LCA of Textile Fibres: Navigating Trade-offs Between Bio-based, Synthetic and Recycled Options

Main Presenter:    Hanna Karg 

Co-Authors:   Sven Gärtner                                               

The textile industry faces mounting pressure to reduce its environmental footprint, with fibre production representing a critical hotspot across multiple impact categories. While bio-based fibres (cotton, hemp, linen), man-made cellulosic fibres, and recycled alternatives are frequently promoted as sustainable substitutes for virgin synthetic fibres like polyester, their actual environmental performance depends on complex interactions across the entire life cycle.
This study presents comprehensive life cycle assessments comparing environmental impacts of bio-based, synthetic, and recycled textile fibres using multiple functional units (1 kg fibre, complete garments) and system boundaries (cradle-to-gate, cradle-to-grave, cradle-to-cradle). We assessed nine environmental impact categories, including climate change, fossil energy demand, acidification, an updated water depletion footprint based on AWARE 2.0, and indicators specifically developed for agricultural products: phosphate rock use and distance-to-nature potential. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify key drivers of environmental impacts across fibre life cycles.
Results reveal significant trade-offs between fibre categories. Bio-based fibres generally demonstrate lower carbon footprints than virgin synthetics but impose substantially higher water and land use burdens. Cotton, in particular, exhibits the highest water footprint among natural fibres due to intensive irrigation requirements. For recycled fibres, climate benefits relative to virgin alternatives depend critically on recycling process energy intensity and energy mix. Mechanical recycling introduces additional complexity: while reducing virgin material demand, it can compromise fibre quality, increase spinning energy requirements, and reduce garment durability—thereby influencing subsequent life cycle stages. Fibre blends often enhance durability but complicate end-of-life recycling, highlighting inherent tensions in circular economy approaches.
These findings underscore the necessity of holistic, life-cycle based decision support that integrates fibre selection with impacts across spinning, weaving/knitting, use phase, and end-of-life management while considering multiple environmental dimensions simultaneously. No single fibre type emerges as universally optimal.
For policymakers implementing the EU Textile Strategy and Ecodesign Regulation, our results suggest that regulatory frameworks should promote system-level optimization considering product durability, repairability, and recyclability. Industry stakeholders—from manufacturers to recyclers—should prioritize design for longevity and closed-loop systems rather than focusing solely on virgin material substitution. For consumers, these findings highlight that sustainable textile choices require consideration beyond fibre type alone, encompassing garment longevity and responsible end-of-life management.
This research demonstrates that advancing textile sustainability requires moving beyond simplistic fibre comparisons toward integrated life cycle thinking that acknowledges environmental trade-offs and system-wide optimization opportunities aligned with circular economy principles.

©2026 Forum for Sustainability through Life Cycle Innovation e.V. | Contact Us | Legal Info

CONTACT US

If you would like to get in touch with us, please feel free to send us a message. Thank you very much in advance.

Sending

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account