Home Science

Below you will find an overview of the most important scientific issues related to microfiber pollution from synthetic clothes and textiles. For more information, have a look at our Quick Facts or contact us.

Use & production of synthetic materials

Nowadays, around 62% of our clothing consists of synthetic materials or a mix of natural and synthetic fabrics. Synthetic materials are widely chosen by the textile and fashion industry because of their availability, durability, resistance, and affordability. These fabrics dominate the market since the mid-1990s when they overtook cotton and became the dominant material.

Annual global consumption of synthetic materials for apparel increased over the last two decades by more than 80%. Since 1990, the production of synthetic material increased from 20% to 60% of the market, from 9 million tons a year to 63,2 million tons. The prediction below shows that it keeps on rising.

Microplastics & microfibers

Microplastics are pieces of plastic smaller than five millimeters which can be especially harmful to the environment. They can be primary or secondary. Primary microplastics are directly released into the environment as tiny plastic particles. Secondary microplastics, meanwhile, originate mostly from the degradation of large plastic waste into smaller fragments once exposed to the environment.

When manufactured, washed, and worn, clothes & textiles made from synthetic materials release small plastic pieces called microfibers. These microfibers are so small that they can be barely or not at all seen with the naked eye. Microfibers go down the drain and enter sewer systems, which are not designed to filter them from wastewater. In this way, these plastic fibers enter the environment.

Friction plays a very important role when it comes to microfiber release. Both during washing and wearing, friction will increase the release of synthetic fibers from textiles.

Research on microfiber release from synthetic clothes

In 2011, ecologist Mark Anthony Browne, who was studying the accumulation of microplastics on shorelines worldwide, was the first to conclude that 85% of the human-made materials discovered on the shorelines were microfibers. He matched these microfibers to the types of material used in clothing, such as nylon and acrylic. He showed that a single garment might lose >1,900 fibers per wash.

In September of 2016, researchers Imogen Napper and Prof. Richard Thompson from the University of Plymouth published a research paper about the loss of fibers when washing clothing made from polyester, acrylic and a mixture of polyester and cotton at different temperatures (30 and 40 degrees), using different detergents. The English study was published in the Marine Pollution Bulletin and showed that more than 700,000 plastic fibers are released for every 6 kg of laundry washed.

Dris et al. (2015) proved the presence of microplastics (mostly fibers) in atmospheric fallout for the first time (at the rate of 29–280 particles m2 /day). A Californian study found that 9-110 kg of microfibers was being discharged in wastewater treatment plants’ effluent daily.

According to a report by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), microfibers are one of the biggest sources of primary microplastics that are directly released into the environment in the form of small particulates. Close to two-thirds (63.1%) of the on average 3.2 million tons per year that are released as primary microplastics into the environment is due to the laundry of synthetic textiles (34.8%), and to the erosion of tires while driving (28.3%).

The Mermaids Life+ Project evaluated microfiber release from synthetic clothes during laundry processes with nanotechnology in 2017. The research is explained below.

Mermaids Life+ Project

Between 2014 and 2017, the Plastic Soup Foundation was the dissemination partner of the Mermaids Life+ research (funded by the EU) which had the goal of decreasing the environmental impact of micro and nanoplastic fibers originating from laundry wastewater. This research project was a joint consortium with Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche in Italy, and Polysistec and LEITAT in Spain.

This multidisciplinary consortium aimed to mitigate the environmental impact of micro and nanoplastic particles originating from laundry wastewater on European (sea) ecosystems. It did so by demonstrating and implementing innovative technologies and as well as additives to laundry processes and textile finishing treatments. The final reports of this project can be downloaded here.

The scientific findings of the research were published in Elsevier’s Environmental Pollution Journal in December 2017: ‘Evaluation of microplastic release caused by textile washing processes of synthetic fabrics’.

The most important result was that each 5kg wash of synthetic clothes releases between 6 to 17 million microfibers, an average of 9 million microfibers.

A Handbook for zero microplastics from textiles and laundry for the textile industry was also developed as part of the Mermaids Life+ project.

Methodologies of microfiber research
Mark A. Browne (2011)
  • 150 one-liter water samples collected around the world
  • 85% of the human-made material found on the shoreline were microfibers
  • An estimated 1,900 individual fibers can be rinsed off a single synthetic garment
Patagonia, University of California (2015)
  • Patagonia conducted research together with researchers at the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
  • Tests: Four types of synthetic Patagonia jackets and one budget fleece jacket
  • No detergent
  • One synthetic jacket sheds an average of 1,174 mg of microfibers
Richard Thompson, University of Plymouth (2016)
  • Professor Richard Thompson and Dr. Imogen Napper from the University of Plymouth
  • Weighed filters before and after washing
  • Washed each fabric four times before recording data
  • Washed at 30ºC and 40ºC with detergent and fabric conditioner
  • Results: More than 700,000 microfibers released from a 6kg wash
Mermaids Life+ Project (2014 – 2017)
  • Three-year research funded by the European Union
  • Research partners in Italy and Spain
  • Plastic Soup Foundation as a dissemination partner
  • The methodology used and extended counting procedure, identifying micro- and nanofibers
  • Quantification of woven polyester, knitted polyester, and woven polypropylene fabric types
  • Analysis using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)
  • Alarming results: an average of 9,000,000 microfibers are released from a 5kg wash
Big fashion brands tested for microfiber release

IPCB-CNR in Italy is a partner of the Ocean Clean Wash campaign since their collaboration in the Mermaids Life+ Project in 2017. CNR is the reference research center for Plastic Soup Foundation in terms of knowledge about textile and microfiber pollutions: their experience makes them the experts in the field in Europe. Their latest collaboration with Plastic Soup Foundation sought to tackle the microfiber problem through the testing of synthetic clothes from four global fashion brands: Zara, Adidas, Nike, and H&M. The results were presented during the ISPO Conference in Munich and have also been published by Nature.com.

T-shirts from Adidas and Nike, both derived from 100 percent polyester, generated similar numbers of microfibers per wash: 124.05 mg/kg and 125 mg/kg, respectively. A top from H&M containing 65% polyester lost an average of 48.6 mg in microfibers per kg of laundry—still high, but better in relation to the other brands.

The Zara garment, which was made of 100% polyester on the front side & cotton and modal blend on the back, lost so many fibers per wash that it started “disintegrating” after only a few washes – this was quantified as losing an average of 307,6 mg of fibers per kilo of laundry.

Finishing treatments to reduce microfiber pollution: pectin coating

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) in Italy, is currently investigating a coating of pectin that might reduce the loss of fibers dramatically. Pectin is mostly extracted from suitable agro-by products like citrus peel & apple pomace and is used by the food industry as a natural ingredient because of its gelling, thickening, and stabilizing properties. It is a mainly linear polysaccharide whose principal chemical unit is based on a D-galacturonic acid monomer. Such a polysaccharide represents an interesting biomaterial because it is cheap and abundantly available since it is a waste product of the fruit juice, sunflower oil, and sugar manufacturing processes. Further research on the feasibility of this coating is being currently undertaken. If we can treat synthetic yarns and fabrics with a coating such as pectin-based finishing, the reduction of fiber loss might go up to 80 – 90%.

Microfiber pollution in the environment

Microfibers from synthetic textiles have been found everywhere in the environment. Scientists have found them in the Mariana Trench (the deepest point of the ocean), at the top of the Himalayas, among the sediment surrounding beaches, in mangroves, and in Arctic ice.

In 2017, a study of microplastic pollution along the shores of the Hudson River in New York state found that the river carries around 150 million plastic microfibers into the Atlantic ocean every day. These plastic fibers are being eaten by zooplankton and other species such as sea cucumbers, shore crabs, and lugworms, and they are affecting the development of crabs. They have also been found in fish being sold in markets, in wild fish, in farmed and wild mussels, oysters, chicken, in sea salt and even in beer, honey, and cane sugar.

Microfibers are also falling from the sky. According to research, there is every day a fallout of about 2 to 355 microfibers per m² in Paris. Even more, research has proven that we breathe in these microfibers at a rate of 11 microplastics per hour. We ingest more plastic through household dust (carpets, curtains, and textiles) than through mussel consumption. A research carried out in London showed that locals are breathing in millions of microfibers every day. The results showed that from all the microplastics found in the samples, 92% of them were microfibers from synthetic clothing, carpets, and furniture.

Fibers have been found in tap water as well as bottled water and the World Health Organization (WHO) has even launched a health review to investigate the effects of these plastics in humans. Here is a video of how microfibers are entering the bottom of the food chain, while we are at the top of it.

Potential effects on human health

We already know that we eat, drink, and breathe microplastics, as described above in the effects of microfibers in the environment. Furthermore, animal studies have shown that plastics can enter the bloodstream and cross barriers such as the placenta, exposing the developing fetus to these particles. Whether this happens in humans is still unknown, but is currently being investigated by researchers at Utrecht University.

Inhaled plastic microfibers may persist in the lung and as a result, could cause inflammation. It has been hypothesized that this could lead to health effects including reproductive problems, cancer, and DNA damage. Particle pollution such as asbestos and fine dust has long been known to damage lung tissues, leading to cancer, asthma attacks, and other health problems. If inhalation of microplastics is sufficiently high, these plastic particles may cause similar health problems. Multiple research reveals people working with plastic-based textiles and dust are at an increased risk of respiratory problems. Therefore, we ask ourselves: are our lungs able to eliminate these plastic particles we are inhaling, as they do for fine dust? Or do plastic particles accumulate in lung tissue and cause damage? Or is it perhaps possible that the plastics we inhale spread to the rest of our bodies?

Researchers of the ZonMw program ‘Microplastics & Health’ hope to unearth answers to these questions.  Three studies on the repercussions of the inhalation of micro-and nanoplastics have been approved by ZonMw, and each has a unique research question. You can read the full abstracts of the research here and the Plastic Health Coalition will regularly report on these projects.

  • Are microplastics which have been exposed to exhaust gasses and cigarette smoke more harmful to our lungs than microfibers which have not been exposed to these pollutants? (Prof. dr. Barbro Melgert – RUG)
  • How do our lungs respond to microplastics that come from the environment and are therefore heavily weathered? (Dr. Ingeborg Kooter – TNO)
  • Are the microplastics that we inhale able to spread from the lungs to other parts of the body? (Dr. Bastien Venzac – UT)

On October 3rd, preliminary results of some of these studies as well as other groundbreaking research findings around plastic & health were revealed during the first-ever Plastic Health Summit, which took place in Amsterdam.

Fransien van Dijk, member of the research team of Prof. dr. Barbro Melgert introduced the preliminary results of the research on the effects of nylon and polyester microfibers in lung cells.

  • Avagyan, Rozanna, Giovanna Luongo, Gunnar Thorsén, and Conny Östman. 2015. ‘Benzothiazole, Benzotriazole, and Their Derivates in Clothing Textiles—a Potential Source of Environmental Pollutants and Human Exposure’. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22 (8): 5842–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3691-0.
  • Baker, Ian. 2018. ‘Polyester’. In Fifty Materials That Make the World, edited by Ian Baker, 157–61. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78766-4_30.
  • Belontz, Sara L., Patricia L. Corcoran, Heather Davis, Kathleen A. Hill, Kelly Jazvac, Kirsty Robertson, and Kelly Wood. 2018. ‘Embracing an Interdisciplinary Approach to Plastics Pollution Awareness and Action’. Ambio, November. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1126-8.
  • Carney Almroth, Bethanie M., Linn Åström, Sofia Roslund, Hanna Petersson, Mats Johansson, and Nils-Krister Persson. 2018. ‘Quantifying Shedding of Synthetic Fibers from Textiles; a Source of Microplastics Released into the Environment’. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25 (2): 1191–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0528-7.
  • De Falco, F., Di Pace, E., Cocca, M. et al. The contribution of washing processes of synthetic clothes to microplastic pollution. Sci Rep 9, 6633 (2019) doi:10.1038/s41598-019-43023-x
  • De Falco, Francesca, Gennaro Gentile, Emilia Di Pace, Maurizio Avella, and Mariacristina Cocca. 2018. ‘Quantification of Microfibres Released during Washing of Synthetic Clothes in Real Conditions and at Lab Scale⋆’. The European Physical Journal Plus 133 (7): 257. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2018-12123-x.
  • De Falco, Francesca, Maria Pia Gullo, Gennaro Gentile, Emilia Di Pace, Mariacristina Cocca, Laura Gelabert, Marolda Brouta-Agnésa, et al. 2018. ‘Evaluation of Microplastic Release Caused by Textile Washing Processes of Synthetic Fabrics’. Environmental Pollution 236 (May): 916–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.057.
  • Dris, Rachid, Johnny Gasperi, Cécile Mirande, Corinne Mandin, Mohamed Guerrouache, Valérie Langlois, and Bruno Tassin. 2017. ‘A First Overview of Textile Fibers, Including Microplastics, in Indoor and Outdoor Environments’. Environmental Pollution 221 (February): 453–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.12.013.
  • Dris, Rachid, Johnny Gasperi, Vincent Rocher, and Bruno Tassin. 2018. ‘Synthetic and Non-Synthetic Anthropogenic Fibers in a River under the Impact of Paris Megacity: Sampling Methodological Aspects and Flux Estimations’. Science of The Total Environment 618 (March): 157–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.009.
  • Dris, Rachid, Johnny Gasperi, Mohamed Saad, Cécile Mirande, and Bruno Tassin. 2016. ‘Synthetic Fibers in Atmospheric Fallout: A Source of Microplastics in the Environment?’ Marine Pollution Bulletin 104 (1): 290–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.01.006.
  • Habib, Daniel, David C. Locke, and Leonard J. Cannone. 1998. ‘Synthetic Fibers as Indicators of Municipal Sewage Sludge, Sludge Products, and Sewage Treatment Plant Effluents’. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 103 (1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004908110793.
  • Hartline, Niko L., Nicholas J. Bruce, Stephanie N. Karba, Elizabeth O. Ruff, Shreya U. Sonar, and Patricia A. Holden. 2016. ‘Microfiber Masses Recovered from Conventional Machine Washing of New or Aged Garments’. Environmental Science & Technology 50 (21): 11532–38. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b03045.
  • Henry, Beverley, Kirsi Laitala, and Ingun Grimstad Klepp. 2019. ‘Microfibres from Apparel and Home Textiles: Prospects for Including Microplastics in Environmental Sustainability Assessment’. Science of The Total Environment 652 (February): 483–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.166.
  • Jemec, Anita, Petra Horvat, Urban Kunej, Marjan Bele, and Andrej Kržan. 2016. ‘Uptake and Effects of Microplastic Textile Fibers on Freshwater Crustacean Daphnia Magna’. Environmental Pollution 219 (December): 201–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.10.037.
  • Liebezeit, Gerd, and Elisabeth Liebezeit. 2014. ‘Synthetic Particles as Contaminants in German Beers’. Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A 31 (9): 1574–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2014.945099.
  • Mishra, Sunanda, Chandi charan Rath, and Alok Prasad Das. 2019. ‘Marine Microfiber Pollution: A Review on Present Status and Future Challenges’. Marine Pollution Bulletin 140 (March): 188–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.039.
  • Othman, Mohd Hilmi, Parit Raja Malaysia, and Malaysia Sulaiman Hassan. n.d. ‘Investigation of Clothes Recycling as Colouring Agent for Polypropylene-Nanoclay Nanocomposites’.
  • Pirc, U., M. Vidmar, A. Mozer, and A. Kržan. 2016. ‘Emissions of Microplastic Fibers from Microfiber Fleece during Domestic Washing’. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23 (21): 22206–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7703-0.
  • Rezania, Shahabaldin, Junboum Park, Mohd Fadhil Md Din, Shazwin Mat Taib, Amirreza Talaiekhozani, Krishna Kumar Yadav, and Hesam Kamyab. 2018. ‘Microplastics Pollution in Different Aquatic Environments and Biota: A Review of Recent Studies’. Marine Pollution Bulletin 133 (August): 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.05.022.
  • Salvador Cesa, Flavia, Alexander Turra, and Julia Baruque-Ramos. 2017. ‘Synthetic Fibers as Microplastics in the Marine Environment: A Review from Textile Perspective with a Focus on Domestic Washings’. Science of The Total Environment 598 (November): 1116–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.172.
  • Senthil Kumar, P., and E. Gunasundari. 2018. ‘Sustainable Wet Processing—An Alternative Source for Detoxifying Supply Chain in Textiles’. In Detox Fashion: Sustainable Chemistry and Wet Processing, edited by Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu, 37–60. Textile Science and Clothing Technology. Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4876-0_2.
  • Suran, Melissa. 2018. ‘A Planet Too Rich in Fibre: Microfibre Pollution May Have Major Consequences on the Environment and Human Health’. EMBO Reports 19 (9): e46701. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201846701.
  • Villalba, Raquel, Àngels Rovira, and Laura Gelabert. 2018. ‘Are Our Synthetic Fabrics Released into the Marine Environment? Evidences on Microplastics Pollution in Wastewater Coming from Our Laundry’. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Microplastic Pollution in the Mediterranean Sea, edited by Mariacristina Cocca, Emilia Di Pace, Maria Emanuela Errico, Gennaro Gentile, Alessio Montarsolo, and Raffaella Mossotti, 67–72. Springer Water. Springer International Publishing.
  • Weis, Judith S. 2018. ‘Cooperative Work Is Needed Between Textile Scientists and Environmental Scientists to Tackle the Problems of Pollution by Microfibers’. Journal of Textile and Apparel, Technology and Management 10 (3). http://stargate.cnr.ncsu.edu/index.php/JTATM/article/view/13791.
  • Woodall Lucy C., Sanchez-Vidal Anna, Canals Miquel, Paterson Gordon L.J., Coppock Rachel, Sleight Victoria, Calafat Antonio, Rogers Alex D., Narayanaswamy Bhavani E., and Thompson Richard C. n.d. ‘The Deep Sea Is a Major Sink for Microplastic Debris’. Royal Society Open Science 1 (4): 140317. Accessed 26 February 2019. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140317.
  • Wright, S. L., J. Ulke, A. Font, K. L. A. Chan, and F. J. Kelly. “Atmospheric microplastic deposition in an urban environment and an evaluation of transport.” Environment International (2019): 105411. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412019330351
  • Zubris, Kimberly Ann V., and Brian K. Richards. 2005. ‘Synthetic Fibers as an Indicator of Land Application of Sludge’. Environmental Pollution 138 (2): 201–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.04.013.