PFAS20/ 100Bad
Overall12/ 100Bad
Black Hole Pack 25L Patagonia

Patagonia · Backpacks

Black Hole Pack 25L Patagonia

Bad

Patagonia's PFAS transparency is insufficient; typical durable packs use water-repellent coating of unknown chemistry.

Verdict: SkipDurable pack with opaque water-repellent coating chemistry and no public PFAS commitment; acceptable if maintained and replaced before coating degrades.

Black Hole 25L uses durable nylon and polyester with water-repellent treatment, a category historically reliant on PFAS. Patagonia won't disclose the water-repellent coating chemistry or confirm PFAS-free materials. No lab data or brand transparency exist.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

nylon/polyester pack with water-repellent coating

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

70/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
🍳

water-repellent coating chemical identity and leaching

Patagonia has not disclosed whether this pack uses legacy PFOA-based water-repellent coating or a newer alternative. Coating contact with skin or wear debris is low-risk during normal use, but coating degradation or machine washing may mobilize compounds into water or air.

70/ 100
🫧

Microfiber shedding during use or washing

Synthetic fabric packs shed microfibers during abrasion and washing. This is environmental and inhalation risk primarily; personal skin exposure is minimal unless fibers are directly handled or inhaled during care. Machine washing amplifies shedding; hand washing or spot cleaning reduces it.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Nylon/polyester off-gassing or breakdown products

Nylon and polyester are chemically stable polymers with no established off-gassing hazard at room temperature. No documented volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions or toxic breakdown are on record for Patagonia packs.

95/ 100

Dyes and colorants (black nylon)

Patagonia uses established industrial dyes for black nylon. No recalls or documented azo dye or heavy-metal pigment contamination are on public record for this product line.

95/ 100

Adhesives or stitching compounds

Patagonia uses industrial-grade fabric adhesives and polyester thread. No known formaldehyde releasers, phthalates, or toxic adhesive outgassing have been documented in their gear. Quality construction minimizes glue exposure.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

The Black Hole Pack uses nylon and polyester fabrics treated with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating to shed rain without pooling. water-repellent coating treatments historically relied on long-chain PFAS (perfluorooctanoic acid, PFOA) or related compounds; Patagonia has not publicly disclosed which chemistry this pack uses. The nylon/polyester blend itself is chemically stable when new, but the coating is the point of chemical uncertainty and potential degradation over time.

The brand's record and disclosure

Patagonia markets itself as an environmental leader but has not published a comprehensive PFAS policy or transparency report for its gear line. The company phased out some PFAS in wetsuits (2015) and climbing gear, but has remained silent on backpack and apparel water-repellent coating treatments. This silence is notable given that Patagonia's sustainability positioning invites higher scrutiny; competitors like Fjallraven have begun disclosing water-repellent coating chemistry. No major recalls or documented contamination incidents are on record for this model.

How it compares in its category

Most 25L packs in this price range use similar nylon/polyester water-repellent coating coatings with equivalent transparency gaps. Some ultralight and budget alternatives use uncoated or wax-treated fabrics (avoids water-repellent coating chemistry but sacrifices water resistance). Premium brands like Arc'teryx and Deuter have begun transitioning to paraffin or fluorine-free water-repellent coating; Patagonia trails in public disclosure. For a pack of this durability and repute, the lack of chemical transparency is a design choice, not an accident.

If you buy it

Keep the pack out of direct prolonged heat (car trunks, sun exposure) to slow water-repellent coating degradation; avoid machine washing in hot water, which can strip or degrade the water repellent. Expect to reapply water-repellent coating treatment every 1-2 years if used frequently in wet conditions; commercial water-repellent coating products carry the same chemistry risk, so choose a fluorine-free option if available. Replace or retire the pack if the coating visibly flakes, cracks, or causes water to bead unevenly. Store in a cool, dry space to minimize off-gassing.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Patagonia has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

More backpacks grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.