Blog Post

Protecting Public Health: Why the UK Must Lower its Asbestos Exposure Limit Amidst New European Proposals

Adam Fox • 14 September 2023

With new proposals from the European Union to further reduce the exposure limit, will the UK follow suit?

Asbestos, a term synonymous with potential health risks, has been on the radar of both health and construction experts for years. With the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 in place, the UK has guidelines for managing asbestos exposure. But with new proposals from the European Union to further reduce the exposure limit, will the UK follow suit?


The Current State of Asbestos Control in the UK


According to the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, the current control limit for asbestos exposure in the UK is set at 0.1 fibres per cubic centimetre (f/cm³). This limit, also known as the Control Limit, equates to approximately 100,000 fibres per cubic metre of air, an alarmingly high number considering the health hazards associated with asbestos.


In addition to the Control Limit, the UK also has the Clearance Indicator. This is the level that an asbestos enclosure must achieve before it can be deemed safe. Currently set at 0.01 f/cm³, this limit ensures the safety of the environment after asbestos removal.


The European Union's Stance on Asbestos Exposure


While the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 governs the UK, the European Union has been making moves to reduce exposure limits even further. The EU Commission proposed a reduction in the exposure limit of asbestos at work to a value 10 times lower than the current level. This proposition would reduce the limit from 0.1 f/cm³ to 0.01 f/cm³, aligning it with the UK's Clearance Indicator.


This proposal, however, was not deemed sufficient by the European Parliament's employment committee (EMPL). The EMPL insists on a 100-fold reduction, which would lower the limit to 0.001 f/cm³, after a transitional period of four years.


The Implications of the EU's Proposal


The EU's proposal has significant implications for the UK. If the EU reduces its exposure limit, it could exert pressure on the UK to follow suit. But adopting such a low limit brings its own set of challenges.


Currently, there's no available equipment or testing technique that can perform personal monitoring tests at these low levels. The technology is simply not ready to support them.


Moreover, the masks that asbestos removal workers use have a protection factor of 40. To stay within the lower 0.001 f/cm³ exposure limit, any method used to remove asbestos must not release concentrations above 0.04 f/cm³. As of now, no working method can reliably achieve this.


The Agreement on New Asbestos Rules


In a move to protect workers from the risks of asbestos exposure, the European Parliament and EU countries reached a political agreement in June. This agreement entails updating the EU Directive on asbestos at work by lowering asbestos limits ten times and setting new measurement methods.

The new rules set the maximum exposure level to 0.01 asbestos fibres per cubic centimetre (f/cm³) during a maximum transitional period of six years. After this period, member states will be required to implement a new method for measuring asbestos levels - electron microscopy (EM). This method is more sensitive than the currently used phase-contrast microscopy (PCM).


Potential Impact on the UK


As a country that has been diligently following the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, the UK might face significant challenges if it decides to align with the EU's new rules. The technological constraints, coupled with the need to ensure the safety of workers involved in asbestos removal, might make it difficult to implement the lower limit.


However, the adoption of these stringent rules could also spur advancements in protection technology. This could lead to breakthroughs that could make achieving the lower limit feasible, ensuring a safer environment for both workers and the general public.


The Bottom Line


With the EU's progressive approach towards reducing asbestos exposure, the UK, under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, may face pressure to adapt. The question of whether the UK will follow suit remains unanswered, but it is clear that the battle against asbestos exposure is far from over.

In the pursuit of a safer environment, it is crucial to balance the need for stricter rules with the practicality of implementing them. For now, the UK continues to abide by its existing regulations, while keeping an attentive eye on the developments within the EU.


References


1.   Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012

2.   European Commission's Proposal on Asbestos Exposure

3.   Council's Press Release on New Asbestos Rules

4.   Press Release from The Left

5.   Commission's Press Release


Contact Us
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
Share by: