CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,087Environmental Impact and SustainabilityWaste Management and RecyclingSustainable Supply Chain Management

Environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling – A review

Open access
Sandin, Gustav, Peters, Greg M.·2018·Journal of Cleaner Production
DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.266
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper reviews studies of the environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling, to provide a summary of the current knowledge and point out areas for further research. Forty-one studies were reviewed, whereof 85% deal with recycling and 41% with reuse (27% cover both reuse and recycling). Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (29%), and fabric recycling (14%). Cotton (76%) and polyester (63%) are the most studied materials. The reviewed publications provide strong support for claims that textile reuse and recycling in general reduce environmental impact compared to incineration and landfilling, and that reuse is more beneficial than recycling. The studies do, however, expose scenarios under which reuse and recycling are not beneficial for certain environmental impacts. For example, as benefits mainly arise due to the avoided production of new products, benefits may not occur in cases with low replacement rates or if the avoided production processes are relatively clean. Also, for reuse, induced customer transport may cause environmental impact that exceeds the benefits of avoided production, unless the use phase is sufficiently extended. In terms of critical methodological assumptions, authors most often assume that textiles sent to recycling are wastes free of environmental burden, and that reused products and products made from recycled materials replace products made from virgin fibres. Examples of other content mapped in the review are: trends of publications over time, common aims and geographical scopes, commonly included and omitted impact categories, available sources of primary inventory data, knowledge gaps and future research needs. The latter include the need to study cascade systems, to explore the potential of combining various reuse and recycling routes.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes 41 studies on the environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling, finding broad support that reuse and recycling generally reduce impacts compared with incineration and landfilling, and that reuse is usually more beneficial than recycling. It also identifies conditions under which benefits may not occur, especially low replacement rates, fossil-powered recycling, and transport burdens in reuse.

Key findings

  • The review covers 41 publications: 85% deal with recycling, 44% with reuse, and 29% with both. Fibre recycling is most studied (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (23%), and fabric recycling (14%). Cotton is the most studied material (76%), followed by polyester (63%), viscose (25%), and wool (20%).
  • The literature strongly supports that textile reuse and recycling generally reduce environmental impact compared to incineration and landfilling, and that reuse is more beneficial than recycling, except under certain circumstances related to transportation distances.
  • Benefits mainly arise from avoided production of new products. Studies expose scenarios where reuse/recycling may not be beneficial: low replacement rates, recycling powered by fossil energy, avoided production processes that are relatively clean, and for reuse, induced customer transport that exceeds avoided-production benefits unless the use phase is sufficiently extended.
  • Climate change is by far the most studied impact category, covered in 39 of 41 studies; energy use is second, covered in 18. Authors most often assume textiles sent to recycling are waste free of environmental burden (cut-off allocation) and that reused/recycled products replace virgin-fibre products (system expansion), often with an unjustified 1:1 replacement rate.

Methods

  • Literature review in two steps: searching Scopus, Science Direct, and Google Scholar in May–June 2017 with a Boolean search string, then applying inclusion/exclusion rules. This yielded 41 publications: 21 peer-reviewed papers and 20 other publication types.
  • Content was mapped using questions on aims, methods, product systems, reuse/recycling type, materials, geographical scope, allocation methods, primary inventory data, impact categories, conclusions, and citations between studies.
  • All 41 publications are either a full LCA, a streamlined/partial LCA, or use LCA data as input; the review synthesizes results descriptively and maps citation linkages.

Limitations

  • Stated gaps: need more detailed studies and updated, publicly available primary inventory data, particularly for collection and sorting processes and for monomer and polymer recycling; only 10 of the 41 reviewed studies contain primary data on reuse or recycling processes.
  • Stated gaps: lack of studies on cascade systems, actual replacement rates for different markets and product types, and future systems accounting for changes in background systems.
  • Evident from the text: the search was limited to English and Swedish and excluded studies before 2003; 20 of 41 publications were not peer-reviewed; collection and/or sorting were fully or partly excluded in about half of the studies; and many studies focus narrowly on climate change and energy use, risking missed impacts and problem shifting.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.266

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

2 of 53 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    As the length of the fibres and the constituent molecules are reduced by wear and laundry, fabric and fibre recycling typically yields materials of lower quality than materials made from virgin fibres, unless mixed with yarn from virgin fibres.

    “As the length of the fibres and the constituent molecules are reduced by wear and laundry (Palme et al., 2014), fabric and fibre recycling typically yields materials of lower quality (if quality is defined in terms of fibre quality) than materials made from virgin fibres (unless mixed with yarn from virgin fibres).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Palme et al., 2014 source

      The Introduction says laundering reduces the degree of polymerization of cotton cellulose, and the Abstract reports a substantial decrease in molecular mass after more than 50 launderings. These support shortening of the constituent molecules. The paper describes fibre abrasion and damage in Results and discussion, but does not establish that wear and laundering reduce fibre length. The citation is attached to that first clause, not to the subsequent claim about recycled-material quality or mixing with virgin yarn. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    There have recently been significant breakthroughs in the separation of cotton/polyester blends.

    “Polymer, oligomer and monomer recycling is, however, hindered by a lack of technologies for sorting and separation into pure enough fractions ( € Ostlund et al., 2015), although there have recently been significant breakthroughs in the separation of cotton/polyester blends (Palme et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Palme et al., 2017 source
  • Findingown data

    Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type, at 57%.

    “Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (29%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Polymer/oligomer recycling is studied in 37% of recycling studies.

    “Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (29%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    The studies expose scenarios under which reuse and recycling are not beneficial for certain environmental impacts.

    “The studies do, however, expose scenarios under which reuse and recycling are not beneficial for certain environmental impacts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 40
  • May combine two claims. 38

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Monomer recycling is studied in 29% of recycling studies in the abstract.

    “Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (29%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of the reviewed studies, 27% cover both reuse and recycling.

    “Forty-one studies were reviewed, whereof 85% deal with recycling and 41% with reuse (27% cover both reuse and recycling).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Cotton is the most studied material, covered in 76% of the studies.

    “Cotton (76%) and polyester (63%) are the most studied materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Fabric recycling is studied in 14% of recycling studies.

    “Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (29%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of the reviewed studies, 41% deal with reuse.

    “Forty-one studies were reviewed, whereof 85% deal with recycling and 41% with reuse (27% cover both reuse and recycling).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Polyester is studied in 63% of the studies.

    “Cotton (76%) and polyester (63%) are the most studied materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Forty-one studies were reviewed.

    “Forty-one studies were reviewed, whereof 85% deal with recycling and 41% with reuse (27% cover both reuse and recycling).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of the reviewed studies, 85% deal with recycling.

    “Forty-one studies were reviewed, whereof 85% deal with recycling and 41% with reuse (27% cover both reuse and recycling).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The rules for selecting literature generated a list of 41 publications: 21 peer-reviewed papers and 20 other types of publications.

    “The rules for selecting literature described in the method section of this paper generated a list of 41 publications: 21 peerreviewed papers and 20 other types of publications (see Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Thirty, or 73%, of the reviewed studies concern reuse/recycling of waste generated in Europe, with the Nordic countries (10 studies), the UK (7) and Italy (4) dominating.

    “Thirty, or 73%, of the studies concern reuse/recycling of waste generated in Europe, in which the Nordic countries (10 studies), the UK (7) and Italy (4) dominate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    As publications often cover both reuse and recycling, or several types of recycling, the number of publications in Fig. 4 exceeds the total number of publications.

    “As publications often cover both reuse and recycling, or several types of recycling, the number of publications in Fig. 4 exceeds the total number of publications (as shown in Fig. 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The most frequent allocation methods encountered in the review are cut-off allocation for recycled input materials and system expansion for reused products and products made from recycled materials.

    “Nevertheless, the most frequent allocation methods encountered in our review are cut-off allocation for recycled input materials and system expansion for reused products and products made from recycled materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    It is quite common to study both reuse and recycling in the same publication, at 29% of publications.

    “It can be noted that it is quite common to study both reuse and recycling in the same publication (29% of publications).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    To date, no review of studies of the environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling has been published in the academic literature or elsewhere.

    “To date, no review of such studies has been published in the academic literature or elsewhere”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Cotton is the most studied material, covered in 76% of the studies, both for studies of reuse and recycling.

    “Cotton is the most studied material (covered in 76% of the studies) both for studies of reuse and recycling, followed by polyester (63%), also counting bottle-to-fibre recycling, viscose (25%) and wool (20%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There are more studies written in the English language exploring recycling in Sweden (7) than in the USA (3), despite the USA having about 30 times larger population than Sweden.

    “Still, there are more studies written in the English language exploring recycling in Sweden (7) than in the USA (3), an English-speaking country with about 30 times larger population than Sweden.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Fabric recycling is studied in 14% of recycling publications.

    “In publications of recycling, fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (23%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    More publications deal with recycling (85%) than with reuse (44%).

    “More publications deal with recycling (85%) than with reuse (44%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Authors of the reviewed studies most often assume that the material input to recycling systems is a waste free of environmental burdens, and that reused products and products made from recycled materials substitute functionally equivalent products made from virgin fibres.

    “In other words, authors most often assume that the material input to recycling systems is a waste free of environmental burdens, and that reused products and products made from recycled materials substitute functionally equivalent products made from virgin fibres.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    There are no substantial differences between peer-reviewed and other types of publications with regard to the studied material type.

    “There are no substantial differences between peer-reviewed and other types of publications with regard to the studied material type.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Increased recycling in the UK may reduce cotton cultivation (and associated environmental impact) in the USA, but increase energy use (and associated environmental impact) in the UK.

    “For example, Allwood et al. (2006) identified that increased recycling in the UK may reduce cotton cultivation (and associated environmental impact) in the USA, but increase energy use (and associated environmental impact) in the UK.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Allwood et al., 2006

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Ionising radiation is studied in 4 reviewed publications.

    “ionising radiation (4)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (23%), and fabric recycling (14%).

    “Fibre recycling is the most studied recycling type (57%), followed by polymer/oligomer recycling (37%), monomer recycling (23%), and fabric recycling (14%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Climate change is considered in all reviewed publications except two (Sahni et al., 2010 and AITEX, 2007), making it by far the most studied impact category or inventory indicator.

    “As climate change is also considered in all remaining publications except two e Sahni et al. (2010) and AITEX (2007) e it is by far the most studied impact category or inventory indicator.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sahni et al., 2010

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites AITEX, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    When reuse and recycling are both considered, reuse is found to be more beneficial than recycling, except under certain circumstances with regard to transportation distances.

    “When reuse and recycling are both considered, the former is found to be more beneficial than the latter (Dahlbo et al., 2017;Schmidt et al., 2016;Zamani et al., 2015;Beton et al., 2014;Corsten et al., 2013;Palm et al., 2013;Farrant et al., 2010;McGill, 2009;Bartl, 2009), except for under certain circumstances with regard to transportation distances (Fortuna and Diyamandoglu, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Dahlbo et al., 2017 source
    • cites Schmidt et al., 2016 source
    • cites Fortuna and Diyamandoglu, 2017 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Authors most often assume cut-off allocation (textiles sent to recycling are wastes free of environmental burden) and system expansion (reused products and products made from recycled materials replace products made from virgin fibres).

    “In terms of critical methodological assumptions, authors most often assume that textiles sent to recycling are wastes free of environmental burden (i.e., cut-off allocation) and that reused products and products made from recycled materials replace products made from virgin fibres (i.e., system expansion).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    A common assumption in the reviewed studies is that the recycled fibre only gets one additional use cycle.

    “Related to the choice of replacement rate, is the common assumption that the recycled fibre only gets one additional use cycle.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Climate impact can increase if recycling processes are powered by fossil energy and/or if virgin cotton as a consequence is assumed to be replaced, as cotton is a fibre associated with relatively low climate impact.

    “In their case, it was shown that climate impact can increase if recycling processes are powered by fossil energy and/or if virgin cotton as a consequence is assumed to be replaced, as cotton is a fibre associated with relatively low climate impact.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review identified 41 publications, of which 21 are peer-reviewed and 20 are other types of publications.

    “Based on the selection criteria (see section 2.1), we found 41 publications, whereof 21 are peer-reviewed and 20 are other types of publications.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Photochemical oxidant formation is studied in 12 reviewed publications.

    “photochemical oxidant formation (12)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Cotton is the most studied material (76%), followed by polyester (63%), viscose (25%) and wool (20%).

    “Cotton is the most studied material (76%), followed by polyester (63%), viscose (25%) and wool (20%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Ozone layer depletion is studied in 9 reviewed publications.

    “ozone layer depletion (9)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Based on the number of citations from other environmental assessments of reuse/recycling, Woolridge et al. (2006) appears to be considered the seminal piece of work among the reviewed studies, with 15 citations, followed by Allwood et al. (2006) with 10 citations and Farrant et al. (2010) with 9 citations.

    “Based on the number of citations from other environmental assessments of reuse/recycling, Woolridge et al. (2006) appears to be considered the seminal piece of work among the reviewed studies, with 15 citations, followed by Allwood et al. (2006) with 10 citations and Farrant et al. (2010) with 9 citations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Woolridge et al., 2006 source
    • cites Allwood et al., 2006

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Farrant et al., 2010 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Peer-reviewed publications have, on average, more citations: about 0.8 citations per year, compared to 0.4 for publications not subject to peer-review (accounting for studies published before 2016).

    “Notably, peer-reviewed publications have, on average, more citations: about 0.8 citations per year, compared to 0.4 for publications not subject to peer-review (accounting for studies published before 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among the 41 reviewed publications, 85% deal with recycling, 44% with reuse, and 29% with both reuse and recycling.

    “Eighty-five percent of the publications deal with recycling, 44% with reuse, and 29% with both reuse and recycling.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Waste (in kg) is studied in 4 reviewed publications.

    “and waste (in kg; 4)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Six reviewed publications include some kind of weighting.

    “Six publications include some kind of weighting”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Acidification and eutrophication are each studied in 17 reviewed publications.

    “Acidification (of some kind) and eutrophication (of some kind) are studied in 17 publications each”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    There is a lack of studies exploring the limits of textile reuse and recycling, and the benefits of combining different types of reuse and recycling routes.

    “In other words, there is a lack of studies exploring the limits of textile reuse and recycling, and the benefits of combining different types of reuse and recycling routes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Some reviewed publications consider future recycling technologies.

    “Some of the reviewed publications do consider future recycling technologies (e.g.€ Ostlund et al., 2015), but it would be valuable to see more explorative studies accounting for changes in background systems, which are also in constant flux.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites € Ostlund et al., 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    There is a lack of studies of future systems.

    “Finally, there is a lack of studies of future systems.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    This inventory data is from an unspecified year of origin and lacks information on recovery rates of certain chemicals used in the processes.

    “This data is from an unspecified year of origin and lack information on, for example, recovery rates of certain chemicals used in the processes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Patagonia (2006)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The studies expose scenarios under which reuse and recycling may not be beneficial, for example in cases of low replacement rates, if recycling processes are powered by fossil energy, or if the avoided production processes are relatively clean.

    “The studies also expose scenarios under which reuse and recycling may not be beneficial, for example in cases of low replacement rates, if recycling processes are powered by fossil energy, or if the avoided production processes are relatively clean.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Monomer and polymer recycling have been studied in several reviewed studies, but the modelling is sometimes based on rough estimates and/or old inventory data.

    “Monomer and polymer recycling have been studied in several of the reviewed studies, but the modelling is sometimes based on rough estimates and/or old inventory data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    There is a lack of studies on actual replacement rates for textile reuse and recycling, for various markets and product types.

    “Thirdly, as mentioned in section 3.5, there is a need for studies on actual replacement rates for textile reuse and recycling, for various markets and product types.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    There is a lack of studies of the environmental potential of cascade systems designed to get the most out of a given virgin or recycled material.

    “Secondly, there is a lack of studies of the environmental potential of cascade systems designed to get the most out of a given virgin or recycled material.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The modelling of synthetic monomer recycling in Zamani et al. (2015) and Schmidt et al. (2016), and one of the four synthetic monomer recycling models in Shen et al. (2010a, b), are based on inventory data from Patagonia (2006), originally from the Japanese company Teijin.

    “For example, the modelling of synthetic monomer recycling in Zamani et al. (2015) and Schmidt et al. (2016), and one of the four synthetic monomer recycling models in Shen et al. (2010a, b), are based on inventory data from Patagonia (2006), originally from the Japanese company Teijin.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Zamani et al. (2015) source
    • cites Schmidt et al. (2016) source
    • cites Shen et al. (2010a, b)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    The reviewed publications elucidate several potential stumbling blocks for achieving environmental benefits by increasing textile reuse and recycling.

    “To conclude, the reviewed publications elucidate several potential stumbling blocks for achieving environmental benefits by increasing textile reuse and recycling.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The global demand for textile products is steadily increasing.

    “The global demand for textile products is steadily increasing (The Fiber Year Consulting, 2015;Oerlikon, 2010), a trend likely to continue due population growth and economic development.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites The Fiber Year Consulting, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Oerlikon, 2010

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sixty-three percent of textile fibres are derived from petrochemicals.

    “Sixty-three percent of textile fibres are derived from petrochemicals (Lenzing, 2017) whose production and fate give rise to considerable carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions (Shen et al., 2010a).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lenzing, 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Cotton is associated with water depletion and toxic pollution due to intensive use of pesticides.

    “The remaining 37% is dominated by cotton (24%), a thirsty plant associated with water depletion e the desiccation of the Aral Sea being the most infamous example (Micklin, 2007) e and toxic pollution, due to intensive use of pesticides (FAO-ICAC, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Micklin, 2007 source
    • cites FAO-ICAC, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The remaining 37% of textile fibres is dominated by cotton, at 24%.

    “The remaining 37% is dominated by cotton (24%), a thirsty plant associated with water depletion e the desiccation of the Aral Sea being the most infamous example (Micklin, 2007) e and toxic pollution, due to intensive use of pesticides (FAO-ICAC, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Micklin, 2007 source
    • cites FAO-ICAC, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The above percentages could be underestimates as at least one of the studied reused/recycled materials is not specified in four of the publications, and information on the type of recycling is missing in six.

    “The above percentages could be underestimates as at least one the studied reused/recycled materials is not specified in four of the publications, and information on the type of recycling is missing in six.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Considering the low recycling rate today, there is a great potential to also increase recycling, particularly polymer, oligomer and monomer recycling, thereby preventing textile waste that cannot be reused or fabric/fibre-recycled from being landfilled or incinerated.

    “Considering the low recycling rate today, there is a great potential to also increase recycling, particularly polymer, oligomer and monomer recycling, thereby preventing textile waste that cannot be reused or fabric/fibre-recycled from being landfilled or incinerated.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    From an LCA methodological perspective, the aims of the reviewed studies are either poorly phrased or the studies are driven by an interest or curiosity to increase knowledge rather than to support specific informational needs.

    “So from an LCA methodological perspective, either the aims are poorly phrased, or the studies of textile reuse and recycling are driven by an interest or curiosity to increase knowledge, rather than to support specific informational needs”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Germany, about 70% of disposed textiles are collected for reuse and recycling, whereof a fraction is separated for incineration.

    “There are, however, large variations within Europe: more prominent examples are Germany, in which about 70% of disposed textiles are collected for reuse and recycling, whereof a fraction is separated for incineration (Textile Recycling Association, 2005), and Denmark, in which about 50% is collected, mainly for reuse domestically or abroad (Palm et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Textile Recycling Association, 2005

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Roos et al. (2016) show that a grand transition requires a combination of different measures for impact reduction, most likely including more reuse and recycling.

    “Roos et al. (2016) show that such a grand transition requires a combination of different measures for impact reduction, most likely including more reuse and recycling.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Roos et al. (2016) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The high prevalence of fibre recycling is probably due to the fact that it is a relatively common recycling route, widely applied in commercial scale both in terms of downcycling and textile-to-textile recycling.

    “The high prevalence of fibre recycling is probably due to the fact that it is a relatively common recycling route, widely applied in commercial scale both in terms of downcycling (e.g. to insulation) and textile-to-textile recycling (e.g.re-spinning of new yarn from cotton or wool waste).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Denmark, about 50% of disposed textiles are collected, mainly for reuse domestically or abroad.

    “There are, however, large variations within Europe: more prominent examples are Germany, in which about 70% of disposed textiles are collected for reuse and recycling, whereof a fraction is separated for incineration (Textile Recycling Association, 2005), and Denmark, in which about 50% is collected, mainly for reuse domestically or abroad (Palm et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Palm et al., 2014 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Spinning of yarns and weaving/knitting of fabrics most often rely on fossil energy use, causing emissions such as CO2 and particulates.

    “Wet treatment processes (dyeing, finishing, printing, etc.) are major sources of toxic emissions (Roos et al., 2015b), and spinning of yarns and weaving/knitting of fabrics most often rely on fossil energy use, causing emissions such as CO 2 and particulates (Roos et al., 2015a).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Roos et al., 2015a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Increased fibre production via recycling may increase total global fibre supply and thereby reduce the price and increase the demand for fibres.

    “However, increased fibre production via recycling may increase total global fibre supply and thereby reduce the price and increase the demand for fibres.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Increased textile reuse and recycling could potentially reduce the production of virgin textile fibres and, in the case of reuse, also avoid engineering processes further downstream in the textile product life cycle, and thus reduce environmental impact.

    “Increased textile reuse and recycling could potentially reduce the production of virgin textile fibres and, in the case of reuse, also avoid engineering processes further downstream in the textile product life cycle, and thus reduce environmental impact.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The interest for textile reuse and recycling (or at least the environmental impact thereof) is greater in Europe than elsewhere, with a particularly strong interest in Northern Europe.

    “This indicates that the interest for textile reuse and recycling (or at least the environmental impact thereof) is indeed greater in Europe than elsewhere, with a particularly strong interest in Northern Europe.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The number of publications in a region reflects the level of interest in that region.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Europe about 15-20% of disposed textiles are collected, whereof about 50% is downcycled and 50% is reused, mainly through exporting to developing countries.

    “For example, in Europe about 15e20% of disposed textiles are collected (the rest is landfilled or incinerated), whereof about 50% is downcycled and 50% is reused, mainly through exporting to developing countries (Textile Recycling Association, 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Textile Recycling Association, 2005

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is difficult to generalise regarding the intended use of the reviewed publications and to what extent methods and scopes generally have been designed to fulfil the intended use.

    “In either case, this makes it difficult for us to generalise regarding the intended use of the publications and to what extent methods and scopes generally have been designed to fulfil the intended use.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The preponderance of studies on polyester and cotton reflects the domination of fibre markets by these fibres, which occupy about 51% and 24% of the global market, respectively.

    “The preponderance of studies on polyester and cotton reflects the domination of fibre markets by these fibres e they occupy about 51% and 24% of the global market, respectively (Lenzing, 2017;The Fiber Year Consulting, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lenzing, 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites The Fiber Year Consulting, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Allwood et al. (2006) suggest greenhouse emissions, water use, toxic chemicals and waste are the main environmental issues facing the textile industry.

    “Allwood et al. (2006) suggest greenhouse emissions, water use, toxic chemicals and waste are the main environmental issues facing the textile industry.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Allwood et al. (2006)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is important to include impact categories corresponding to the environmental issues associated with conventional cotton, namely water depletion and toxicity.

    “it is important to include impact categories corresponding to the environmental issues associated with conventional cotton, namely water depletion and toxicity”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Allocation based on fibre length may become an obvious alternative for analysts wishing to avoid the uncertainties associated with system expansion and replacement rates.

    “and allocation based on fibre length may become an obvious alternative for analysts wishing to avoid the uncertainties associated with system expansion and replacement rates.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Often only one or a few indicators are studied, introducing a risk that relevant impacts are missed, potentially contributing to problem shifting and sub-optimisation.

    “Often only one or a few indicators are studied, introducing a risk that relevant impacts are missed, potentially contributing to problem shifting and sub-optimisation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Successive reduction in the fibre length of recycled fabrics or fibres over multiple reuse or recycling life cycles would reduce the range of functions available to manufacturers.

    “While presumably unproblematic for monomer recycling scenarios, successive reduction in the fibre length of the recycled fabrics or fibres over multiple reuse or recycling life cycles would reduce the range of functions available to manufacturers”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The common narrow focus on climate change and energy use may not capture the real benefits of many types of textile reuse and recycling, thereby potentially contributing to problem shifting.

    “So the common narrow focus on climate change and energy use may not capture the real benefits of many types of textile reuse and recycling, thereby potentially contributing to problem shifting”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
72 of 72

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Polymer, oligomer and monomer recycling typically yields fibres of similar quality to virgin fibres.

    “In contrast, polymer, oligomer and monomer recycling typically yields fibres of similar quality to virgin fibres.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Collection and sorting of textile waste have non-negligible environmental impact.

    “Nonetheless, the common exclusion of collection and sorting indicates that several studies have underestimated the environmental impact of reuse and recycling systems.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The benefits of reuse and recycling are mainly due to the avoidance of the manufacturing of new products.

    “For example, as the benefits of reuse and recycling are mainly due to the avoidance of the manufacturing of new products, low replacement rates can eliminate the benefits (as was discussed in section 3.5).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The number of publications in a region reflects the level of interest in that region.

    “This indicates that the interest for textile reuse and recycling (or at least the environmental impact thereof) is indeed greater in Europe than elsewhere, with a particularly strong interest in Northern Europe.”
4 of 4

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Abstract and results disagree on the share studying monomer recycling

    Minor

    The abstract reports 29% for monomer recycling, whereas the results and conclusions report 23%.

  • Abstract and results disagree on the share of studies covering reuse

    Minor

    The abstract says 41% of studies cover reuse, while the results and conclusions both say 44%.

  • Abstract and results disagree on the share covering both reuse and recycling

    Minor

    The abstract reports 27% covering both reuse and recycling, but the results and conclusions report 29%.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Oerlikon, 2010, The fiber year 2009/10, World SurveyTextNonwovens Ind
  2. Östlund, 2015, Textilåtervinning: Tekniska möjligheter och utmaningar [Textile recycling – technical opportunities and challenges], Naturvårdsverket rapport, 6685
  3. Stevenson, 2012, Study into consumer second-hand shopping behaviour to identify the re-use displacement effect, Waste Res. Act. Prog. (WRAP)
  4. The Fiber Year Consulting, 2015, The Fiber Year 2015, World Survey on Textiles and Nonwovens, Issue, 15

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M.
Affiliations
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden (SE)
Corresponding author
Sandin, Gustav
ORCID
Sandin, Gustav
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
184
Pages
353-365
ISSN
0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.266
OpenAlex
W2789335896
Cited by
1,087
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 170 · 2025: 185 · 2024: 152 · 2023: 135 · 2022: 148 · 2021: 123 · 2020: 107 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 6
FWCI
36.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Cleaner Production (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Union's (646226)
  • Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Waste Management and Recycling
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Keywords
textile reuse, textile recycling, environmental impact, fiber recycling, polymer recycling, cotton, polyesters, incineration, landfilling, replacement rate, cascade systems, life cycle assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-18.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-18.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review