On June 20, 2025, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published a report entitled Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and Alternatives in Hydraulic Oils and Lubricants: Report on Commercial Availability and Current Uses. The report examines the commercial availability and current uses of PFAS and non-PFAS alternatives in lubricants and hydraulic oils within the framework of the Global PFAS Group. OECD notes that it considered publicly available information from worldwide sources, including those provided by members of the Global PFAS Group. The information was supplemented by discussions and inputs from experts with academic, regulatory, and industry stakeholders. The key findings include:

• PFAS are used in various lubricant components across a wide range of different sectors and end uses. Approximately one third of the PFAS used are in base oils (most notably perfluoropolyethers (PFPE)) and two thirds are micro-powder additives (almost entirely polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)). PFAS are shown to impart wide and unique combinations of properties, that in turn enable a range of technical functions simultaneously. These are associated with key performance qualities that cannot be attained with more “conventional” lubricants.
• While progress is being made in substituting PFAS in these uses, and various non-fluorinated alternatives have been identified, manufacturers and downstream users of lubricants have highlighted the technical and economic challenges in developing suitable alternatives in many uses. This is mainly associated with the multi-functional aspect of PFAS in these uses. The report states that “it is suggested that, while alternatives can replicate some of the functionality needed, it is technically challenging to replace all desired functionality with one ‘drop in’ option.”
• In the absence of significant market drivers towards substitution, the market for PFAS-based lubricants is expected to expand in the future. According to the report, it is currently indicated that PFAS-based lubricants are limited to uses that must withstand “harsh” or “extreme” conditions and where the use is considered by the user to be “critical.” The report notes that what constitutes “harsh” or “extreme” conditions or “critical” uses is subjective and likely to vary between sectors and users. The report highlights the importance of making an objective assessment of required performance requirements to determine where, and for what functions, available alternatives can currently be used.

Based on the conclusions, the report makes a number of specific policy recommendations, highlighting specific actions for different actors, to address the barriers and challenges associated with substitution of PFAS in lubricant and hydraulic oils:

• For international organizations: Actions to understand further the potential health and environmental risks of PFAS and non-PFAS alternatives; and systematically collect market data on the use of PFAS and alternatives in hydraulic oils and lubricants.
• For national and regional governments and agencies: Develop and implement national- or regional-level action plans and risk management measures to minimize the uses and releases of PFAS in hydraulic oils and lubricants; establish a regulatory approach incorporating requirements for users to report and assess alternatives for identified uses, including specific guidance on what a “critical” application is; and prioritize research funding to address current knowledge gaps.
• For individual companies: Actions to phase out the use of PFAS in lubricant and hydraulic oil products where possible; a more detailed evaluation of uses and performance requirements and targeted comparative tests to evaluate fully the potential alternatives.
• For industry associations: Actions to investigate and monitor better the uses of PFAS across the full supply chain in different sectors; supporting the sharing of knowledge and data between different users, including data from the evaluation of alternatives and methods or approaches to help users determine if the use of PFAS in specific applications is “critical.”