We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Are 'Natural' Textile Fibres Environmentally Benign? A Systematic Literature Review of Chemical Processing and Microfibre Pollution
Original title: Are ‘natural’ textile fibres environmentally benign? A systematic literature review of chemical processing and microfibre pollution,
AI summary Read the abstract
That "natural" fabric labels like cotton and rayon might give you a false sense of security: this review of existing research shows that heavy chemical treatment during manufacturing can make these fibers shed particles that are just as persistent and potentially harmful as synthetic microplastic fibers, not the harmless, biodegradable bits we assume them to be. Since these "natural" microfibers are showing up everywhere in the environment (in water, soil, and likely our food and bodies) but get far less scientific attention than plastic microfibers, this research suggests we need to start treating them as a comparable health and pollution concern rather than giving them a free p
Natural and man-made cellulosic textile fibres and microfibres have been viewed as environmentally benign due to their biological origins. This assumption has caused natural and man-made cellulosic microfibres to be overlooked and underrepresented in research despite findings demonstrating their abundance in environmental systems, compared to synthetic, microplastic fibres. This systematic literature review critically examines how natural and man-made cellulosic fibres undergo multiple chemically intensive processing stages within the textile manufacturing processes, resulting in materials that differ substantially from their raw counterparts, exposing critical gaps in understanding across environmental science, toxicology and textile production. These chemical processes influence fibre degradation, increase the potential for pollution adsorption, and contribute to the environmental persistence and impact of microfibre shedding. Across studies, natural and man-made cellulosic microfibres are frequently reported in high abundance in environmental systems yet remain underrepresented in environmental monitoring which predominantly focus on synthetic microplastics. By adopting a textiles perspective, which highlights viewing information through a textile-focussed lens rather than from an environmental science perspective which has dominated this field. This review challenges the assumption that natural and man-made cellulosic microfibres pose no harm to the environment, suggesting that “natural” fibres can cause comparable harm to the environment compared to their synthetic, microplastic counterparts. This demands a reframing of current narratives that position natural and man-made cellulosic textiles as environmentally benign, recognising their potential for environmental harm. The findings further support the inclusion of chemically processed natural and man-made cellulosic microfibres in environmental monitoring, policy and sustainable textile design.
More Papers Like This
Are 'natural' textile fibres environmentally benign? A systematic review of chemical processing and microfibre pollution
AI summary Read the abstract
That "natural" fabrics like cotton and rayon are eco-friendly may be a myth: this review of existing studies shows that heavy chemical processing during manufacturing changes these fibers so much that the tiny threads they shed can pollute and persist in the environment much like plastic microfibers do. Since these "natural" microfibers have largely been ignored by researchers and regulators—who focus mainly on synthetic microplastics—we may be underestimating our overall exposure to fiber pollution in water, soil, and potentially our bodies, meaning your "eco-friendly" cotton t-shirt might not be as harmless as
Eco-friendly or eco-threat? The environmental risks of natural and semi-synthetic fibers
AI summary Read the abstract
This review examines emerging evidence that natural and semi-synthetic textile fibers (cotton, viscose, wool) contribute significantly to environmental microfiber pollution, comparable in scale to synthetic fibers. The authors challenge assumptions of negligible ecological impact and call for natural and semi-synthetic fibers to be included in microplastic pollution assessments.
Fragmented fibre (including microplastic) pollution from textiles
AI summary Read the abstract
This review examined fragmented fiber pollution from all textile types including natural, regenerated, and synthetic fabrics, finding that all textiles release fibers throughout their lifecycle from manufacturing to washing to disposal, and that natural fiber shedding has been underestimated relative to synthetic fibers in pollution assessments.
Microfibre and nanofibre: pollution and environmental impacts
AI summary Read the abstract
This review examines microfibres and nanofibres — shed from clothing and textiles during use and washing — as a significant but poorly quantified category of environmental pollutants. Up to 4.28 million metric tonnes of microfibres enter the environment each year, with synthetic garment laundering responsible for about 35% of that total, yet natural fibre shedding is largely ignored in sustainability assessments. The authors argue that both synthetic and natural microfibres need to be included in environmental impact frameworks, especially as fast fashion drives ever-increasing textile production.
Impacts of non-petroleum and petroleum-based microfibers on aquatic organisms: a meta-analysis
AI summary Read the abstract
This meta-analysis compared the toxic effects of petroleum-based and non-petroleum microfibers on aquatic organisms. Surprisingly, natural fibers like cotton and viscose also caused significant biological harm, not just synthetic ones like polyester and nylon. This means that even "natural" textiles shed fibers that can damage aquatic ecosystems, complicating the assumption that non-synthetic clothing is automatically safer for the environment.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.