Even before PFAS became a hot topic, the shell jacket was the most discussed and tested garment in the outdoor industry. Has a new, PFAS-free performance benchmark been found? Suston seeks answers in Swedish Lapland.

We start our days in the beautiful, desolate mountains south of the ski resort of Björkliden with a joint avalanche exercise.

The exercise turns out to be doubly educational—soon becoming a clear lesson in the many challenges faced by a shell jacket.

A strong wind blows and sharp snow crystals whip our faces. Two backpacks with avalanche transceivers in transmit mode are buried somewhere by avalanche instructor Andreas Gustafsson. There are almost twenty of us searching, each taking a transceiver.

“From the moment the avalanche has occurred, we have a maximum of 15 minutes to find a person who ends up buried under the snow—otherwise it’s usually too late. You have to move fast!”

Soon we have located a beacon, and the avalanche transceivers seem to be buried. The avalanche probes are unfolded and poked down through the snow. Deep down, where we find one of the backpacks, strong winds take turns at full speed. A moment of silence when the air feels rigid and a moment of anxiety as you pull out a little piece of the “victim.”

As we stand against the freezing wind, I must steel myself against both panic and cold. My thoughts feel fogged. What might it have been like in a real avalanche, if someone was there next to us who was buried? How cold could we get in just seconds? I shudder to think, most likely needing additional hours to get here in time.

The margins between a magical off-piste run and a life-threatening situation can be minimal. The mountains are risky by nature. The weather changes quickly. Some elements can require hard physical effort, interspersed with being completely still. If one minute you get wet and hot, the next you get chilled. If an accident occurs, help is often far away.

This is where shell garment performance truly matters. They are the outer barrier against snow, rain, and wind. At the same time, they have to let out excess sweat and water that the body releases during activity. Otherwise, the base layers get wet, and later they get cold.

Real life outdoor performance and durability: Testing jackets where they matter most

Jackets are therefore perhaps the most important ones in a kit. They not only protect the upper body and head, which are the most important organs. That’s why finding the perfect balance between protection and breathability has occupied material developers and designers for generations. This challenge is not exclusive to outdoor clothing. Hunters, workers, construction workers, firefighters—they all rely on high-performance shell brands.

Today, brands like Patagonia and Gore contribute by testing at the cozy Låktatjåkko Mountain Station, on the bare mountain slopes, located 1,228 meters above sea level, close to Björkliden.

All 15 of them are managers at outdoor brands and ski shops around the Nordics, EU, and the UK. They are used to the wild, and they bring above-average obsessions with shell jacket solutions. For three days, they will undertake summit tours and be trained in new materials and shell garments. To understand why these experts need to be trained further, it helps to take a look back on recent history and understand a few abbreviations like ePFTE and ePE.

The perfect waterproof membrane already exists

It’s been decades since scientists realized that there is one “material” that meets all functional requirements—human skin. It’s completely sealed on the outside, while microscopic pores expand from the inside and release excess heat in the form of sweat. Dirt and grease can be removed, usually with an ordinary bar of soap.

Imitating the properties of human skin became a field of textile research in its own right. While no one has yet managed to solve the puzzle completely, many have come a long way.

Today, several different solutions can be found in the outdoor industry. But perhaps no other material is as well-known as Gore-Tex—and none has been as controversial.

The company W. L. Gore & Associates, commonly known as Gore, was founded in 1958 by Wilbert and Genevieve Gore. Initially focused on cable innovations, the company gradually expanded its activities. With a large portfolio of patents and products for various industries, Gore today has a turnover of around five billion dollars and employs 13,000 people in some thirty countries.

In 1969, the material ePFTE was developed, laying the foundations for products such as Gore-Tex, first as a technical solution in medicine, and soon as a material for outdoor jackets. The first were launched in 1975 with advertising that is just as relevant today: “Impressive protection from water, wind and your body moisture.”

In practice, ePFTE is a thin “membrane” of durable, elastic, and grease-repellent fluoroplastic, with microscopic holes that serve as a seal at one end and allow moisture and heat to pass through at the other. Much like human skin.

Imitating skin properties – with one important exception

To work as outdoor clothing, membranes (also from other manufacturers) need to be laminated together with a textile on the outside—nobody wants to walk around with just a floppy plastic bag around their body. This came to be called the 2-layer shell jacket.

For warmer and more durable garments, a thin fabric was also needed on the inside—the 3-layer jacket was born.

Before long, Gore became a subcontractor and partner to numerous outdoor brands. The outer fabric was impregnated with another solution from Gore Fabrics, also based on water- and grease-repellent fluorocarbons.

During the 1990s, the business grew rapidly—it was not uncommon for people to call shell jackets “Gore-Tex jackets” regardless of the brand making it. As such, brands were lining up to use the materials, while other suppliers also offering membrane solutions struggled. But by the mid-2010s, Gore-Tex’s star status began to be challenged, largely due to one crucial difference between human skin and Gore-Tex ePTFE materials: If a skier were to be buried in an avalanche and never found, the skin would gradually break down. The fluorocarbons in the “Gore-Tex jacket,” however, would have virtually eternal life.

International campaign from Greenpeace targets PFAS in outdoor gear

Back in 2011, Greenpeace launched its infamous Detox Fashion campaign, targeting the fashion industry’s use of hazardous chemicals. In winter 2015, the spotlight turned to the outdoor industry, under the slogan Detox Outdoor. Here, Greenpeace focused on one group of chemicals: The highly fluorinated substances known as PFCs (now often referred to as PFAS).

These carcinogens were found in everything from polar bears to drinking water. Several outdoor brands had already recognized the risks, such as Fjällräven, who began phasing them out in 2011.

There were also other manufacturers of membranes made without PFAS, one of the best known being the Sympatex material made of copolyester. The basis of this material was developed by the chemical company Akzo Nobel, for use in food wrapping where moisture could escape. Sympatex developed this further in textiles and launched its copolyester membrane back in 1986. The material has since been further developed, always without PFAS chemicals.

Unavoidable component of the material: PFAS challenges in waterproof membranes

But Gore-Tex could not make the shift on such a short time frame. The material ePFTE, with all its advantages and production in Gore’s own factories, was still based on a formulation of these “forever chemicals.” Gore’s high internal quality standards on both materials and products would need to be met before a new material could get the green light.

Brands with which Gore collaborated were also criticized—and chose different strategies. Some switched to other suppliers and solutions. While many, such as Patagonia, Norrøna, and Arc’teryx, continued the collaboration.

Anton Svanborg from Patagonia’s Stockholm office and one of the organizers of the meeting in Låktatjåkko gives a presentation to the invitees, as everyone gathers indoors in “Sweden’s highest bar.”

“Our materials experts had many meetings with Gore counterparts. Patagonia was clear that PFAS had to be phased out, while we realized that it would take time. In 2016, we agreed on 2025 as a final deadline, with several milestones along the way,” Anton Svanborg says and continues:

“In parallel, we tested other waterproofing materials. Virtually none met our quality requirements.”

The following year, a more unexpected collaboration was confirmed: Gore and Greenpeace agreed on a phase-out plan that was endorsed by their respective research teams.

An even more complicated abbreviation: Gore-Tex PFCec Free explained

This was followed by several years of intensive research at Gore. The PFAS-based impregnations were now easier to find replacements for, with one caveat: The garments needed to be washed and re-impregnated more often.

But ePFTE, which has been around since 1959, was a much harder nut to crack. A central part of Gore-Tex’s success was the high-quality requirements that Gore Fabrics set—not only on their materials but also on their partners and the products they manufacture. No other company in the outdoor industry has as many resources for testing water resistance, durability, etc., at its disposal.

Gore came up with its own solution to the problem, namely a variant “Free of PFCs of Environmental Concern,” abbreviated to “PFCec Free,” which was accepted by the Greenpeace research team. In short, Gore-Tex membranes were now using a more stable chemical structure, whereby PFCs no longer risked leaching from the products as before.

The development included extensive studies, including what happens when the jacket is no longer usable and is discarded. If it is burned in a modern incinerator, such as those commonly found in Scandinavia or Germany, do the PFCs escape in the smoke from the plant? No, the researchers found.

Soon, Gore-Tex sales representatives started traveling to their major customers and holding “Gore-Tex PFCec Free” training sessions, and then shell garments with such symbols began appearing in outdoor stores.

The new solution: Expanding polyethylene (ePE) for shell jackets

In retrospect, there was a kind of culture clash between the engineering-based giant and the outdoor community, with its close connection to nature. For a salesperson in an outdoor store, explaining “PFCec Free” to a skeptical customer became too complicated.

At the same time, when legislators in the EU and several U.S. states started talking about banning PFASs in certain industries, it was clear that this solution would be rather short-lived.

So, there was a sense of relief among brands like Patagonia when Gore unveiled its new patented expanding polyethylene solution—ePE.

The first shell garments with Gore-Tex ePE arrived in selected outdoor stores as early as 2022. But after that, one important piece of the puzzle remained: The top-tier Gore-Tex Pro. This material, which is both the most expensive and the most durable, was the most difficult to produce with the new technology. Eventually, Gore was able to produce a number of test products in collaboration with Patagonia and other selected partners.

In the fall of 2025, such shell garments will be available in stores. This is the news that the team at Låktatjåkko mountain station is now getting familiar with—the shell garments made of ePE, which will have the same high performance as the previous PFAS-based Gore-Tex Pro products.

“I’ve actually been testing an ePE Pro jacket since the summer. So far, I don’t notice any difference,” says Peter Darch, Human Resources Manager at UK retailer Ellis Brigham.

New materials, new washing advice, and reduced environmental impact

The next presentation will be given by Linus Hallberg, Marketing Manager for Gore-Tex in Scandinavia. He says that people who use shell garments with Gore-Tex will have to change their behavior.

“In the past, many people thought they never had to wash their Gore-Tex garments. Actually, that wasn’t true—the waterproofing actually needed to be reactivated at regular intervals. This is still the case today. But with PFAS-free impregnations, you need to wash and re-impregnate more often than before,” says Linus Hallberg.

“It’s easy to tell when it’s time—if the water doesn’t turn into beads and run off after washing. Today, there are several specialized detergents that contain impregnation.”

According to Linus Hallberg, the new materials also have other environmental benefits. The new laminates contain more varieties of recycled material than before. In production, both water consumption and CO2 emissions are significantly reduced.

Finding new steps along the way

During the days in Låktatjåkka, we alternate between lectures and presentations indoors, and summit tours and downhill skiing on the surrounding mountains. Some of the participants are worried. How can they explain the differences between ePTFE and ePE to both employees and visitors in the shops? And the differences between different impregnations?

“Keep it simple. This material has the same quality as before, is better for the environment but you have to wash more often,” suggests Peter Darch from Ellis Brigham.

Does this mean the search for the perfect shell jacket is over? No, it doesn’t. The share of recycled plastic materials can increase. Manufacturing can use less energy and water. Garments should be easier to recycle at the end of their life (Sympatex copolyester membranes, for example, can be laminated with polyester outer fabrics to create a so-called mono-material garment). New hazardous chemicals may yet be identified. Increasingly varied weather can also place new demands on materials, for example, if it starts to rain more often during skiing.

The truth is that the quest for the perfect shell jacket may never end—but now, PFAS garments will soon be out of the shops. Opinions within the outdoor industry differ on whether this should have happened sooner, but it is in any case an important milestone journey towards better products with less environmental impact.

 

 

Photos: Evelina Rönnbäck