251
the textile production phase. Blended fibres are challenging to recycle. To date,
there is no specific analytical technique to identify the type of fibre in the garment,
and chemical separation is often difficult as different types of fibre require their own
specifications (Peters et al. 2014). Likewise, current recycling methods lack efficiency. For example, only 20% of the fibres in a pair of jeans can be recycled and
polyester fabrics, also difficult to recycle. Moreover, recycling requires the separation of garments into different colours which is often a very labour-intensive process (Walker 2017).
Fibres can be natural or synthetic. Textile production is possible due to the manufacturing of fibres, which can be turned into yarn for knitting or weaving. Natural
fibres are either sourced from agriculture or the production of synthetic (noncellulosic) fibres from petroleum through chemical synthesis. However, the production of natural fibres through agriculture consumes a significant amount of total
freshwater available for human consumption (Radhakrishnan 2017). Despite the
obvious benefits of biodegradable fibres, those demand fertilizers and pesticides,
which reduce soil fertility and consequently result in the biodiversity loss (ITPS
2015: 127). Data shows that cotton itself represents 82.7% of the total natural fibre
production for the apparel sector whilst other fibres, which are more beneficial for
the environment, represent a minority. For instance, wool represents 5.3%, flax
2.5% and cellulosic fibres 9.9% (FAO-ICAC 2013). Among all the natural fibres,
cotton has the most adverse environmental impacts, followed by polyester, acrylic,
elastane and nylon (Karthik and Rathinamoorthy 2017). In 2010, cotton represented
32.9% of the total world apparel fibre consumption (FAO-ICAC 2013). Evidence
also shows that 350 million people are engaged in cotton farming, and it is manufactured in 100 countries (Radhakrishnan 2017). According to UNECE (2019),
2700 litres of water are needed to produce an average cotton shirt. Additionally,
cotton farming is responsible for 24 percent of insecticides and 11 percent of pesticides despite using only 3 percent of the world’s productive land (UNFCCC 2018).
As for natural fibres like cotton, the recycling process consists of cutting clothes or
textile waste and making them small enough, through stripping machines to pull
them apart into fibres and finally spin into yarns. These shorter fibres then need to
be blended with virgin cotton. Although natural fibres seem more beneficial to the
environment, they can create negative environmental impacts due to unsustainable
production practices and poor natural resource management.
On the other hand, synthetic fibres depend on the extraction of raw materials,
such as petroleum, coal and limestone, adversely impacting soil and water supplies.
Since Nylon became popular in the 1930s, its demand kept on increasing as it
became a substitute for silk due to the scarcity of the latter in World War II. Nylon
was mainly used for the production of military products like parachutes. However,
it also opened the door for other synthesized polymers derived from petroleum. By
2010 synthetic (non-cellulosic) fibres represented 70% of the world’s apparel fibre
consumption (FAO-ICAC 2013). This is a major sustainability issue, as most polymers are non-biodegradable, and their manufacturing produces many harmful
chemicals and emits greenhouse gases, fostering global warming.
16 SDG 15 Life on Land
the textile production phase. Blended fibres are challenging to recycle. To date,
there is no specific analytical technique to identify the type of fibre in the garment,
and chemical separation is often difficult as different types of fibre require their own
specifications (Peters et al. 2014). Likewise, current recycling methods lack efficiency. For example, only 20% of the fibres in a pair of jeans can be recycled and
polyester fabrics, also difficult to recycle. Moreover, recycling requires the separation of garments into different colours which is often a very labour-intensive process (Walker 2017).
Fibres can be natural or synthetic. Textile production is possible due to the manufacturing of fibres, which can be turned into yarn for knitting or weaving. Natural
fibres are either sourced from agriculture or the production of synthetic (noncellulosic) fibres from petroleum through chemical synthesis. However, the production of natural fibres through agriculture consumes a significant amount of total
freshwater available for human consumption (Radhakrishnan 2017). Despite the
obvious benefits of biodegradable fibres, those demand fertilizers and pesticides,
which reduce soil fertility and consequently result in the biodiversity loss (ITPS
2015: 127). Data shows that cotton itself represents 82.7% of the total natural fibre
production for the apparel sector whilst other fibres, which are more beneficial for
the environment, represent a minority. For instance, wool represents 5.3%, flax
2.5% and cellulosic fibres 9.9% (FAO-ICAC 2013). Among all the natural fibres,
cotton has the most adverse environmental impacts, followed by polyester, acrylic,
elastane and nylon (Karthik and Rathinamoorthy 2017). In 2010, cotton represented
32.9% of the total world apparel fibre consumption (FAO-ICAC 2013). Evidence
also shows that 350 million people are engaged in cotton farming, and it is manufactured in 100 countries (Radhakrishnan 2017). According to UNECE (2019),
2700 litres of water are needed to produce an average cotton shirt. Additionally,
cotton farming is responsible for 24 percent of insecticides and 11 percent of pesticides despite using only 3 percent of the world’s productive land (UNFCCC 2018).
As for natural fibres like cotton, the recycling process consists of cutting clothes or
textile waste and making them small enough, through stripping machines to pull
them apart into fibres and finally spin into yarns. These shorter fibres then need to
be blended with virgin cotton. Although natural fibres seem more beneficial to the
environment, they can create negative environmental impacts due to unsustainable
production practices and poor natural resource management.
On the other hand, synthetic fibres depend on the extraction of raw materials,
such as petroleum, coal and limestone, adversely impacting soil and water supplies.
Since Nylon became popular in the 1930s, its demand kept on increasing as it
became a substitute for silk due to the scarcity of the latter in World War II. Nylon
was mainly used for the production of military products like parachutes. However,
it also opened the door for other synthesized polymers derived from petroleum. By
2010 synthetic (non-cellulosic) fibres represented 70% of the world’s apparel fibre
consumption (FAO-ICAC 2013). This is a major sustainability issue, as most polymers are non-biodegradable, and their manufacturing produces many harmful
chemicals and emits greenhouse gases, fostering global warming.
16 SDG 15 Life on Land