIB) industry, where both polymeric and low molecular weight PFAS are used. The PFAS restriction dossiers currently state that there is weak evidence for viable alternatives to the use of PFAS in LIBs. In this Perspective, we summarize both the peer-reviewed literature and expert opinions from academia and industry to verify the legitimacy of the claims surrounding the lack of alternatives. Our assessment is limited to the electrodes and electrolyte, which account for the most critical uses of PFAS in LIB cells. Companies that already offer or are developing PFAS-free electrode and electrolyte materials were identified. There are also indications that PFAS-free electrolytes are in development by at least one other company, but there is no information regarding the alternative chemistries being proposed. Our review suggests that it is technically feasible to make PFAS-free batteries for battery applications, but PFAS-free solutions are not currently well-established on the market. Successful substitution of PFAS will require an appropriate balance among battery performance, the environmental effects associated with hazardous materials and chemicals, and economic considerations.

This report contains a life cycle assessment, LCA, of recycling of lithium-ion battery, LIB, cells. It was performed in the context of the Swedish Scope-lib project. The study aims to highlight environmental hotspots with LIB recycling and shows the potential of LIB recycling. In short, the results indicate that: • the Scope-lib process operated in full scale, can potentially recover almost half of the climate impacts of producing a new NMC traction battery, the currently most common traction battery chemistry. The main reason is that the climate impact (data) of cobalt production has four folded since 2018. It emphasizes the importance of recycling scarce battery materials. • the Scope-lib process is not dependent on carbon-lean electricity to achieve a lot of climate impact avoidance. Using average European electricity mix (around 400 g CO2-eq/kWh) instead of Swedish electricity mix (around 40 g CO2-eq/kWh) only decrease the climate impact avoidance with less than 1 kg CO2-eq/kg cell or less than 10%. • recovery and recycling of ethylene carbonate (used as solvent in LIB electrolytes) shows much smaller potential climate benefits than recovery and recycling of the metals. • the resource depletion gains of the Scope-lib process follow the same trend as the climate impact gains, with the exception of aluminium. To complement the LCA, a life cycle-based risk mapping was performed which identified a particular high risk with fluorinated materials present in binders and electrolytes in NMC batteries which could potentially form hazardous chemical emissions during recycling (such as persistent PFAS) and thus need special attention.

Recycling of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is a rapidly growing industry, which is vital to address the increasing demand for metals, and to achieve a sustainable circular economy. Relatively little information is known about the environmental risks posed by LIB recycling, in particular with regards to the emission of persistent (in)organic fluorinated chemicals. Here we present an overview on the use of fluorinated substances - in particular per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) - in state-of-the-art LIBs, along with recycling conditions which may lead to their formation and/or release to the environment. Both organic and inorganic fluorinated substances are widely reported in LIB components, including the electrodes and binder, electrolyte (and additives), and separator. Among the most common substances are LiPF6 (an electrolyte salt), and the polymeric PFAS polyvinylidene fluoride (used as an electrode binder and a separator). Currently the most common LIB recycling process involves pyrometallurgy, which operates at high temperatures (up to 1600 °C), sufficient for PFAS mineralization. However, hydrometallurgy, an increasingly popular alternative recycling approach, operates under milder temperatures (<600 °C), which could favor incomplete degradation and/or formation and release of persistent fluorinated substances. This is supported by the wide range of fluorinated substances detected in bench-scale LIB recycling experiments. Overall, this review highlights the need to further investigate emissions of fluorinated substances during LIB recycling and suggests that substitution of PFAS-based materials (i.e. during manufacturing), or alternatively post-treatments and/or changes in process conditions may be required to avoid formation and emission of persistent fluorinated substances.

The emission of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from functional textiles was investigated via an outdoor weathering experiment in Sydney, Australia. Polyamide (PA) textile fabrics treated with different water-repellent, side-chain fluorinated polymers (SFPs) were exposed on a rooftop to multiple natural stressors, including direct sunlight, precipitation, wind, and heat for 6-months. After weathering, additional stress was applied to the fabrics through abrasion and washing. Textile characterization using a multiplatform analytical approach revealed loss of both PFAS-containing textile fragments (e.g., microfibers) as well as formation and loss of low molecular weight PFAS, both of which occurred throughout weathering. These changes were accompanied by a loss of color and water repellency of the textile. The potential formation of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) from mobile residuals was quantified by oxidative conversion of extracts from unweathered textiles. Each SFP-textile finish emitted a distinct PFAA pattern following weathering, and in some cases the concentrations exceeded regulatory limits for textiles. In addition to transformation of residual low molecular weight PFAA-precursors, release of polymeric PFAS from degradation and loss of textile fibers/particles contributed to overall PFAS emissions during weathering. © 2022 The Authors.