The Future Path of PVC in the Construction Industry: Where to Go?

In certain types of buildings—such as hospitals, hotels, and schools—PVC products are widely used due to their durability, ease of maintenance, and ability to present patterns and colors. However, many sustainability experts and design teams are urging the industry to reduce or avoid the use of PVC whenever possible.

When PVC is not properly manufactured or disposed of, it can expose workers and surrounding communities to harmful gases. Poorly regulated PVC may also contain hazardous substances such as heavy metals. For these reasons, the International Living Future Institute has included PVC on its “Red List” of materials to avoid.

So, what is the future direction for this material? Should we focus on making PVC as safe and clean as possible, or invest in finding alternative materials with similar performance advantages?

The following three experts provide different perspectives: Shawn Totten, Vice President of Sustainability at Mannington Commercial, whose company produces certified transparent PVC flooring and non-PVC resilient flooring; David Briefel, Director of Sustainability and Partner at Gensler, and co-founder of the Gensler Product Sustainability Standards; and Annie Barfield, an interior design expert at LaBella Associates who specializes in the design of educational, healthcare, and senior care spaces, where PVC products are often the default choice for flooring and wall protection.

They discussed the complexities and possibilities of designing with or without the use of PVC. The following is an excerpt from their conversation.

How has Mannington Company addressed the issue of PVC and its alternatives in recent years?

Sean Totten: I am accustomed to asking designers, when conversing with them, whether they still design buildings and interior environments the same way they did 50 years ago. This question makes designers realize that even manufacturers and supply chains evolve over time. Often, designers' perceptions of products, product safety, and the best product choices for optimal application scenarios deviate from reality. I believe there are several reasons why I make this distinction clear in the American manufacturing sector.

Significant advancements have been achieved in the manufacturing processes of PVC resin. Both energy and material utilization have been highly optimized, with closed production systems now in use. You would observe how these processes have evolved in such environments—from mercury- and asbestos-containing diaphragms to modern membrane materials in closed-loop systems—resulting in a strategic improvement in product quality. The end products have also been continuously optimized as heavy metals and toxic additives have been eliminated.

The polyvinyl chloride resin industry in the United States is subject to strict regulation. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) stipulates that the concentration of exposure for workers must not exceed a few parts per million.

In 2022, the accident rate of the polyvinyl chloride industry chain was 30% lower than that of other chemical industries in the United States, and it accounted for only 20% of the national manufacturing industry accident rate. Emissions are strictly controlled by the government. Since 1987, emissions have been reduced by 86% to 96%. Regarding emissions related to vinyl manufacturing, emissions from resin manufacturers account for less than 0.6% nationwide. Even the Department of Transportation regulates the transportation of raw materials in the value chain, with some aspects being more strictly regulated.

We have removed 15 ingredients from our products. Long-term research has found that these materials pose safety risks, and they must be eliminated to ensure the safety of our employees and customers.

We are committed to continuously improving our processes every day, constantly challenging ourselves in the pursuit of excellence. By establishing operational standards, we have further strengthened our rigor in striving for excellence. We have adopted a Supplier Code of Conduct to regulate expectations for our supply chain, which includes a controlled substances list. All these measures together form the foundation of trust and transparency that we provide to our customers through transparency documentation, ensuring that no ingredients in our products are concealed.

We understand that there is significant demand pressure for PVC-free options in certain markets nationwide, and we respect the design industry's ability to meet customer needs with products that align with these goals. Therefore, we are committed to developing PVC-free products that meet the requirements for both soft surfaces and resilient surfaces. We are now offering a PVC-free modular carpet backing with no additional cost and no minimum order quantity. We want to make it as simple as possible because we want to convey to our customers that we are satisfied with both options.

Rubber products are well-suited to meet the demand for hard surfaces. However, some people prefer the elasticity of luxury tiles or planks. We offer Proxy as an alternative and are also developing a vinyl-free flexible sheet.

However, these products, like PVC, also have their impacts. Therefore, when discussing product choices with designers, if PVC-free is one of their decision criteria, we hope they can make their choice based on the most accurate information possible.

How Gensler's product sustainability standards address PVC products in flooring and wall covering materials

David Briefel: The way we establish the Gensler Product Sustainability standards (GPS) is by setting two performance levels. The Gensler standard applies to all of our projects in the United States, Canada, Europe, and the United Kingdom. A series of applicable standards have been developed for materials used in projects that have a high impact and high usage. The standards are essentially mandatory requirements for product types in these markets.

We have also created a separate performance tier called "market differentiation." Market differentiation is our way of signaling to manufacturers that we would like to incorporate certain requirements into the standard, but these attributes may not yet be mature in the market, with PVC being one such example.

Carpets, resilient flooring, wall coverings, and textiles are all mentioned under "market differentiation" for category-based avoidance, and PVC is one of the components that may appear among them.

We did consider incorporating this into the standard, but there are numerous factors hindering this initiative. One challenge is that when we start requiring such transparency, although we can make requests during the submission process, it is very difficult and problematic for us to require our team to review ingredients and determine whether a product contains a specific substance. To verify whether we avoid using a certain ingredient, we have to rely heavily on third-party verification. This has prompted many products to seek third-party verification, but currently, the supply of such products in the market is still insufficient.

One of the key methods to determine whether certain content can be included in the standard is to ensure that there are enough products available to choose from, so as not to impose an excessive burden on the cost of typical projects.

Another factor is that if we are to promote alternatives to PVC and start removing certain components, we want to ensure that any alternatives provided comply with relevant standards and are verified by third parties and peer-reviewed to ensure they do not cause other types of harm. We consider not only from a human health perspective but also from the perspectives of carbon emissions, life cycle, and social impact. We want to ensure that the alternatives are also validated in all these aspects.

We hope that by including PVC as a market differentiation factor, we will see more third-party verified materials, gain more high-quality information about alternatives, and make these materials the norm, so that we can make requests without compromising our projects.

Could you share a specific case to illustrate why a universal policy cannot be formulated in such scenarios?

Annie Barfield: When considering materials in medical environments, the primary factors to consider are durability, ease of cleaning, and safety for the end user.

I previously worked in the business and hospitality industry, where I rarely used vinyl flooring. In medical environments, wooden flooring cannot be installed, and sometimes natural stone is also unsuitable due to safety considerations. The first areas we need to consider are waiting rooms, operating rooms, examination rooms, laboratories, etc. Each area has different requirements, and the way users use them also varies.

We might use rubber flooring in the operating room. However, another medical facility might not want to use rubber flooring because it’s too soft, making it difficult to move equipment during surgery. The solution might be to use resin flooring, but that’s too hard, as surgeons need to stand for hours. We really need to listen to users’ needs, work to help them understand the situation, and hope to help them make the best decision.

I believe that we have made significant progress in product availability across different application areas. Flooring materials have undoubtedly made great strides, and in the past one or two years, many new products have been able to achieve the vast majority of functions of traditional PVC-based flooring materials.

Some customers and subcontractors may still have a certain dependence on traditional PVC-based products and are cautious about trying new products. One of the challenges we face in the resilient flooring material sector is that there are currently relatively few manufacturers offering such products, and the available color options are sometimes limited.

The selection of non-PVC wallpapers and textiles is diverse. The areas where we still find it difficult to compete are mainly concentrated in basic building materials, such as PVC pipes for infrastructure or roofing materials, where we currently find it challenging to find competitive alternatives.

In terms of interior decoration materials, there are already many competing products on the market. The industry needs some time to adapt to the use of these products, and we also need to conduct a comprehensive evaluation to ensure that they meet our standards—not only from the perspective of human health, but also considering the entire life cycle, including recyclability and social considerations.

Shawn Totten: I believe that in the field of flooring products that require durability, low maintenance, and aesthetic appeal, PVC is an excellent choice because you can trust the resin manufacturing process and the safety of the final product. I think such products should be used in healthcare, education, and institutional settings, as the building standards in these places require the replacement of flooring and other decorative materials every 10 to 15 years. You need a product that can withstand the test of time, maintain its appearance, and not incur high maintenance costs, without the need for extensive polishing and other heavy maintenance work.

Annie Barfield: Many situations are driven by facilities management, considering how to maintain this type of flooring. While there are other alternatives, many large healthcare systems are reluctant to be "guinea pigs" for trying new types of flooring. They spent 10 years figuring out how to maintain the luxury vinyl tile they use. They have had it installed for 8 years, and it still looks good, so why would they switch to something else? By establishing standards, many have already built pricing relationships with manufacturers to include it in their budgets.

Sean Totten: We've seen this product perform excellently over decades. While its manufacturing has indeed become better, more responsible, and safer, this product has always been high-performance. It has always been known for its highly competitive price and flexible features. Looking at the non-PVC alternatives currently available in the market, there are few, if any, that can make it through their first warranty period.

In the medical field, we see that non-PVC products decompose under UVC light, which is a severe test for them. In addition, infection control protocols can also lead to the degradation of the physical properties of products due to their inability to withstand the intensity of chemical cleaning required for infection management or prevention. Under these conditions, we already have proven and mature products, but there is still much to learn about the performance of these new products in long-term use.

What challenges exist in some of the PVC alternative products we see? In which areas are there opportunities, and in which areas do challenges remain?

David Brief: The flooring sector seems to be full of potential. Our design team is excited about some PVC alternative products that have passed durability tests. Although these products have not yet proven their durability after being installed in projects to gain customer trust, there appear to be products that can be applied in commercial environments based on initial performance tests.

Some challenges also revolve around transparency. I believe there are still manufacturers making PVC-free claims without being able to verify their PVC-free assertions or not reaching the level of transparency we expect.

As a globally influential company, what we most want to advocate for is the promotion of products with genuine circular reuse potential. While having PVC-free alternatives is a good thing, it is even more important to encourage manufacturers to produce materials that can be recycled after consumption and remade into new products, rather than merely nominal recycling programs—what we need are truly operational recycling systems.

In the current situation, we must optimize each option to the best state before changing practices or operations. The healthcare sector will not switch to a different cleaning protocol tomorrow, nor will we see performance requirements change quickly. We need to take a pragmatic approach, but the ultimate goal is to create spaces that are beneficial to the environment rather than harmful.