Words and opinions: Jennifer Semple
Australia’s cleaning and hygiene sector faces an unexpected regulatory crisis. At the heart of it is ethylene oxide, a chemical essential to the production of surfactants that underpin everything from hospital disinfectants to household detergents. While its hazards at high exposures are undisputed, Australia’s current zero-tolerance stance on trace residues is creating a compliance trap that threatens the availability of critical cleaning products.
Many surfactants, the backbone of most cleaning products, are made using ethylene oxide. Even with strict manufacturing controls, trace levels in the parts-per-million (ppm) range remain as unavoidable by-products.
Ethylene oxide is hazardous at significant exposures, which is why its use is tightly regulated worldwide. But in Australia, it is listed in Schedule 7 of the Poisons Standard, which prohibits any detectable amount, even at trace levels. With modern analytical testing now able to detect ethylene oxide at parts per billion, once invisible residues are now creating a compliance problem.
Why a zero limit doesn’t work
Zero isn’t achievable in practice. Saying the limit for ethylene oxide must be zero detectable is like saying drinking water is unsafe unless it contains absolutely no lead or bacteria. With today’s testing, very low levels of something hazardous can always be found, but that doesn’t mean the water is dangerous.
By contrast, a very low ethylene oxide cut-off (such as 10 or 20 ppm) would be scientifically robust, is achievable for product manufacturers, and poses no meaningful health risk, providing safety without blocking essential products. It also aligns with international practice, as other major economies, such as the EU, Canada, New Zealand and ASEAN, all allow trace amounts. Australia’s zero-tolerance stance leaves us out of step. It’s not realistic, and it forces an outcome that actually undermines safety by putting necessary cleaning and hygiene products at risk.
Where things stand
A 2019 review by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) clarified that the regulation of ethylene oxide impurities in surfactants was not intended. In response, the industry proposed a pragmatic limit of 20 ppm and an expert committee proposed a 10 ppm limit, significantly more workable than a zero-tolerance approach. Despite this, the interim regulatory decision was to keep the acceptable ethylene oxide level at zero.
If upheld in the final decision, a zero limit could have immediate and significant consequences. Consumers and businesses would be unable to access many existing surfactant-based cleaning products. This would disrupt supply chains, leading to shortages in hospitals, aged care facilities, schools, food manufacturing, hospitality and households, ultimately increasing public health and business continuity risks.
The science is clear: zero is not a practical or meaningful standard. Setting a traceable limit in line with international norms would protect both public health and supply certainty, ensuring vital cleaning products remain available where they matter most. If regulators persist with an absolute ban, Australia risks undermining its own health system and economy in the name of unattainable purity.
What you can do
Accord Australasia is coordinating the industry response and ensuring regulators understand the realities of manufacturing surfactants and the scale of the impact. If your business supplies surfactant-based cleaning or hygiene products, your input is urgently needed to help safeguard continued access to these essential products and to protect your business.
Please contact Rianna Goodwin at rgoodwin@accord.asn.au to express your interest or for more information.
