Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Brominated flame retardants (BFRs) remain indispensable for polymer fire safety owing to their efficient radical-quenching capability and excellent compatibility, yet their environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity pose a fundamental tension between fire performance and life-cycle sustainability. This review addresses this tension through a central “structure–performance–exposure/hazard–circularity” framework, which links the molecular features governing flame-retardant efficiency to migration and release behavior, environmental fate, and toxicological outcomes. The review proposes an integrated Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) strategy spanning scenario-specific authorization, low-release molecular design, bromine reduction via synergistic formulations, and life-cycle risk management. For the end-of-life stage, it further assesses the technical boundaries of precise identification, separation, targeted debromination, bromine resource regeneration, and safety evaluation of recycled products. A key contribution is an evidence-based, tiered decision rule: applications characterized by high exposure, high release potential, and inadequate safe-treatment pathways should be prioritized for substitution, whereas applications with severe fire-failure consequences and immature alternatives should be managed through low-release design, traceable management, and controlled recycling. This framework offers a coherent basis for coordinated decision-making among flame-retardant performance, environmental safety, and resource circularity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: