From Risk to Resolution: Could Tech Transform Asbestos Safety in the UK?

Adam Fox • 5 August 2024

Can we afford to delay adopting a technology that would help save lives?

As the European Commission takes decisive steps to protect its citizens from the dangers of asbestos, the UK faces a pressing question: should it follow suit and adopt stricter asbestos exposure limits? The argument for reducing permissible exposure levels is compelling, especially given the grave health risks associated with asbestos, which remains the UK's biggest industrial killer. Despite the inherent challenges, particularly in the realms of technology and financial cost, the potential to save lives should steer our course.


The Case for Lowering Asbestos Exposure Limits


Recent initiatives by the European Commission underscore an urgent reality: asbestos is a lethal carcinogen responsible for a significant number of preventable deaths across Europe. The Commission's bold steps aim to protect workers and the environment by proposing to lower the occupational exposure limit to asbestos tenfold, based on the latest scientific advancements and technological developments in safety monitoring. In the UK, where similar industrial and building contexts exist, adopting these stringent limits could dramatically decrease health risks for thousands of workers each year.


Current Challenges in Asbestos Detection and Analysis


Traditionally, the UK has utilised Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM) for asbestos monitoring. While effective within its limits, PCM fails to detect the finest—and often most harmful asbestos fibres. These microscopic fibres can linger in the air long after initial disturbance and pose severe health risks upon inhalation.


Although not entirely new, advancements in technology present Electron Microscopy (EM) as a superior alternative. EM offers a more precise analysis, capable of identifying these smaller fibres that PCM misses. This technology could revolutionise safety standards by providing a clearer, more accurate picture of airborne asbestos levels in environments from old buildings to construction sites. It would also bolster the current standards worked to by Licensed Asbestos Removal Contractors (LARC’s) potentially meaning they would have to spend longer and adopt new methods of fine cleaning an asbestos removal area prior to handing it back to the client, making it safer to be re-occupied. 


The Cost and Complexity of Advanced Asbestos Analysis


Transitioning to Electron Microscopy underscores 2 significant challenges:-


  1. Cost. 
  2. Portability


EM technology involves sophisticated, expensive equipment that represents a substantial investment for any business. Moreover, EM is not as portable as PCM, complicating its deployment in various field conditions.


Further complicating this transition are the upskilling of the existing workforce via training and qualification, as well as the time required to conduct EM analysis. These factors will inevitably lead to longer project timelines and higher overall costs for the end client. However, when considering the technology's ability to prevent asbestos-related diseases, its value becomes apparent. We must ask ourselves: can we afford to delay adopting a technology that would help save lives?


Balancing Costs with Public Health


The financial implications of adopting advanced technological solutions like EM must be weighed against the potential healthcare savings over time. Asbestos-related diseases are not only deadly but also cause significant long-term healthcare costs and personal suffering. Investing in better detection technology could reduce these burdens dramatically.


The government and industries must explore ways to balance these costs. Possible measures could include financial support for businesses transitioning to better technology, such as grants, subsidies, or tax incentives. Such initiatives could alleviate the immediate financial burden and encourage widespread adoption of safer practices.


The Role of Government and Industry in Facilitating the Transition


It is essential for the UK government and industrial sectors to take proactive steps towards safer asbestos management. This includes setting realistic timelines for businesses to adapt to new regulations, offering training for technicians in the use of EM, and fostering a regulatory environment that supports health and safety without stifling economic growth.


The government could play a pivotal role by providing clear guidelines and support for companies transitioning to new technologies. Industry leaders, for their part, should prioritise investing in technologies that ensure the safety and well-being of their employees—their most valuable asset.


Conclusion


As the UK considers its stance on asbestos regulation, the lessons from the European Union offer a valuable blueprint for action. Embracing advanced technology in asbestos detection and analysis, despite its higher initial costs and complexity, is a critical step towards safeguarding public health. The potential to significantly reduce the incidence of asbestos-related illnesses should guide our decisions, transcending the constraints of current methodologies.


In an era where technological advancements continuously reshape our industries, adopting stricter asbestos control measures is not only a regulatory or economic issue but a moral imperative. The UK has the opportunity to lead by example, demonstrating that public health is the ultimate priority in its policy decisions. It is time for change—a time to commit to an asbestos-free future where the safety of our workers and the public is guaranteed.


Want to ensure you have your asbestos fully under control? Reach out to us today for a FREE audit and advice.

Contact Now
by Adam Fox 9 April 2025
Asbestos and the Circular Economy: Why It's Time to Stop Burying the Problem Twenty-five years after asbestos was banned in the UK, we’re still digging a hole—literally and metaphorically. Every day, across the country, asbestos waste is double-bagged, labelled, loaded into skips, and driven to landfill, where it will sit indefinitely, taking up valuable space, creating ongoing liability, and adding to our already bloated environmental burden. And yet, 2025 presents a different path. A smarter one. One that replaces disposal with repurposing, and turns a dangerous waste product into a useful, circular resource. The technology exists. So the question we should be asking isn’t “Can we recycle asbestos?” It’s “Why the hell aren’t we doing it already?” Landfill is Failing Us—But We’re Still Relying On It Let’s start with the basics. There are still over 1.5 million buildings in the UK that contain asbestos, most of them now approaching the end of their useful life. As these structures age or undergo refurbishment, the volume of asbestos waste is only going to increase. Right now, we handle that waste the same way we did decades ago: • Identify it • Remove it (usually under fully controlled conditions) • Seal it in heavy-duty plastic • Drive it to landfill • Bury it • Forget about it Except we don’t forget, do we? Because landfill space is running out. Disposal costs are going up. And the environmental cost? We’re only just starting to count it. There’s a Better Way—and It Already Works Here’s what most duty holders don’t realise: We no longer have to bury asbestos. Thanks to recent advances in thermal treatment technology, we now have a method that can safely denature asbestos, breaking down its fibrous structure and rendering it harmless. Companies like Thermal Recycling in the UK are already proving this is not science fiction. They’re using high temperatures to transform asbestos cement products—like corrugated roofing sheets—into an inert ceramic material that’s completely safe. But here's the best bit: That material isn’t just neutral. It’s useful. It can be crushed and graded into aggregate, which can be used in road construction, paving, and concrete mixes. Instead of creating a waste burden for the next generation, we’re creating a valuable, low-carbon building material. Why Aggregate Matters in the Carbon Equation The production of virgin aggregates—through mining and quarrying—is energy-intensive and environmentally damaging. It contributes significantly to CO₂ emissions and destroys natural landscapes. So by replacing some of that demand with recycled aggregate from denatured asbestos, we: • Cut carbon emissions • Reduce dependence on extraction • Shrink the environmental footprint of infrastructure projects • Extend the life of quarries and reduce waste tonnage That’s not just a win for waste management. That’s a win for the entire construction supply chain. And yet most people in the industry don’t even know it’s possible. Why Are We Still Burying What Could Be Reused? As someone who’s worked in asbestos compliance for over 20 years—and now helps business leaders manage risk more intelligently—I’ve seen the same patterns play out time and time again: • “We’ll just do what we’ve always done.” • “This project’s tight on budget—landfill’s cheaper, right?” • “We’re just following the usual route—it’s less risky.” Let’s be honest. That mindset is outdated, short-sighted, and lazy. Cost may always be a factor, but the belief that landfill is “cheaper” needs to be challenged. Once you factor in: • Long-term environmental costs • Reputational risk • Rising disposal fees • And the public pressure for sustainable practices Thermal recycling is already starting to make sense. Especially when the output is something usable, not something buried. Licensed Contractors: You Don’t Get a Free Pass Either This isn’t just about clients or duty holders. Licensed Asbestos Removal Contractors (LARC’s) have a moral obligation here too. And I say that not from a place of opinion—but from first-hand experience, day in and day out for over two decades. Too often, LARCs put profits over progress. They default to landfill because it’s faster, easier to price up, and keeps their margins clean. They know the alternatives exist—but they don’t explore them, let alone offer them to their clients. When you hold a licence from the HSE, you’re not just a business—you’re a guardian of public health. That comes with responsibility. Choosing the most sustainable, forward-thinking disposal route should be part of that. Especially when the technology is available, proven, and legal. It’s time for the industry to stop hiding behind what’s convenient and start leading from the front. A Moral Obligation for Everyone Involved Whether you’re a: • Local authority managing public buildings • Developer under pressure to go green • Commercial landlord looking to reduce liability • Or a licensed contractor with influence over disposal routes —you have a responsibility to look beyond the cheapest or fastest option. If there’s a proven, safe, and more sustainable way to manage asbestos, you have a duty to understand it before choosing to ignore it. Because let’s be honest: “We didn’t know” isn’t going to wash when the public starts asking why we’re still filling landfill sites with a problem we already have the technology to eliminate. So What Can You Do Differently? No one’s asking you to overhaul your entire waste strategy overnight. But you can—and should—start asking better questions: • “Is landfill our only option here?” • “Could this waste stream be recycled instead of buried?” • “What suppliers, contractors, or experts do we know who can help us explore this?” You don’t have to be a global pioneer. But if you’re in a position of responsibility, you should at least be aware that the old way isn’t the only way anymore. Final Thought: The Future Is Circular—Whether You Join In or Not Asbestos will be with us for decades to come. That’s a fact. But how we handle it—and whether we choose to keep repeating the past or do something smarter—is up to us. Thermal recycling and other denaturing technologies offer a rare opportunity to do something that actually moves the industry forward. Not just ticking the compliance box. Not just burying the problem. But solving it—and turning it into something useful in the process. If you’re involved in asbestos management in even the slightest way, ask yourself this: Are you part of the problem, or part of the solution?
by Adam Fox 13 January 2025
Compliance is no longer just about avoiding fines; it’s about creating workplaces where people can thrive.
by Adam Fox 6 December 2024
This is more than a regulatory issue—it’s a moral obligation
by Adam Fox 7 November 2024
Elevating health and safety from a compliance obligation to a strategic business focus offers immense benefits
by Adam Fox 4 September 2024
A groundbreaking solution to a long-standing problem
by Adam Fox 21 August 2024
More companies, sole traders and responsible individuals are now facing hefty fines or even custodial sentences for non-compliance
Show More