Microplastics. Are they slipping through the cracks?

The Plastic Problem: Smaller and Greater than we thought

The plastic problem in fashion has been around for a while. Cities and countries have implemented taxes or bans on plastic bags. However, as researchers found out more about plastics, the fashion, beauty, and food industries found out it went deeper than large plastic items. Microplastics and microfibres are a serious concern because they end up not only at the bottom of the Ocean and at the top of Mount Everest, but they end up in our food and in our bodies. Microplastics have been found in everything from breast milk and lung tissue to the beach and the deepest part of the Ocean.

Understanding the Microplastic Problem

The discussion around microplastics can be confusing as different definitions are used to refer to different types of plastic pollutants. General consensus defines Microplastics as tiny pieces of plastic that are less than 5 mm in length. Textiles are the largest source of primary microplastics. This means that 34.8% of global microplastic pollution is coming from textiles and clothing. This makes the fashion industry responsible for the largest source of microplastics.

Plastic waste also creates micro flake waste, beauty products have been known to produce microbeads, and clothing produces microfibers. While definitions vary of what a microfibre is, it is often differentiated from microplastics as having a certain density to the synthetic fibre, although the Forum for the Future uses microfibre to refer to both natural and synthetic fibres. This is because organic materials can be treated with chemicals, coatings, or dyes, that makes them just as harmful as other microplastics. While all the different byproducts of different plastic sources are environmentally concerning, it is microplastics that have largely gone unanswered and it is microplastics that produce the largest unanswered problem of plastic byproducts.

How do microplastics end up everywhere?

Microplastics can be released at any point of the clothing’s lifecycle. Three main sources of the problem are the fibres themselves, the construction, and the washing (both while being made and when it reaches the consumer).

If the fibres themselves are of lower quality and if the construction of the article of clothing isn’t well made then there will be more shedding throughout its lifecycle, whether this is when heat is applied, when it is dyed, or when it is washed. Microfibres can be released when synthetic clothing is washed. Seeing as a large percentage of clothing is made from plastic, think polyester and acrylic, this makes for a significant amount of waste, 50% of clothing to be specific . Around 700,000 fibres come off of synthetic clothing in a typical wash . The fibres detach from clothing and then enter the wastewater. The wastewater takes the microfibres to the sewage treatment facilities, where they get through most filtration processes because they are so small. Thus, they enter our rivers and seas and then our food.

Who is Responsible?

There are several ideas to address the microplastic problem that puts the onus on different players along the lifecycle of the textiles in question. Is it the responsibility of the producer, the brands, the consumers? Who and at what stage should there be intervention into the way things are done? This is usually the root of every sustainability concern and the answer is probably everybody.

After all it is no secret that the cost of implementing overhauls of processes is massive. When the European Union faced banning microplastics, the beauty industry faced a cost of 8 billion euros to replace products and make the necessary changes . It is also oftentimes an obstacle when the overhaul in question affects the suppliers at the beginning of the supply chain the most. Because it is those at the beginning of the supply chain that have the smallest profit margins.

Solutions

Let’s take a closer look at possible solutions to the microplastic problem. They range from addressing raw materials to water usage and wastewater treatment systems.?

1. High-quality raw materials

Brands and independent groups have invested in researching fibres and fabrics that produce the least amount of shedding and therefore microfibres. One of these groups, the Microfibre Consortium, built a portfolio of shedding data for more than 600 different fabrics . Patagonia and Under Armour have also conducted similar in-house studies. Across the board, the response is that high-quality raw materials are less likely to break – whether this means organic long staple fibres or high-quality plastic pellets. In terms of recycling these raw materials, it is better to keep long filaments from chemical recycling as opposed to mechanical recycling that usually involves chopping up fibres . There is also an argument to be made for keeping the materials organic matter so that if they do end up in our water and our soil that they are able to biodegrade. However, there are so many added chemicals along the fibres' lifecycle that it is possible this doesn’t have the desired end result.?

2. Restricting chemical and water use and dying and heat

Restricting chemical use to allow for the biodegradability of natural fibres to remain intact as well as to prevent the breakdown of materials is a way to tackle the microplastic problem. During the production process microplastic waste is produced when heat is applied to the clothing and when dying is water intensive. Water usage, chemicals, and heat lead to the breakdown of fibres throughout the lifecycle of the clothing. There are brands and producers that are adapting their ways of dying and heat usage to mitigate the breakdown of materials. For example, Denim Privé uses Blu Volt dying processes that drastically reduce water consumption because it is a process that replaces traditional water-intensive dying systems with an innovative spray system. There are also innovative washing technologies that reduce water consumption during what is often the most water-intensive step in the creation of denim. YILMAK Rainforest machines save 25% more water compared to Silver Liner and Tonello UP saves 22% more water than conventional models. Denim Privé cuts water usage in the washing step by using both of these machines.?

3. Washing solution – consumer and company

Washing can be broken out into two parts: the industrial washing that happens during manufacturing and the washing that happens once the clothing is in the hands of the consumer. According to a 2021 report released by an environmental organisation, The Nature Conservancy, about 120,000 metric tons of synthetic microfibres a year are released from textile manufacturing. In the hands of consumers there are 530,000 metric tons of waste produced in a year . In 2022, Patagonia and Samsung announced a collaboration to create a washing machine that cuts microplastic emissions by 54% according to a Samsung release . The washing machine generates bubbles to dissolve the detergent and create a soapy foam to clean clothes with less abrasion . There are also filters that can be added to washing machines to catch microfibres as well as special bags and balls that can be added to laundry.

Who starts the solving and where do they start?

The problem and the solution lies in every step of the supply chain. Microplastics are also being tackled by players outside of the fashion industry like regulatory bodies and government bills. Yet the problem still remains at every step of the supply chain and requires efforts from brands, suppliers, producers, governments, and consumers. There are plenty of ideas coming in from every entry point and in the meantime clothing production will continue to rely on plastic-based fabrics as they are often integral to athletic wear and durable clothing. As the fashion industry examines how and when to use nylon, polyester, acrylic, there is also a call for responsibility in minimising the microplastics' impact to the planet. It’s time for everyone to start looking closer at the plastics slipping through the cracks and into bloodstreams.