Perspectives on the Future of Polyester
Service Shirt: 50 year fashion concept (Earley 2018)
Polyester is a plastic made from crude oil. In 2016 we produced 77 million tonnes of it globally. It’s shedding micro-fibres into the sea from its production and laundry. We all have concerns; we need to come up with a game plan. But what plan?
These days, whenever I am at a sustainable fashion and textiles conference, the debate around synthetic fibres and polyester often reminds me of the Brexit discussions in the media. People tend to be on one side or the other of the naturals vs synthetics topic. My favourite dad to meet on the school run is James O’Brien, who experiences very polarised views from the public every day on his LBC radio show, and laments the lack of accurate, critical debate. “Ultimately, it discourages thinking. Instead, we are encouraged to pick our side…” (O’Brien 2018:62). Love it or hate it, polyester is everywhere, and we are in desperate need of some expert-level, in-depth discussion.
Today’s discourse around fibres and their environmental impacts is too often overly simplistic and generalised. Kassia St Clair wrote ‘The Golden Thread: how fabric changed history’ and she takes a clear-cut position. “Environmentally, synthetic fabrics are a disaster.” (St Clair 2018:219). Yet, in the research conversations my team and I are part of, polyester is seen as one of the most viable solutions to meeting our global clothing needs, albeit with huge changes to how it is used and reused.
The collaborative research work with Research Institutes of Sweden (RISE) — where we have been working on the Design Theme questions — have provided us with a rich network of expertise on which to draw. I emailed them and others — material scientists, life cycle assessment experts, journalists, designers, CEO’s and futurists — and asked them to tell me what they thought lay in store for polyester and our planet. I asked them to consider when it works best, and when should we absolutely NOT use polyester. I asked them to respond to a series of themes. or make their own. These included how it fits into the luxury market and whether it can be luxurious as well as durable; experiences of using and wearing polyester; whether they can imagine us valuing it differently in the future as the price and availability of oil changes; how the outdoor clothing sector regards its future functionality without it; and whether biosynthetics and regeneration technologies will provide us with all the answers we seek?
Of the 20 answers I got back, 10 were from ‘industry pioneers’, 8 from academics and authors, and 2 were from RISE scientists. All respondents highlight durability, strength and versatility as the key assets of the fibre, so for the sake of space, I have edited out repetition around these comments. ‘True cost’ versus current low prices also came up a lot; the whole industry needs to reconsider its value system, pricing clothes based on all lifecycle stages being considered and labour being fairly remunerated. Perhaps some of the most interesting views I present here are those that contextualise the current use of oil and chemicals, emissions, fibrillation truths, and the answers that recycling technologies, biopolymers and PET engineering are providing for the future. But in the end, it comes down to how different experts view the timeline ahead. The academics often give us their position on the kind of future we want to achieve for polyester and fashion; yet the ‘industry pioneers’ and the scientists offer us incredibly useful reality checks in the form of insightful comparisons to other fibres, as well as ideas about the steps to take towards a future, ‘planet-safe’ polyester.
Let’s start with Dr Gustav Sandin, a Life cycle Assessment scientist at RISE who gives us a really concise overview of the environmental shortcomings of polyester and his suggestions for where to look for solutions:
“First… fossil feedstock — burning it at end-of-life causes climate impact. Second, the fossil fuels powering its production… Third, it sheds microplastics to lakes and oceans, which attracts hazardous contaminants… This can be mitigated by better production: less brushing, using ultrasound cutting, and removing and safely disposing of microplastics at the production stage. The second can be mitigated by using low-carbon energy sources. The first can be mitigated by using bio-based feedstocks, recycling the fibres at end-of-life, or by using polyester primarily for long-life garments, in timeless designs fit for function…”
This is a pretty clear starter for ten. But what is timeless design when it comes to polyester? From the wearer’s point of view, when it works well, it can really work well. Tamsin Blanchard, journalist, editor and special events curator, Fashion Revolution:
“Some of my favourite items of clothing are made from 100 % polyester and every time I wear them, I marvel at the way they always look like new… a pair of grey Homme Plissé pleated trousers designed (apparently for men) to be easy to wear, with all the comfort of a pair of jogging pants without looking like I couldn’t quite be bothered to get dressed properly… seemingly indestructible. They can be washed cold according to the label, but I generally chuck them in with everything else at 30 and they don’t mind. I pack them in a suitcase and they can be rolled up to take minimal space, then spring into life when needed.”
Prof Sandy Black, author and researcher, London College of Fashion, also wrote about her wardrobe successes in her email reply to me:
“Two of my favourite garments are 100% polyester, both by Japanese designers and I have owned and worn them for a very long time, one for over 20 years and 10 the other; these garments give me constant pleasure. The mouldable properties of their polymer structure enable heat setting into permanent pleats or crumpled surface textures that simply recover to the original shape when stretched. They never look old or worn, they can be thrown in a suitcase and put on without ironing, they hand wash at low temperature and air dry very fast, no ironing required — ideal for travelling. In the 1990s, Issey Miyake’s Pleats Please range was a ground-breaking innovation, continued by Yoshiki Hishinuma, who had worked for Miyake. Japanese design and technology has for decades elevated polyester fibre and fabric to the status of luxury, contrary to its commonly held perception.”
The other Sandy in my address book, Sandy McLennan, Director of East Central Studios, shared insights about how designers for the luxury market are employing it well, writing that they are “quietly using it… [for example] a great 2 way stretch crepe for modern tailoring from Girbaud, or in blends with high twist components making super hi performing fabrics that I know Armani uses, and also a brilliant weaver in Italy who makes very kind of couture quality satins for sport and fashion, all from regenerated polyester. Cos of course uses masses of it very well too. For sport it’s still a top choice along with PA [polyamide] qualities… For me there is a place in the grand landscape of fabrics and while I reckon fossil fuel resources get a bad rap, perhaps when we stop using it for fuel and energy there could be lots left over for this benign way of locking it up in garments without causing havoc?”
Others are not at all fans of wearing polyester. They can see its benefits, but believe that material science and engineering could help us design away from the need to use it in the future. Dr Veronika Kapsali, Reader Material Technology and Design, London College of Fashion:
“I don’t wear garments made from, or containing polyester next to my skin, they give me the ick. However, I appreciate that there are many next to skin applications such as high wicking polyester fibres used in athletic/gym wear that consumers find beneficial… Polyester should be regarded as an expensive material, it has been created at huge cost to the environment that exceeds its perceived ‘low cost’ commercial value. We have already produced enough polyester to meet the demands of products that rely on the properties of this material. Why not stop, focus efforts on reclaiming the material from waste and reuse it, over and over again?”
Annie Gullingsrud, Founder of DesignforAllKind.com and author, ‘Fashion Fibers Designing for Sustainability’ (2017), also writes about its ‘true cost’ to us and its distorted value — urging us to understand more about how to use it, as well as develop the essential plan to recapture it.
“… Our planet, our oceans, and our bodies are deeply experiencing these unintended negative consequences today from this fiber and the non-existent system of recapture. As we move forward, we must acknowledge the sheer scale of usage, and be realistic with our efforts to move forward, understanding there is not a quick fix… ensuring these materials can be actively recovered and identified, and can be regenerated at the proper time to retain their highest value.”
Holly McQuillan, researcher and co-author of ‘Zero waste Fashion Design’ (2015) sent me a really well researched statement, which resonated with a lot of the points being made by others here, as well as writing this:
“We make value judgements on polyester, primarily that it is ‘cheap’ and therefore only useful for garments that are cheap. However, by treating it this way we place it into the very context where it will cause the most damage. Perhaps, since polyester is literally here to stay, we need to use only what we already have, and value it more — it’s what we do with it that counts.”
Sass Brown, academic and author of ‘Refashioned’ (2013), has looked at what designers do with materials for many years. She asks us to love the signs of wear and design for reuse and remanufacture, getting maximum value before it gets to the recycling stage:
“… as long as we have it, we had better find ways of valuing it and keeping it out of landfill… Flipping the concept of wear and tear from something that devalues materials, into something that pridefully exhibits intrinsic value through the wounds of time served and service rendered, is truly magical, and something the best upcycling designers manage beautifully on an ongoing basis.”
Using it well because it is already here is a response that continues with many others who emailed me back. But this can seem a little reactive to some. If you are a design academic full to the brim with ideas about the kind of change we ultimately want to see in the long-term, then the pace and processes of industry can be deeply frustrating. Dr Timo Rissanen, co-author of ‘Zero waste Fashion Design’ (2015) and Associate Professor at Parsons the New School:
“We absolutely should not be making disposable, low-quality items from [polyester]… I used to think that polyester had great potential due to its capacity for recycling. Instead of designing for that cyclability, we have instead flooded the old linear model with low quality (both in fabric and garment) polyester, much of which ends in landfill or incineration… All polyester, whether virgin or recycled, contains carbon that doesn’t belong in the carbon cycle of the planet at the quantities and speeds that we have inserted it into the cycle… As for virgin polyester, we should aim to transition away from it as rapidly as possible; polyester textiles should not be a gateway for the fossil fuel industry. What is still in the ground should stay in the ground, as a matter of survival of life on the planet. Synthetic fibers in circulation are carbon that ‘doesn’t belong’; we put it there… Having an industrial infrastructure for recycling doesn’t mean everything ends up recycled — see any roadside or ocean for evidence — so we ought to design for things not entering the recycling systems (through biodegradability and compostibility) as much as for doing so.”
There are many aspects of Timo’s frustrations that are commonly voiced — some I will pick up later in this essay — but the request for extending the use phase and evolving models for recirculating clothing is echoed in the statement by Francois Souchet, Lead at Make Fashion Circular at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation. He says if it’s not safe and renewable, it’s not circular;
“… benefits of polyester can not be truly enjoyed without addressing its negative impacts on people and the environment. In a circular economy all garments are made from safe and renewable materials. To achieve this, there is a need to shift away from oil-based virgin inputs. Non-toxic production processes need to be developed, for example to avoid the use of heavy metals such as Antimony Trioxide, a known carcinogen, which is currently used as a catalyst. In recent years, the textile industry has been identified as a major contributor to the issue of plastic entering the ocean. Focussed innovation is required to design out non-biodegradable microfibre shedding from the outset.”
The natural world providing new materials solutions excites many of us. The huge innovation potential is what Ina Budde, circular.fashion, Berlin, wrote about. She also wants to see oil replaced with plant-based biopolymers.
“We assume there will be many interim and hybrid forms replacing traditional polyester in order to slowly but steady pave the way for the ultimate bio-based, biodegradable and recyclable fibres and filaments of tomorrow.”
Materials that come from nature, function as well as polyester, and then go back to nature through biodegradation. It’s a tall order as Timo pointed out in a follow up email,
“I do think that if we are going to continue with polyester for some time, but we ought to think about transitioning away from it, to plastics generated from renewable sources that can also return to biological systems via biodegradability, that perform as well as or better than the fibres they replace. (A somewhat formidable design brief for material scientists working with designers.)”
Experts working with the development of new materials and exploring their properties for and with clients, wrote about this and other concerns, like the essential need to evaluate the polyester fibre in terms of the relative harm that comes from others in the sector, as well as the trade off with growing food. Charles Ross, sportswear and outdoor wear specialist, academic and journalist:
“At a time when over 1 billion people on this planet live below the nutritional poverty — why are we still growing textiles instead of food? 99.2% of the oil extracted from the ground is burnt or buried within 12 months; there is such a little looped into clothing that this area could be further expanded. Polyester is the most popular textile in world production now, but cotton is 8 times weaker — so the latter produces more pollution (which does not biodegrade quickly if it has been synthetically dyed). Synthetic micro-filaments in the sea are not such a problem as the chemicals that use them as a carrier to enter our food chain. PCBs, DDT, PFCs, pesticide & herbicide are those most dangerous chemicals found in the sea; the latter two are used extensively in the cultivation of cotton crops.”
Dr Sandra Roos, Research Institutes of Sweden, was one of the key people that inspired this article for me. She has been aligning the arguments through her research over the last few years. She makes a really clear case for understanding the trade-offs from all angles, but especially chemicals:
“My daily work means advising on how to reduce harmful effects of chemicals in textiles. The most powerful solution I’ve found so far is dope-dyed polyester. Firstly, because water pollution from conventional dyeing can be avoided by using dope dyed polyester. Secondly because pesticide use during conventional cotton cultivation can be avoided by material substitution using polyester instead. The lifespan of garments can be increased using this durable fibre. What’s the hitch then? That polyester is fossil? So are a lot of cosmetics, for example baby oil, where ‘synthetic’ is interpreted as ‘clean’ from allergenic substances. From the natural science perspective, it seems irrational to worry about 100g fossil content in a polyester t-shirt, but not raise an eyebrow over the 1000g fossil fuels needed to produce a cotton t-shirt. Microplastics? Yes, this is a question. Although micro-sized plastic particles are not harmful in themselves they can act as carriers of toxins. Safe removal of dust in production and selection of non-toxic additives is not rocket science and is a must in the future, regardless of fibre type. What if in the future we don’t throw waste in the oceans, we base polyesters on plants or recycled feedstock and dope dye the fibres. We could save a lot of harmful impact!”
Christian Tubito, Project Manager, Innovation and Research at Material Connexion Italia, (now at Kering), writes about the madness of demonising a fibre, in his email with the subject heading, ‘Rethinking the Environmental Impact of Polyester, aka re-discovering the potential of an overused fibre’:
“Prejudice is a dangerous state of mind when we talk about materials, preventing good innovation. To envision the future (of) polyester, it is necessary to re-consider this material in light of the new technologies and opportunities ahead. We have to stop demonizing polyester, assuming that a synthetic material has a negative impact per se; to be a chemical material might prove to be an advantage in the future. Innovation in recycling often can be found more in the recycling process itself than in the material derived from it. The environmental potential of polyester needs to be unveiled for the future… When it comes to chemical recycling, only polyester and certain nylons can currently be reprocessed. We can modify it at fibre level, we can work on cross sections, we can dye it at the spun fibre stage.”
I worked on the Trash-2-Cash project with Christian, so know first-hand what he means about the innovations we can make through recycling. He also warns us about the limitations of biopolymers and the time required to adequately develop them:
“Polyester, like all plastic materials, was originally not meant to be disassembled into its constituent parts at the molecular level and then re-constructed, but now it is necessary and it is possible to do this and to do it in a sustainable manner, and ever more in the future; this changes the unfriendly fate of this versatile material. Biopolymers are far from being a real alternative to polyester fibres, even more when we talk about technical and high-performance applications. What should we do whilst we wait for the new bioplastic fibre miracles? Polyester is a material with which man can do better than his (the man) nature. The new regeneration processing technologies (starting from waste textile) are opening new scenarios on this material, provided that to know what is in the Polyester (composition, finishes) with traceable origins. Is that an issue of the material or of its use? The polyester fibre obtained in the future from chemical re-generation processes will ensure stable chemical and functional properties, will be easier to process with improved dye adsorption, and chemical reactivity for the creation of a water-scarce end to the textile manufacturing value chain and water-scarce finishing treatments, will be heavy-metal-free and free from chemical substances, will be designed to be used, recovered and remanufactured safely and effectively throughout multiple product life cycles, and will be available in a wide range of deniers. Are we really sure we want (and we can) give up this material?”
Sophie Mather, Material Futurist at Biov8tion, also writes about our great potential to engineer it in the future, in particular, by using it in direct polymer to garment manufacturing:
“With the speed of the current industry, the true potential of PET is yet undiscovered. As the workhorse of the textiles industry with 64% usage across all fibres, it is more often cited as the commodity fibre… but its potential is far greater, with innovation opportunities currently hidden within its DNA and myriad of process steps from its building block chemistry to the final consumer-facing garment. PET engineering opportunities beg for discovery in a race to solve sustainability challenges. There is an escalating need for the use of renewable resources, fibre to fibre recyclability, zero water colouration and solutions to the escalating concerns around microfibre shedding, all of which can be met by this versatile polymer which currently is undervalued as far as the innovation potential it can offer. As we use PET as a vehicle for sustainable innovation, the ultimate systemic change will be seen in the commercialisation of direct polymer to garment manufacturing, cutting out the complex process steps grandfathered into the industry, but which now seem somewhat redundant as we rethink totally how we best utilise this under-discovered fibre.”
New production processes is a research passion for my colleague at Centre for Circular Design, Dr Kate Goldsworthy, who has done a lot of work on looking into the future of this fibre:
“Polyester (and indeed plastic) is part of a much bigger materials story. In some ways it’s already a recycling solution to one of our biggest waste streams — that from oil. Of the 4,000 million tonnes of oil used towards world energy consumption, less than 1% is converted for use in plastic and synthetic textiles. Even if we stop using oil tomorrow we still have all existing plastic available — what an incredible resource if we harness and recover it efficiently for future generations… so many of the life-changing advances we see in the world today have plastic in their story — we must acknowledge not only the ‘easy to see’ impacts of material and production but the wider societal value it can create.”
Kate goes on to highlight the need for us all to clarify the terminology:
“The science and technology behind ‘recycling’ is a hugely complex set of activities — not a singular process. Recovery and ‘undoing’ of materials can happen in almost as many ways as we create them. It is in essence a reversal of creation processes. Often the word ‘recycling’ is used to mean very different things to different people which is where confusion sets in. We must find consensus in the language we use in order to communicate and debate the real issues. This is where design can really help. Some chemical recycling processes can be used to remove impurities and contamination OUT of the system, resulting in a cleaned-up version of the virgin material. How incredible that we might be able to retain the value in the materials we already have whilst simultaneously Improving the material world we have for the future.”
Kate works with Worn Again Technologies innovator Cyndi Rhoades, Founder CEO, who sees a positive future:
“The exciting news is that new processing technologies are currently in development which will overcome [these] barriers and enable the vast majority of all polyester, whether pure or trapped in blends, to be recycled. The reality is that we already have enough polyester in circulation today, in the form of textiles and PET plastic bottles, to satisfy our annual demand for new polyester textile raw materials. With the right processes and collection infrastructure in place, we can continue to make use of these resources into the distant future.”
Edwin Keh, CEO of The Hong Kong Research Institute of Textile and Apparel, leads on the direction of the R&D Centre, and is the midst of ongoing research activities that reclaim polyester at fibre, not molecular, level. He says we can’t get back to the same quality of material through recycling:
“ It’s very hard to recycle. It’s down-cyclable, but can’t be repurposed to do the same thing over and over again due to the damage in the process of recycling… Our hydrothermal system is the only known method to truly recycle polyester, but we’re only at 100kg a day… a drop in the ocean really. We need to scale it quickly before we can say it is truly recyclable.”
Isaac Nichelsen, CEO of Circular-systems.com, sent through an amazing timeline — steps towards change that included policy ideas. He looks forward to a future (perhaps as soon as 2030) where all petroleum based virgin synthetics are a thing of the past, the world is moving toward a thriving and regenerative bio-economy with a [booming] recycled synthetics market and efficient collection systems for all waste plastic resources. In order to make this happen, we need a massive drop in the cost of ionic solutions fostered by government subsidies to enable the biggest challenge of all, the chemical separation of blended fibres; cellulosic and synthetic. By 2025 Isaac can see “the oceans and land [are] raked clean of plastic waste to drive the recycled raw materials market.”
My final respondent, the ever-inspiring Elin Larsson, Founder of Elco — advisor for sustainability and circularity, also highlighted this new ‘raw materials’ market:
“In a near future we will be able to wear clothes that have a positive climate impact, made from harvested greenhouse gases from the air and the oceans that have been turned into polyester pellets.”
The plan ahead seems to involve being able to shift our value systems from using polyester in cheap, low-quality clothing to more durable, long-life and high-function contexts. Several experts say we have already produced enough polyester — so working with collection systems to reprocess it and circular design models to keep it perpetually in use seems key. A few experts are concerned about quality and downcycling, but one way forward is to add small amounts of virgin materials into the regeneration and/or re-spinning process. Others say the percentages of oil going into this sector are tiny when compared to the transportation sector — but few think that long-term we should still be using fossil fuels; we can use what we have already produced as well as creating new polyester materials from biopolymers. We need to evaluate the materials landscape ahead in terms of lifecycle trade-offs — from land use, through production as well as impacts through wear, re-wear and regeneration. Life cycle assessment techniques aren’t quite ready yet to do this yet. The trade-off with future food needs is a huge one, and needs further review, as does the chemical contaminants on all kinds of fibres in the sea. The innovation potential here seems immense, and as designers this excites us. Redesigning polyester is one of many material approaches needed; legislation and behavioural ones are needed to. But to be able to use the pollution around us to make infinite cycles to meet our future needs means that an old outdated system can become one that’s truly fit for purpose. The sky is the limit. Quite literally.
Contributors: Dr Kate Goldsworthy | Edwin Keh | Cyndi Rhoades | Sandy MacLennan | Christian Tubito | Dr Gustav Sandin | Dr Sandra Roos | Charles Ross | Dr Veronika Kapsali | Tamsin Blanchard | Annie Gullingrud | Professor Sandy Black | Dr Timo Rissanen | Holly McQuillan | Elin Larsson | Ina Budde | Sass Brown | Isaac Nichelsen | Sophie Mather | Francois Souchet.
Note: This essay is an excerpt from:
Earley, R. (2019) Shirt Stories: University of the Arts London Professorial Platform, 26 June 2019, ISBN number: 978–1–906908–54–6
Other References:
O’Brien, J. (2018) How to be Right… in a world gone wrong. London:WH Allen
St Clair, K. (2018) The Golden Thread: how fabric changed history. London: John Murray Publishers.
