Wolfram-Ferdinand Shultz, Head of Casualty Treaty for Continental Europe at Howden Re, and Kalle Pohls, Head of Liability and Claims at Howden, have discussed the growing implications of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals,” for the European liability (re)insurance market.
Although PFAS have been in use since the 1940s in products ranging from non-stick cookware to firefighting foams, their potential risks are only now being fully recognized. Wolfram Schultz explained:
"Although PFAS have been used since the 1940s, in consumer goods, from non-stick cookware to firefighting foams, we are now only starting to fully appreciate the scale of their potential risk. Their chemical stability makes them persistent in the environment and the human body, raising long-term health and environmental concerns. Their risks cut across industries, liability classes, and geographies, with uncertain clean-up costs and unpredictable legal liabilities."
Kalle Pohls added:
"We are also seeing increasing public awareness, regulatory activity, and better testing methods. These developments mean that PFAS-related issues are being identified more frequently. Unlike a single-event loss, PFAS contamination accumulates silently over time. However, for the market, it’s less about alarm and more about preparing for potential liabilities in a structured way."
The experts noted several key trends affecting insurers. Litigation related to PFAS is rising steadily; lawsuits in the United States have increased each year for a decade while Europe is experiencing more claims as monitoring improves. Settlements involving major manufacturers have reached multi-billion-dollar levels globally. The differences between regions are narrowing as European courts become more assertive—recent decisions in Italy and Sweden have linked PFAS exposure directly to bodily injury.
When asked about challenges facing (re)insurers regarding PFAS exposure, Schultz said:
"I would say it would be uncertainty around exposure and remediation which is pushing carriers towards exclusions, higher deductibles, and sub-limit. While PFAS exclusions are already standard in the US, Europe shows mixed approaches depending on client risk profiles."
Pohls pointed out that financial uncertainty remains high:
"There is also uncertainty around the potential financial impact in Europe. In Europe alone, the projected cost of cleaning up PFAS contamination is up to €95 billion for health-related issues and another €170 billion for environmental remediation over two decades. These are costs that will inevitably translate into claims; the question is how much of that will be borne by insurers."
Both experts emphasized that these trends require action from insurers and policyholders alike. Schultz stated:
"It really means we must act now. Many carriers are already tightening terms, adding PFAS exclusions, and raising retentions. But this is not just about excluding the risk, it’s about understanding it. At Howden Re, we partner with clients to align reinsurance structures with regulatory demands and evolving science. Tailored solutions, rather than broad exclusions, will be essential to ensuring adequate protection while addressing emerging liabilities."
Pohls concluded:
"We are encouraging data sharing and dialogue. The more information available, the more we can support clients with tailored reinsurance solutions that genuinely protect them rather than unintentionally leaving gaps."
They agreed that managing risks associated with PFAS requires collaboration among clients, brokers,and carriers along with a strategy informed by science,data,and legal insight.