Recycled Polyester: When Fashion's "Green Solution" Worsens Microplastic Pollution

For several years, the fashion industry has presented recycled polyester as a concrete response to the sector's environmental challenges. Over 100 international brands have made this material the cornerstone of their ecological commitments, promising reduced pollution and better resource management. However, a new independent study conducted by Çukurova University in Turkey and published by the Changing Markets Foundation upends this consensus: recycled polyester actually releases 55% more microplastics than virgin polyester during washing.

This discovery casts harsh light on a widely adopted strategy by the industry, where 116 brands have committed to using up to 100% recycled polyester by 2025, transforming this promise into the central marketing argument of their environmental communications. The scientific reality, however, appears to directly contradict these virtuous claims.

Rigorous Methodology and Unequivocal Results

The study, titled "Spinning Greenwash: How the fashion industry's shift to recycled polyester is worsening microplastic pollution", relies on rigorous scientific methodology to establish a concerning assessment. Researchers analyzed 51 garments from five major international brands: Adidas, H&M, Nike, Shein, and Zara. To ensure result reliability, tests were conducted using two washing systems recognized in the scientific community – GyroWash and Wascator – allowing precise measurement of both the number of fibers released and their total mass.

The figures revealed by this research are unequivocal. Recycled polyester releases an average of 12,430 fibers per gram of tested garment, compared to 8,028 for virgin polyester. But beyond quantity, it is the very nature of these particles that concerns scientists: they are 20% smaller than those from virgin polyester, measuring an average of 0.42 millimeters versus 0.52 millimeters. This size difference, which may seem minimal, actually holds crucial importance environmentally and health-wise. Smaller particles disperse more easily across all ecosystems and penetrate more deeply into biological tissues, whether in aquatic organisms, terrestrial animals, or humans.

The total mass of microplastics released confirms this alarming trend: recycled polyester generates 50% more plastic matter than its virgin counterpart, with 0.36 milligrams per gram of garment versus 0.24 milligrams. These laboratory-derived data scientifically establish what the textile industry has long denied: polyester recycling does not improve the environmental situation, it worsens it.

Nike Tops the List of Most Polluting Brands

While the study reveals that microplastic pollution is a systemic problem affecting the entire industry, comparative analysis between brands nevertheless highlights significant disparities that raise questions. Nike proved to be the most polluting brand in both tested categories, whether for its virgin or recycled polyester fabrics.

The results concerning Nike are particularly striking. The brand's recycled polyester lost more than 30,000 fibers per gram of garment on average during wash tests, a figure far exceeding that of its competitors. To put this result in perspective, it represents nearly four times H&M's observed average and seven times that found for Zara. Even Nike's virgin polyester performs no better, releasing approximately 20,258 fibers per gram, three times more than Shein and seven times more than H&M.

These significant gaps raise important questions about production choices, manufacturing processes, and quality control implemented by different brands. They suggest that beyond the type of material used – virgin or recycled – weaving methods, finishing, and fiber treatment play a determining role in the amount of pollution generated throughout the garment's life.

Shein: Suspicions of Recycled Polyester Fraud

Beyond measured pollution levels, the study also highlights a particularly concerning case that raises questions about labeling veracity and material traceability in the fashion industry. Shein garments labeled as being made from "recycled polyester" release approximately the same amount of microplastics as their virgin polyester garments, a statistical anomaly that immediately alerted researchers.

The in-depth investigation conducted by Changing Markets reveals even more troubling practices. Items purchased in June 2025 from Shein's website and clearly presented as being made from recycled polyester were found a few months later on the same platform, but this time simply labeled "polyester," without any mention of recycling. This silent modification of labeling, without explanation or communication from the brand, strongly suggests that these items never contained recycled polyester, or that the proportion of recycled material was negligible.

The study emphasizes that this "polyester fraud" is not an isolated case but rather common practice in the global textile industry. Traces of similar practices have also been identified in H&M and Nike product ranges, where researchers found inconsistencies between online garment descriptions and the composition labels physically appearing on items.

These discoveries raise major questions about the reliability of certifications and environmental claims in the fashion sector. They highlight the absence of rigorous independent controls and the urgent need to establish more robust traceability and verification systems to protect consumers and guarantee the veracity of brands' displayed ecological commitments.

An Environmental Reality Very Different from Marketing Promises

Market analysis reveals the scale of the recycled polyester phenomenon in the contemporary fashion industry. The figures are impressive and testify to massive adoption of this material by sector giants. Adidas claims that 99% of its polyester is now recycled, while H&M reports that 94% of the polyester it used in 2024 came from recycled sources. Even Patagonia, a brand regularly cited as an example for its environmental commitments and sustainability approach, reveals that 93.6% of its polyester is recycled, with this material alone representing more than half of all its textile materials used.

These massive proportions are accompanied by well-oiled marketing discourse presenting recycled polyester as a circular and responsible solution. Brands highlight their contribution to reducing plastic waste, their commitment to ocean preservation, and their participation in building a circular economy. Yet, the industrial reality behind these beautiful promises is substantially different.

According to industry figures reported by the Changing Markets study, 98% of so-called "recycled" polyester actually comes from plastic bottles, not textile waste as one might assume. This practice, far from constituting a virtuous example of circular economy, actually creates a new environmental problem. Indeed, it diverts plastic bottles from closed-loop bottle-to-bottle recycling systems, which have functioned effectively for years in the beverage industry, to transform them into garments that can no longer be effectively recycled afterward.

The journey of these bottles perfectly illustrates the concept of "downcycling": they go from an indefinitely recyclable material to a textile product that will inevitably end up in landfill or incineration after a few uses. The beverage industry, which has developed efficient collection and recycling infrastructure, thus finds itself in direct competition with the textile industry for access to these recycled bottles. According to McKinsey projections cited in the report, by 2030, recycled polyester demand will be three times higher than available supply in the United States, further intensifying this resource tension.

Meanwhile, Textile Exchange data reveals a troubling paradox: although recycled polyester volumes are increasing in absolute terms, its overall market share actually decreased last year, falling from 12.5% to 12%. This drop is explained by even faster growth in virgin polyester use, demonstrating that recycled polyester is not replacing virgin polyester but simply adding to constantly expanding overall textile production.

A Context of Global Plastic Crisis

This polyester issue, whether virgin or recycled, fits into a much broader and worrying context of global plastic crisis. Plastic production and pollution figures are staggering and testify to an unsustainable trajectory for our planet. Global plastic production has experienced exponential growth, rising from just 2 megatonnes in 1950 to 475 megatonnes in 2022. Projections for coming decades are even more alarming, with production estimated at 1,200 megatonnes by 2060, more than double current production.

The accumulation of plastic waste in the environment unfortunately follows the same upward curve. Approximately 8,000 megatonnes of plastic waste now contaminate all our planet's ecosystems, from land to oceans to the atmosphere. These plastics progressively fragment into increasingly smaller particles, creating pervasive and persistent microplastic pollution.

A recent report from Pew Charitable Trusts titled "Breaking the Plastic Wave 2.0" and published in December 2025 provides particularly concerning insight into this crisis's expected evolution. According to this study, plastic pollution is expected to more than double over the next fifteen years, largely due to packaging and textile production. The figures presented are staggering: by 2040, plastic waste released into the environment will increase from 130 to 280 megatonnes per year, despite expected improvements in waste management systems.

The report clearly identifies the textile sector as one of the main drivers of this growth. While packaging will remain the largest plastic user until 2040, textiles will experience the steepest growth, fueled by rapid expansion of the low-cost fashion industry. Polyester, a synthetic material derived from petroleum, sits at the heart of this phenomenon. Its extremely low cost – about half that of cotton – has made it the material of choice for fast-fashion and ultra-fast-fashion, enabling mass production of disposable clothing at ever-lower prices.

Microplastics: A Major Health Issue

Microplastic pollution generated by the textile industry represents far more than an abstract environmental problem: it constitutes a concrete and growing health threat to all living things. Synthetic textile fibers account for approximately 35% of primary microplastics entering oceans, a considerable percentage that makes the fashion sector one of the main contributors to this form of pollution.

The phenomenon's scale is measured with each wash cycle. A single wash of a polyester garment can release up to 900,000 microplastic fibers, which drain away with wastewater. Even though treatment plants manage to filter out some of these particles, a significant proportion escapes treatment systems and ends up in natural environments. The captured fibers don't disappear either: they concentrate in sewage sludge which is then spread on agricultural land, thus contaminating soils and entering the terrestrial food chain.

These microplastics are now ubiquitous in all the planet's ecosystems. They contaminate agricultural soils, circulate in the atmosphere as aerosols, pollute freshwater and oceans, and accumulate in living organisms at all levels of the food chain. Recent studies have detected microplastics in the most remote places on Earth, from Himalayan peaks to oceanic trench depths, testifying to their ability to disperse across the entire globe.

The consequences for human health are beginning to be documented increasingly precisely, and the results are concerning. Microplastics have been detected in numerous human organs: the stomach, blood circulatory system, placenta, lungs, liver, and even the brain. These discoveries are no longer anecdotal but reveal widespread contamination of our organisms.

Epidemiological research now establishes links between microplastic exposure and a series of serious health problems. Recent studies associate the presence of microplastics in the body with an increased risk of stroke, heart attack, and cardiovascular disease. The mechanisms of action are multiple: chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, endocrine system disruption by chemical additives contained in plastics.

A particularly concerning element of the recycled polyester study concerns precisely the size of released particles. The smaller the fibers, the greater the health danger they represent. The finest particles can penetrate deep into respiratory pathways to lung alveoli, cross biological barriers to pass into blood, and distribute throughout the body. The fact that recycled polyester generates particles 20% smaller than virgin polyester concretely means they present superior harmfulness potential.

Toxicological research also reveals that recycled polyester fibers contain a more complex and potentially more toxic "chemical cocktail" than virgin polyester. During their first life as bottles, these plastics may have accumulated various chemical substances from the liquids they contained. The recycling process itself can generate or concentrate certain compounds. And final textile manufacturing adds dyes, antimicrobial treatments, waterproofing agents, and other chemicals, thus creating a mixture whose synergistic health effects remain largely unknown.

The Industry's Position

Faced with this study that challenges one of the pillars of their environmental strategy, fashion brands adopt various positions, oscillating between defending their choices and caution in their statements. Adidas's reaction, one of the tested brands and one of the most committed to using recycled polyester, well illustrates the arguments advanced by the industry.

An Adidas spokesperson stated that the brand continues to see "an environmental benefit in using recycled polyester," highlighting the sector's main argument: the fact that no crude oil needs to be extracted and processed to produce this material, and that plastic waste is thus reused rather than being abandoned in the environment or incinerated. The brand representative also emphasized that recycled polyester generates "much less greenhouse gas emissions" compared to virgin polyester, referring to other scientific studies on the subject.

Adidas particularly relies on work from the Microfibre Consortium, an industry-supported research group, which has not identified significant differences between recycled and virgin fibers regarding microfiber release during washing. This reference highlights the existence of an ongoing scientific debate, with different research methodologies and different test protocols potentially leading to divergent results.

This scientific controversy is not unusual in a relatively recent research field like textile microplastic pollution. Variables are numerous: weaving type, fabric density, applied treatments, tested washing conditions, fiber collection and counting methods. Each study brings understanding elements, but data accumulation is necessary to establish a solid scientific consensus.

Nevertheless, the Changing Markets study is distinguished by several important aspects. It is independent of industry, it directly compares several major brands on equal footing, and it uses rigorous test protocols recognized by the scientific community. These characteristics give it particular credibility and provide objective data that did not exist previously in public debate.

Beyond the microplastics question, the industry regularly emphasizes that recycled polyester presents other undeniable environmental advantages, particularly in terms of carbon footprint. Virgin polyester production from petroleum is indeed very greenhouse gas emissive, and recycling significantly reduces these emissions. This climate impact reduction is a strong argument, particularly in the current context of climate emergency.

However, as the Changing Markets study emphasizes, this approach illustrates a classic problem in environmental assessment: optimizing a single criterion can lead to neglecting other equally important impacts. Reducing carbon emissions is essential, but not at the cost of worsening microplastic pollution which also presents major environmental and health risks. A truly sustainable approach requires considering all impacts across products' entire life cycles.

The Real Solutions According to the NGO

For Urska Trunk, Campaign Director at Changing Markets Foundation, this study's results demonstrate that the fashion industry has gone down an ecological dead end by betting massively on recycled polyester. In an uncompromising statement, she asserts: "The fashion industry is selling recycled polyester as a green solution, yet our findings show it worsens the pollution problem. It exposes recycled polyester for what it truly is: a sustainability fig leaf masking the fashion industry's growing dependence on synthetic materials—plastic."

This analysis joins broader criticism formulated by numerous environmental organizations: recycled polyester allows the fashion industry to give an appearance of ecological virtue while continuing its growth model based on mass production and rapid consumption. It offers a marketing alibi without questioning the very foundations of the fast-fashion and ultra-fast-fashion system.

Urska Trunk continues by emphasizing technical solutions' limits: "A few smart design tweaks and end-of-pipe solutions will only scratch the surface." This remark directly targets approaches currently favored by the industry, which relies on marginal technical improvements: filters on washing machines, industrial pre-washing of garments, weaving technique optimization to reduce fiber release, development of textile finishes limiting pilling. While these innovations can bring marginal improvements, they don't solve the problem at its source.

For Changing Markets Foundation, the only truly effective solution is radical: "Real solutions mean phasing down and out synthetic fiber production and stopping the diversion of used plastic bottles into disposable fashion." This position reflects a conviction increasingly shared in the environmental movement: given the plastic crisis's scale, technical adjustments won't suffice, only profound transformation of production and consumption models will allow escaping the impasse.

The NGO formulates a series of concrete recommendations for policymakers, particularly at the European level where several environmental regulations are under discussion or revision. These proposals aim to create a binding regulatory framework that would force the industry to evolve.

Among recommended measures are implementing eco-design criteria with mandatory testing and labeling of all fabrics on their fiber shedding performance. This transparency would allow consumers to make informed choices and create competitive pressure on brands to improve their products. Establishing microplastic emission limits in finished products, modeled on what exists for pollutant emissions in other sectors, would constitute strong regulatory constraint driving innovation.

The NGO also recommends clear consumer warnings on synthetic textiles, similar to health warnings on tobacco products or pesticides. Integrating ecotoxicity impacts of microplastic release in textile product life-cycle assessments would allow a more complete vision of their real environmental impact.

At the international level, Changing Markets advocates for a global plastics treaty that would set binding limits on virgin plastic production and establish progressive reduction targets. Such global regulation would be necessary to prevent one region's efforts from being circumvented by production relocation to less regulated areas.

The NGO also calls for revision of the European waste directive to integrate taxes linked to microplastic emissions and production volumes, in a logic of extended producer responsibility. This economic mechanism would incentivize brands to reduce their production volumes and prioritize quality over quantity.

Implications for the Textile Biomass Sector

For the International Textile Biomass Alliance (ITBA), this study constitutes a major warning signal but also an opportunity to demonstrate the relevance of alternative approaches. The scientific results presented by Changing Markets forcefully underscore the urgency of accelerating transition toward bio-based and truly biodegradable fibers.

Faced with now-proven limitations of solutions based on recycling petroleum-derived synthetic materials, developing innovative, sustainable, and high-performing plant-based fibers appears no longer as merely one option among others, but as an imperative necessity for the textile industry's future. Biomass-derived fibers present intrinsic advantages that cannot be ignored in the current context of multiple environmental crises.

Unlike synthetic fibers, natural fibers are biodegradable under normal environmental conditions. When they fragment and end up in the environment, they don't persist for centuries like plastic but naturally decompose, reintegrating biological cycles without leaving toxic residues. This fundamental characteristic radically changes the environmental equation.

The Changing Markets study actually mentions that cotton, although it also releases fibers during washing, produces heavier and longer particles that likely present lower health risk than microplastics. These natural fibers are less likely to be deeply inhaled into lungs or cross biological barriers to contaminate different organs.

For ITBA, research must now intensify on several strategic axes. Developing optimized natural fibers represents a priority: creating plant-based materials that combine technical performance, environmental durability, and economic viability. Innovations in this field can build on new fiber plant varieties, less impactful transformation processes, or intelligent assemblies of different natural fibers to obtain desired properties.

Textile production technologies allowing drastic reduction of dependence on synthetic polymers constitute another crucial research field. It's not simply about replacing polyester with cotton, but rethinking the entire textile production chain to adapt it to bio-based fiber specificities while maintaining or improving finished product performance.

The issue of traceability and material authenticity takes on particular importance given fraud suspicions revealed by the recycled polyester study. The bio-based fiber industry must now develop robust certification systems and inviolable traceability technologies, potentially using blockchain or other digital tools, to guarantee consumers and regulators that environmental claims correspond to products' physical reality.

Finally, developing specific sustainability standards accounting for all environmental impacts, including microplastic pollution, is essential. These standards must rely on complete life-cycle analyses that conceal no major environmental impact and allow fair comparisons between different technical solutions.

ITBA also has a crucial role to play in raising awareness among policymakers and the general public. Scientific data on real impacts of different textile fibers must be widely disseminated and understood by all value chain actors. This recycled polyester study demonstrates the importance of a rigorous and independent scientific approach to inform industrial and political choices.

What Can Consumers Do?

While awaiting regulatory changes that appear increasingly necessary and technological developments that will take time to deploy at large scale, consumers are not powerless facing textile microplastic pollution issues. Their purchasing choices and usage behaviors can significantly contribute to reducing their personal impact and sending market signals encouraging the industry to evolve.

The first and probably most effective action consists of buying fewer but better quality garments. This approach goes against fast-fashion logic that has accustomed consumers to frequently renewing their wardrobe with low-cost and low-durability items. Investing in quality garments designed to last reduces both production demand and washing frequency over the long term.

Raw material choice constitutes an important lever. Favoring natural fibers – cotton, linen, hemp, wool – when possible significantly reduces one's contribution to microplastic pollution. Although these fibers are not without environmental impacts, particularly in terms of water consumption for certain crops or pesticide use in conventional agriculture, they present the major advantage of being biodegradable and not generating persistent plastic pollution.

Washing habits also play a significant role. Washing less frequently – many garments are washed out of habit when simple airing would suffice – and favoring gentler cycles reduces fiber release. Low temperatures, slower spins, and short programs generate less friction and therefore less microplastic release. Some brands now offer special washing bags designed to capture synthetic fibers, though their large-scale effectiveness still requires evaluation.

Avoiding ultra-fast-fashion items primarily made from synthetics is another concrete action. Brands like Shein, which launch thousands of new clothing lines daily with articles often worn just a few times before being discarded, represent the most problematic aspect of current textile industry from a microplastic pollution perspective. Choosing more durable garments from brands committed to environmental responsibility sends a strong market signal.

Remaining vigilant about potentially misleading "recycled polyester" claims is important given revelations from this study. Consumers should favor brands offering genuine transparency on their supply chains, using independent third-party certifications, and documenting the actual origin of their materials. The lack of regulation in this area requires particular consumer alertness.

Finally, supporting brands and initiatives that genuinely reduce their dependence on plastic fashion, whether through massive adoption of natural fibers, investment in textile recycling research, or adoption of slower, more responsible production models, helps direct the market toward more sustainable solutions. Consumer choices, while not sufficient on their own, constitute an important lever in combination with policy changes and technological innovations.