SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the be-environmentally-conscious-go-naked dept.
Wearing clothes could release more microfibres to the environment than washing them:
In a first-of-its-kind study, scientists from the Institute for Polymers, Composites and Biomaterials of the National Research Council of Italy (IPCB-CNR) and the University of Plymouth compared four different items of polyester clothing and how many fibres were released when they were being worn and washed.
The results showed that up to 4,000 fibres per gram of fabric could be released during a conventional wash, while up to 400 fibres per gram of fabric could be shed by items of clothing during just 20 minutes of normal activity.
Scaled up, the results indicate that one person could release almost 300million polyester microfibres per year to the environment by washing their clothes, and more than 900million to the air by simply wearing the garments.
In addition, there were significant differences depending on how the garments were made, which the researchers concluding that clothing design and manufacturer has a major role to play in preventing microfibres from being emitted to the environment.
The research, published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, was conducted by scientists at the National Research Council of Italy and the University of Plymouth. It builds on their previous studies which showed substantial quantities of fibres are released during the laundry process.
More information: Francesca De Falco et al, Microfiber Release to Water, Via Laundering, and to Air, via Everyday Use: A Comparison between Polyester Clothing with Differing Textile Parameters, Environmental Science & Technology (2020). DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b06892
Journal information: Environmental Science and Technology
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2020, @07:10AM
Synthetic fibres aren't free to make, yo.
Yeah we can spin nylons from petroleum (with some interim steps!) but I'm not sure why you think that synthetic polyester is less environmentally- and energy-costly than organic fibre.
Plants and photosynthesis, it turns out, aren't just good for species diversity and biomass and CO2 sequestering, but also for energy capture and conversion into material. Industrial processes fed by solar farms take more energy per R for insulative fibres.
Maaaaaybe the answer is to deploy nuclear power and find less persistent synthetic polyesters. I welcome data in support (or against) that idea.
Citations because I'm not full of hot air, unlike some blowhards:
"Polyester, a petroleum-based synthetic fabric, was the clear loser by a 3-1 margin, because it takes so much energy to extract the oil required to make it."
https://slate.com/technology/2011/04/hemp-versus-cotton-which-is-better-for-the-environment.html [slate.com]
"The raw materials PTA, DMT, and MEG are mainly produced by large chemical companies which are sometimes integrated down to the crude oil refinery where p-Xylene is the base material to produce PTA and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is the base material to produce MEG"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyester#Basics [wikipedia.org]