The need for Enzyme Bioremediation across London

London is a city of layers: Roman roads beneath Victorian houses, modern towers rising above Georgian terraces, and an urban fabric stitched together by parks, canals and the River Thames. It is also a city that carries the chemical and industrial legacy of its past. Brownfield sites, contaminated soils, stormwater run-off, ageing sewer systems and the invisible load of “forever chemicals”, microplastics and pharmaceuticals together create an environmental challenge that is both local and systemic. Conventional remediation approaches — heavy excavation, landfill disposal, or energy-intensive physicochemical treatments — are often disruptive, expensive and carbon-heavy. For a dense, valuable and highly populated urban area like London, solutions that are effective and low-impact are essential.

Enzyme bioremediation — the targeted use of naturally occurring or engineered enzymes to break down pollutants — offers a genuine, pragmatic alternative. It combines scientific precision with ecological sensitivity: enzymes can be formulated to attack specific pollutants, applied with minimal disturbance, and biodegrade after doing their work. In London’s constrained urban setting, with its pressing housing needs, protected river environments and intense public scrutiny, bespoke enzyme solutions can unlock multiple benefits: safer redevelopment of brownfield land, cleaner waterways, reduced greenhouse-gas emissions from remediation projects and lower long-term risk to public health.

This article explains why enzyme bioremediation matters for London, surveys the most urgent pollutant problems the city faces, summarises the scientific advances that make enzyme approaches viable at scale, outlines how bespoke enzyme variants can be designed and deployed, and discusses regulatory, practical and commercial considerations for moving from pilots to widespread adoption.

London’s contamination picture — why remediation is needed now

London’s rapid industrialisation in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries left a patchwork of land parcels that contain petrol and oil residues, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from coal and tar processing, heavy metals from historical manufacturing, and newer classes of contaminants such as PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), pharmaceuticals and microplastics. These contaminants are not just a problem of old factories; transport corridors, former gasworks and petrol stations, landfill sites, and even green spaces can hide contamination that poses risks to human health, construction projects and the riverine environment.

Local planning authorities and developers increasingly encounter contamination constraints during the early planning and master-planning stages. The Greater London Authority has recognised that identifying contamination issues at the planning stage helps deliver cost-effective and sustainable outcomes for redevelopment projects, particularly when large brownfield sites are involved. Strategic remediation can unlock land for housing, infrastructure and public space while reducing long-term liabilities. For many of these sites, low-impact, in-situ approaches — including enzyme treatments — can be far more practical and less destructive than excavation and off-site disposal.

Meanwhile, London’s water environment remains under pressure. The Thames and its tributaries receive urban run-off, intermittent sewage discharges and industrial inputs. Pollutants such as hydrocarbons, nutrients and emerging contaminants can harm aquatic life and complicate the city’s efforts to meet water-quality objectives. In parallel, the UK’s historic reliance on spreading treated sewage sludge (biosolids) to farmland has created pathways for microplastics and chemical contaminants to re-enter the terrestrial and aquatic environment, a problem that has received renewed public attention and regulatory scrutiny. Recent investigative reporting and scientific reviews have highlighted the scale of contaminants — including PFAS and microplastics — entering soils and waterways via sludge and other waste streams.

These facts mean London needs remediation tools that are selective, scalable and suitable for urban deployment. Enzyme bioremediation fits that brief.

What is enzyme bioremediation and how does it work?

Enzymes are biological catalysts: proteins that speed specific chemical reactions without being consumed by them. In bioremediation, enzymes are chosen or engineered to catalyse reactions that convert a pollutant into harmless compounds (mineralisation) or into intermediate products that are easily assimilated by native microbes.

There are a few practical modes for applying enzymes:

• Direct application of free enzymes to contaminated soil or water when the pollutant is readily accessible and enzyme conditions (pH, temperature) can be controlled.
• Immobilised enzymes, where the protein is stabilised on a solid support (e.g. beads, hydrogels, membranes), which increases operational stability and allows for reuse or containment.
• Enzyme-embedded matrices (for example hydrogels or permeable reactive barriers) that can be installed in situ to treat flowing groundwater or point-source discharges.
• Biostimulation / bioaugmentation using microbes that either produce the target enzyme in situ or work synergistically with added enzymes.

The choice of approach depends on the contaminant, site conditions and the practical constraints of the remediation project (space, access, timescale).

One of the strengths of enzyme remediation is specificity: enzymes like laccases, peroxidases and certain hydrolases have known activity against classes of organic pollutants such as phenolics, PAHs and esters. Recent advances — from enzyme engineering and formulation science to immobilisation strategies — have improved enzyme stability in challenging environments and opened up applications for traditionally recalcitrant pollutants. Bioglobe’s research pipeline focuses precisely on these capabilities: we develop organic enzyme formulations tailored to matrices (soil, sediment, wastewater) and pollutant suites, and we combine lab-scale R&D with field pilot testing to ensure practical deliverability.

The major pollution challenges enzyme solutions can tackle in London

Hydrocarbons and PAHs on brownfield land

Many redevelopment sites in London contain petroleum hydrocarbons and PAHs — residues of historical fuel storage, coal tar, creosote and industrial processes. These pollutants bind to soil organic matter and can be persistent. Enzymes such as laccases and peroxidases (often used in tandem with mediators or carrier materials) can oxidise PAHs and reduce their toxicity, enabling in-situ treatment that preserves soil structure and reduces the need for excavation. Recent laboratory and field evidence shows enzyme hydrogels and immobilised laccase systems can significantly reduce PAH loadings under realistic site conditions.

PFAS (“forever chemicals”)

PFAS are a particularly challenging group of compounds: their carbon–fluorine bonds are among the strongest in organic chemistry, which is why these molecules resist degradation and have earned the nickname “forever chemicals”. Traditional physico-chemical treatments (e.g. activated carbon, ion exchange, incineration) can be costly and energy intensive. Over the past few years, research has reported promising advances in enzymatic degradation pathways for certain PFAS classes, including extracellular enzymes capable of initiating defluorination and breakdown under controlled conditions. The field is advancing rapidly: recent comprehensive reviews summarise current successes, mechanisms and the remaining challenges for extracellular enzymatic PFAS degradation. Enzyme-based options are not yet a silver bullet, but they provide a complementary pathway that is greener and potentially more scalable for certain PFAS-affected matrices.

Microplastics and polyester microfibres

Microplastics are released to London’s environment from multiple sources: urban run-off, tyre wear, synthetic fibres from laundry, and importantly, from treated sewage sludge when it is spread on land. The latter pathway is particularly worrying because biosolids are recycled to farmland and fields, dispersing microplastics into soils and eventually into rivers and food chains. While current wastewater treatment processes capture many of the larger microplastic particles, residual microplastics persist through sludge treatment and land application. Emerging research (including briefing papers from leading UK institutions) suggests that microbial and enzymatic strategies could be developed to break down certain polymers or to remove microplastic particles during wastewater and sludge processing — potentially stopping a major pathway before it reaches soils and rivers.

Pharmaceuticals and other micropollutants

Pharmaceutical residues and personal-care chemicals enter the sewer network and can pass through conventional wastewater treatment unchanged. Enzymes such as oxidases and certain peroxidases can transform some pharmaceutical compounds into more biodegradable metabolites, allowing downstream biological treatment processes to finish the job. Integrating tailored enzyme stages into existing sewage treatment works could reduce pollutant loads before discharge into the Thames and tributaries.

Why enzyme solutions are well suited to London’s urban constraints

London is an extremely constrained environment. Space is at a premium, neighbourhoods cannot tolerate long periods of excavation, and remediation projects often intersect with housing developments, transport infrastructure and important ecological corridors. These realities make enzyme approaches appealing for several reasons:

• Minimal disruption: in-situ enzyme applications can often be done using small drill rigs, injection systems, or shallow installations rather than block-wide dig-and-haul operations. This reduces noise, traffic and waste movements.
• Lower carbon footprint: less excavation means lower transport and landfill emissions. Enzymatic processes themselves often require little energy compared with thermal or chemical treatments.
• Targeted action: enzyme formulations can be tailored to pollutant types and concentrations, minimising unintended impacts on non-target materials and organisms.
• Compatibility with redevelopment timelines: many developers and councils require remediation to be completed to achieve planning consent; enzyme options can often be integrated into staged redevelopment plans, treating contamination as part of construction sequencing rather than as a separate, time-consuming operation.
• Public acceptability: enzyme methods are perceived as “natural” compared with harsh chemicals, and when presented with transparent safety data they can improve stakeholder confidence.

These advantages do not mean enzymes are universally applicable; they are most powerful when matched to realistic pollutant profiles and when combined with good site investigation data and monitoring regimes.

Scientific advances that make enzyme strategies practical today

Enzyme bioremediation has benefited from several recent scientific and technological advances:

• Enzyme discovery and engineering: modern screening platforms and protein engineering techniques allow researchers to discover enzymes with novel activity and to optimise stability, substrate range and catalytic efficiency. This includes directed evolution, rational design and AI-assisted sequence optimisation. Bioglobe’s in-house R&D applies these approaches to produce bespoke variants tuned to specific remediation challenges.
• Immobilisation and formulation technologies: enzymes are proteins and are sensitive to environmental conditions. Immobilisation on solid supports, entrapment in hydrogels, or embedding in permeable reactive materials increases operational robustness and allows enzymes to function in the presence of metals, variable pH and fluctuating temperatures. Recent literature highlights hydrogels and immobilised laccase systems as particularly promising for soil and wastewater applications.
• Extracellular enzymatic PFAS research: the enzyme–PFAS literature has accelerated, with systematic reviews and experimental studies reporting enzymatic defluorination pathways and candidate enzymes that can act on certain PFAS analogues under aerobic conditions. These developments do not yet represent a universal solution to all PFAS chemistry, but they mark a step change in possibilities for green PFAS remediation.
• Integration with treatment infrastructure: rather than replacing existing wastewater or soil treatment systems, enzymes are increasingly being viewed as modular add-ons — a stage in a treatment train — that can significantly reduce loadings of specific contaminants before downstream processes. Researchers and pilot plants are exploring retrofittable enzyme stages for sewage treatment works to address microplastics and pharmaceuticals.

These advances allow companies like Bioglobe to move beyond lab-only demonstrations and into robust formulation, pilot deployment and scaled application.

What Bioglobe offers: bespoke enzyme variants for London’s needs

At Bioglobe we combine laboratory science, AI-assisted enzyme discovery and field experience to produce organic enzyme remediation solutions designed for urban challenges. Our capabilities include:

• Custom enzyme blends that target defined pollutant suites (for example, hydrophobic PAHs plus light hydrocarbons; or mixed pharmaceutical residues); blended formulations consider co-contaminants and the physical matrix (soil texture, organic carbon content, water table depth).
• Stabilised enzyme products using immobilisation, hydrogel embedding or pelletised carriers for slow-release and extended activity in situ — particularly valuable for groundwater and riverbank applications.
• Delivery systems for constrained urban sites: injection rigs for deep soils, surface application protocols for shallow contamination, and retrofittable modules for wastewater treatment works.
• Sensor and monitoring integration: enzyme-embedded sensors and early-warning detectors to monitor hydrocarbon presence and enzymatic activity in real time — an approach that reduces uncertainty and supports adaptive management.
• Regulatory and site support: from initial site characterisation through to regulatory reporting and long-term monitoring plans — we work with environmental consultants, local authorities and developers to design remediation strategies that are acceptable to planners and the public.

Our goal is not to promote “one-size-fits-all” remedies but to deliver targeted, evidence-based solutions that lower costs, reduce environmental impact and allow redevelopment to proceed safely.

Case examples and pilot opportunities in London

To illustrate how enzyme bioremediation could work in practice, consider several realistic London scenarios:

1. Redeveloping a former petrol station in inner London

A small petrol station earmarked for residential redevelopment contains hydrocarbon-impacted soils and shallow groundwater contamination. Traditional remediation would likely involve excavation, temporary traffic disruption and off-site disposal. An enzyme solution could involve targeted injection of a hydrogel containing immobilised peroxidase and biosurfactant-compatible mediators, allowing in-situ oxidation of PAHs and enhanced bioavailability for native microbes. The result: less excavation, lower transport emissions and a quicker pathway to site handover.

2. A brownfield site with mixed PAH and heavy-metal co-contamination

PAHs sorbed to soils can be difficult to remove when heavy metals inhibit microbial activity. Enzyme formulations can be designed to operate in the presence of metals (through stabilisation and protective carriers) to oxidise PAHs into more biodegradable intermediates; combined with chelation or phytostabilisation strategies for metals, this creates a hybrid remediation plan that avoids wholesale soil removal.

3. Stormwater treatment for urban run-off into the Thames

Urban run-off carries oil residues, tyre and brake particulates, and organic pollutants into tributaries. Small-scale enzyme treatment modules — for example, permeable reactive barriers installed at outfalls or enzyme-treated vegetated swales — can reduce pollutant loads before they reach main rivers, improving aquatic habitat and reducing compliance risks for water companies.

4. Wastewater treatment works

Enzyme stages inserted before biological treatment could reduce microplastics, degrade problematic pharmaceuticals and lower PFAS concentrations in influent streams. Furthermore, removing microplastics at the treatment stage reduces their transfer to biosolids and eventual spread to agricultural soils — a pressing national concern. Research and institutionally backed briefing papers suggest microbes and enzymes could play a role in such interventions; pilot demonstrations at selected London wastewater works would provide crucial evidence for broader rollout.

Barriers, risks and how to manage them

No remediation approach is without constraints. Honest appraisal of the limitations and risk management strategies is essential for credible adoption.

Enzyme stability and environmental robustness

Enzymes are proteins and can denature under extreme heat, acidic/alkaline pH or in the presence of proteases and certain pollutants. Mitigation: immobilisation technologies, protective carriers, formulation chemistry and careful site-specific testing. Many modern immobilisation strategies have demonstrably improved operational life in the field.

Pollutant specificity and incomplete degradation

Enzymes are often specific to particular chemical bonds or functional groups. Complex contaminant mixtures may need multiple enzyme classes or multi-stage approaches. Good site investigation and bench-scale testing are necessary to design effective combinations.

Cost and scalability

Producing enzymes at scale has become cheaper with advances in biotechnology, but costs remain a factor for very large sites. A practical approach is to prioritise high-value or high-risk sites (brownfield housing developments, critical river tributaries) and to combine enzyme use with other measures for cost-effective outcomes.

Regulatory acceptance and public perception

Regulators require proof of efficacy and absence of unintended harm. This means transparent trial data, monitoring, and demonstration projects done in partnership with local authorities and environmental agencies. Public communication is key: explaining what enzymes are, how they work and why they are safe reduces resistance and builds trust.

Unknowns with emergent contaminants

For PFAS and certain microplastics, research is still evolving. Enzyme pathways may work for some compounds within a class but not all; a cautious, evidence-based approach is necessary. The recent surge in enzyme-PFAS research is promising, but full commercial deployment for all PFAS types remains a future objective rather than a present reality.

Policy, funding and the role of local government

The UK’s Environment Act and national targets on environmental quality, alongside London’s own planning and environmental strategies, create both incentives and obligations for better remediation practice. Local authorities want housing and infrastructure delivery that is safe and sustainable; developers want predictable remediation pathways; water companies face pressure to reduce pollutant discharges; and the public demands cleaner rivers and healthier green spaces.

This environment creates opportunities for enzyme remediation to be funded and scaled through:

• Public-private partnerships between councils, developers and specialist remediation firms.
• R&D grants and innovation funding (UKRI, Innovate UK, mayoral innovation funds) to support pilots and field trials in London boroughs.
• Regulatory pilots and fast-track approvals where evidence is robust and monitoring is built into the condition.
• ‘Polluter pays’ and procurement levers that incentivise water companies and waste producers to invest in upstream solutions like enzymatic sludge treatment. Recent investigative coverage highlighting contaminants in biosolids has increased political appetite for such reforms.

For London boroughs, enzyme remediation offers a route to unlock development sites with minimal disruption and to deliver environmental benefits at relatively low marginal cost when compared with full dig-and-remove strategies.

Monitoring, verification and long-term stewardship

Remediation is not simply the application of a product; it is a project lifecycle that requires site investigation, tailored design, deployment, monitoring and verification of outcomes. For enzyme solutions this includes:

• Baseline and post-treatment chemical analyses of targeted pollutants and possible metabolites.
• Ecotoxicity testing to ensure transformation products are not harmful.
• Long-term monitoring (groundwater wells, soil sampling, biosensor networks) to demonstrate sustained risk reduction.
• Adaptive management — adjusting enzyme dosage, carrier systems or treatment duration in response to monitoring data.

Bioglobe’s approach embeds monitoring and reporting into every contract, and we work with accredited laboratories and local regulators to ensure that outcomes are verifiable and transparent.

The economic case: efficiencies, carbon and social value

Cost comparisons between enzyme remediation and traditional methods must be site specific. However, several recurring economic advantages often emerge:

• Lower transport and landfill costs because less material is excavated and removed.
• Reduced programme time and disruption, which has direct value for developers and public stakeholders.
• Lower embodied carbon by avoiding heavy machinery, hauling and thermal treatments.
• Social licence benefits from less intrusive works and enhanced local communication.

When the environmental and social co-benefits are included (cleaner waterways, reclaimed brownfield for housing or green space, reduced exposure risk), enzyme solutions frequently compare favourably with alternative approaches.

A roadmap for scaling enzyme remediation across London

To realise the potential of enzyme bioremediation at scale, a pragmatic roadmap is needed:

1. Prioritise pilot projects in high-value, high-visibility locations (brownfield housing sites, wastewater works, river tributaries). Pilot designs should include control plots and rigorous monitoring.
2. Create public-sector partnerships — councils, the Greater London Authority, Defra and water companies should co-fund pilots to de-risk the approach and develop regulatory confidence.
3. Standardise testing and reporting so data from different pilots can be compared and aggregated into a London-scale evidence base.
4. Mobilise innovation funding to reduce production costs and improve enzyme robustness for field conditions.
5. Communicate transparently with local communities about the science, safety and monitoring. Public trust will be pivotal for adoption.
6. Integrate with planning policy so that developers can consider enzyme remediation as an accepted route in remediation strategies and planning conditions.

Conclusion — why London should act now

London stands at a crossroads. Its development needs, climate commitments and civic demands for cleaner environments require remediation approaches that are effective, low-impact and forward looking. Enzyme bioremediation is not a universal panacea — it is a scientifically grounded, rapidly evolving toolbox that delivers tangible advantages for many of the city’s most intractable pollution problems.

From unlocking brownfield land to reducing microplastics and mitigating PFAS risks, bespoke enzyme variants — designed, stabilised, and deployed with care — can help London meet its environmental and housing objectives without the heavy footprints of traditional remediation. Breakthroughs in enzyme science, immobilisation techniques and process integration make deployment increasingly realistic, while recent institutional studies and media investigations into biosolids and urban contamination underscore the urgency of action.

Bioglobe is positioned to support London’s transition to greener remediation: our lab capabilities, field experience and AI-assisted enzyme discovery enable tailored solutions that respond to the city’s unique constraints. The next step is collaborative action — regulators, local authorities, developers, water companies and technology providers must partner on pilot projects, evidence generation and policy mechanisms that will bring enzyme remediation from promising demonstrations to mainstream practice across the capital.

If London chooses to embrace these methods, the city can lead the way in urban regeneration that is safe, sustainable and scientifically robust — turning contaminated legacies into renewed, resilient places for people and nature alike.

Selected references and further reading

• BioGlobe — company information and research pages.
• Greater London Authority — Decontamination Study (planning and brownfield remediation).
• Reviews on enzymatic PFAS degradation and recent literature (Chemistry–A European Journal; PubMed).
• Imperial College briefing: using microbes to remove microplastics from wastewater and sewage sludge.
• Investigative reporting on sewage sludge contaminants, biosolids and agricultural application.

Bioglobe offer Enzyme pollution remediation for major oil-spills, oceans and coastal waters, marinas and inland water, sewage and nitrate remediation and also agriculture and brown-field sites, globally.

For further information:
BioGlobe LTD (UK),
Phone: +44(0) 116 4736303| Email: info@bioglobe.co.uk