A Review on Textile Recycling Practices and Challenges

Abstract

The expansion of clothing and textile industry and the fast fashion trend among consumers have caused a rapid global increase in textile waste in the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream. Worldwide, 75% of textile waste is landfilled, while 25% is recycled or reused. Landfilling of textile waste is a prevalent option that is deemed unsustainable. Promoting an enhanced diversion of textile waste from landfills demands optimized reuse and recycling technologies. Reuse is the more preferred option compared with recycling. Various textile reuse and recycling technologies are available and progressively innovated to favor blended fabrics. This paper aims to establish reuse and recycling technologies (anaerobic digestion, fermentation, composting, fiber regeneration, and thermal recovery) to manage textile waste. Improved collection systems, automation of sorting, and discovering new technologies for textile recycling remains a challenge. Applying extended producer responsibility (EPR) policy and a circular economy system implies a holistic consensus among major stakeholders.

Full text



Citation: Juanga-Labayen, J.P.;
Labayen, I.V.; Yuan, Q. A Review on
Textile Recycling Practices and
Challenges. Textiles 2022,2, 174–188.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
textiles2010010
Academic Editor: Philippe Boisse
Received: 6 February 2022
Accepted: 9 March 2022
Published: 16 March 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Review
A Review on Textile Recycling Practices and Challenges
Jeanger P. Juanga-Labayen 1, Ildefonso V. Labayen 2and Qiuyan Yuan 3 ,*
1College of Industrial Technology, Carlos Hilado Memorial State College,
Talisay City 6115, Negros Occidental, Philippines; jeanger.labayen@chmsc.edu.ph
2Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Technological University of the Philippines Visayas,
Talisay City 6115, Negros Occidental, Philippines; ildefonso_labayen@tup.edu.ph
3Environmental Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, University of Manitoba,
Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6, Canada
*Correspondence: qiuyan.yuan@umanitoba.ca
Abstract:
The expansion of clothing and textile industry and the fast fashion trend among consumers
have caused a rapid global increase in textile waste in the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream.
Worldwide, 75% of textile waste is landfilled, while 25% is recycled or reused. Landfilling of textile
waste is a prevalent option that is deemed unsustainable. Promoting an enhanced diversion of
textile waste from landfills demands optimized reuse and recycling technologies. Reuse is the more
preferred option compared with recycling. Various textile reuse and recycling technologies are
available and progressively innovated to favor blended fabrics. This paper aims to establish reuse
and recycling technologies (anaerobic digestion, fermentation, composting, fiber regeneration, and
thermal recovery) to manage textile waste. Improved collection systems, automation of sorting,
and discovering new technologies for textile recycling remains a challenge. Applying extended
producer responsibility (EPR) policy and a circular economy system implies a holistic consensus
among major stakeholders.
Keywords: textile waste; reuse and recycling; municipal solid waste; composting; sustainability
1. Introduction
Population growth, improvement of living standards, an increasing assortment of
textile materials, and the decreasing life cycle time of textile products contributed to global
fiber consumption that generates a significant amount of post-industrial and post-consumer
fiber waste [
1
,
2
]. Globalization has made the apparel industry produce more clothing at
lower costs, and many consumers have adapted a ‘fast fashion’ trend that considers clothing
to be a disposable product [
3
]. Fast fashion characterized by mass production, variety,
agility, and affordability has brought about a surge of apparel consumption [4].
The rising cost associated with textile manufacturing in terms of energy, raw materials,
and waste management is putting pressure on businesses across the globe. The textile
industry accounts for about 10% of total carbon emissions [
5
] and has been identified as the
fifth largest contributor of carbon emissions [
6
,
7
]. In this regard, it is crucial to understand
that 20th-century approaches in meeting 21st-century demands are not affordable for
sustainable development [
8
]. It is essential to consider the efficient use and management of
natural resources by reducing the raw material consumption through reuse and recycling
of textile products regarded as waste, which would offer a sustainable approach for textile
waste management. To improve the current behavior of clothing consumption and waste
generation, an environmentally and financially sound long-term national program should
be established [9].
Globally, approximately 75% of textile waste is disposed of in landfills, 25% is reused
or recycled, and less than 1% of all textile is recycled back into clothing [
10
,
11
]. In this
respect, advancing reuse and recycling technologies for textile waste in diverting waste
Textiles 2022,2, 174–188. https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles2010010 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/textiles

Textiles 2022,2175
from landfill is crucial. More importantly, closed-loop recycling of fabric is highly promoted.
There have been several reinforced global actions integrating many expert stakeholders
addressing both economic and environmental challenges that the clothing industry faces;
among them are the Textile Exchange, Council for Textile Recycling, Sustainable Apparel
Coalition, and the Boston Consulting Group, among others. For instance, Textile Exchange
commits to reducing CO
2
emissions by 30% from textile fibers and material production by
2030 and fosters the role of the circular economy as a powerful instrument for mitigating
impacts and contributing to the urgent need for climate action [
11
]. Hence, textile reuse
and recycling are vital in promoting this innovative act. This paper determines the existing
textile waste reuse and recycling technologies and the status of textile waste generation
and management in some leading economies.
2. Textile Production
Clothing and textiles contributed 6% to the world exports of manufactured goods
in 2017 (Figure 1); China and the European Union (EU) are the two leading regions for
clothing and textile exports [
12
]. The worldwide volume production of textile fibers in
1975 was about 23.9 million metric tons (MMT), in 2017 it reached 98.5 MMT [
13
], and it
increased further to about 111 MMT in 2019 [
11
]. For many years, cotton fiber demand
dominated polyester; however, in 2002, polyester demand surpassed cotton fiber and has
continued to grow at a faster rate than cotton fiber [
14
]. Polyester and cotton are the most
common fibers used worldwide [
14
,
15
]. Moreover, the global fiber consumption in 2017
consists of 60% synthetic fibers or polyester/cotton blend (polycotton) and 40% cellulosic,
which is the typical example of most textiles [
16
]. Nevertheless, the global fiber market in
2019 was dominated by polyester and cotton (Figure 2). From these figures, it is apparent
that textile waste management is a critical issue that presents enormous challenges for the
textile industry, policymakers, and consumers.
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 2
from landfill is crucial. More importantly, closed-loop recycling of fabric is highly pro-
moted. There have been several reinforced global actions integrating many expert stake-
holders addressing both economic and environmental challenges that the clothing indus-
try faces; among them are the Textile Exchange, Council for Textile Recycling, Sustainable
Apparel Coalition, and the Boston Consulting Group, among others. For instance, Textile
Exchange commits to reducing CO2 emissions by 30% from textile fibers and material pro-
duction by 2030 and fosters the role of the circular economy as a powerful instrument for
mitigating impacts and contributing to the urgent need for climate action [11]. Hence, tex-
tile reuse and recycling are vital in promoting this innovative act. This paper determines
the existing textile waste reuse and recycling technologies and the status of textile waste
generation and management in some leading economies.
2. Textile Production
Clothing and textiles contributed 6% to the world exports of manufactured goods in
2017 (Figure 1); China and the European Union (EU) are the two leading regions for cloth-
ing and textile exports [12]. The worldwide volume production of textile fibers in 1975
was about 23.9 million metric tons (MMT), in 2017 it reached 98.5 MMT [13], and it in-
creased further to about 111 MMT in 2019 [11]. For many years, cotton fiber demand dom-
inated polyester; however, in 2002, polyester demand surpassed cotton fiber and has con-
tinued to grow at a faster rate than cotton fiber [14]. Polyester and cotton are the most
common fibers used worldwide [14,15]. Moreover, the global fiber consumption in 2017
consists of 60% synthetic fibers or polyester/cotton blend (polycotton) and 40% cellulosic,
which is the typical example of most textiles [16]. Nevertheless, the global fiber market in
2019 was dominated by polyester and cotton (Figure 2). From these figures, it is apparent
that textile waste management is a critical issue that presents enormous challenges for the
textile industry, policymakers, and consumers.
Figure 1. Percentage share of world exports of manufactured goods in 2017 [12].
Figure 1. Percentage share of world exports of manufactured goods in 2017 [12].
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 3
Figure 2. Global fiber production share in 2019 [11].
3. Textile Waste Generation and Management in Leading Economies
Textile waste is considered as discarded or unwanted material from the production
and use of fiber, textile, and clothing, which can be categorized into three types, pre-con-
sumer, post-consumer, and industrial textile waste [8,17]. The pre-consumer textile waste
is viewed as ‘clean waste’, as a by-product during the manufacturing process of fibrous
materials. The post-consumer textile waste consists of discarded garments or household
textiles (sheets, towels, and pillowcases) that are worn-out, damaged, and outgrown of no
value to consumers after their service life [18]. Industrial textile waste is deemed as ‘dirty
waste’ generated from commercial and industrial textile applications. The expansion of
the clothing and textile industry and the consumer’s fast fashion trend have caused a rapid
global increase in textile wastes. The increased consumption of fashion textiles generates
a growing amount of waste. As fashion textiles, are almost 100% recyclable, nothing in the
textile and apparel industry should be wasted in an ideal scenario. Furthermore, more
than 60% of all recovered clothes could be reused, 35% could be converted into wipers
and fiber recycling, and only 5% would need to be discarded [19]. However, in the real
world, a significant portion of textile waste is disposed of in landfills. As a result, it is
critical to comprehend the challenges that leading economies face when it comes to textile
production and waste management. In terms of textile exports, the leading economies
considered in this study are China, The European Union, The United States, and Canada.
China has the largest economy in clothing and textiles exports globally, yet the in-
dustry faces unprecedented crises [20,21]. The country’s dominance as a textile provider
across the globe is challenged by the loss of competitive advantages in terms of low labor
costs as wages are rising. China attempts to maintain its dynamic advantage in labor-in-
tensive textile products by encouraging the relocation of Chinese textile production bases
to poorer Chinese provinces and neighboring least developed countries (LDCs). Simulta-
neously, China’s global competitiveness was upgraded through technological advance-
ment, implementing sound policies to develop capital-intensive textile goods, launching
niche products and international brands [21,22]. The Chinese textile industry sector has
experienced consistent economic growth over the last decade and is primarily focused on
the production of apparel made of synthetic fabrics. Furthermore, China produces ap-
proximately 31% of the global ratio of synthetic fibers required by the modern textile in-
dustry [23] and produces nearly 65% of the world’s clothing [24]. When China started
imposing strict environmental standards on textile production, China’s cloth products be-
came more competitive in the United States (US) market [25].
Furthermore, many people in China have easy access to low-cost fashion clothing
with a short service life. Roughly 45% of the textile produced in China is wasted. Approx-
imately 26 million tons (MT) of garments are left untreated and dumped annually, while
Figure 2. Global fiber production share in 2019 [11].

Textiles 2022,2176
3. Textile Waste Generation and Management in Leading Economies
Textile waste is considered as discarded or unwanted material from the production and
use of fiber, textile, and clothing, which can be categorized into three types, pre-consumer,
post-consumer, and industrial textile waste [
8
,
17
]. The pre-consumer textile waste is
viewed as ‘clean waste’, as a by-product during the manufacturing process of fibrous
materials. The post-consumer textile waste consists of discarded garments or household
textiles (sheets, towels, and pillowcases) that are worn-out, damaged, and outgrown of no
value to consumers after their service life [
18
]. Industrial textile waste is deemed as ‘dirty
waste’ generated from commercial and industrial textile applications. The expansion of the
clothing and textile industry and the consumer’s fast fashion trend have caused a rapid
global increase in textile wastes. The increased consumption of fashion textiles generates
a growing amount of waste. As fashion textiles, are almost 100% recyclable, nothing in
the textile and apparel industry should be wasted in an ideal scenario. Furthermore, more
than 60% of all recovered clothes could be reused, 35% could be converted into wipers and
fiber recycling, and only 5% would need to be discarded [
19
]. However, in the real world,
a significant portion of textile waste is disposed of in landfills. As a result, it is critical to
comprehend the challenges that leading economies face when it comes to textile production
and waste management. In terms of textile exports, the leading economies considered in
this study are China, The European Union, The United States, and Canada.
China has the largest economy in clothing and textiles exports globally, yet the indus-
try faces unprecedented crises [
20
,
21
]. The country’s dominance as a textile provider across
the globe is challenged by the loss of competitive advantages in terms of low labor costs
as wages are rising. China attempts to maintain its dynamic advantage in labor-intensive
textile products by encouraging the relocation of Chinese textile production bases to poorer
Chinese provinces and neighboring least developed countries (LDCs). Simultaneously,
China’s global competitiveness was upgraded through technological advancement, imple-
menting sound policies to develop capital-intensive textile goods, launching niche products
and international brands [
21
,
22
]. The Chinese textile industry sector has experienced con-
sistent economic growth over the last decade and is primarily focused on the production of
apparel made of synthetic fabrics. Furthermore, China produces approximately 31% of the
global ratio of synthetic fibers required by the modern textile industry [
23
] and produces
nearly 65% of the world’s clothing [
24
]. When China started imposing strict environmental
standards on textile production, China’s cloth products became more competitive in the
United States (US) market [25].
Furthermore, many people in China have easy access to low-cost fashion clothing with
a short service life. Roughly 45% of the textile produced in China is wasted. Approximately
26 million tons (MT) of garments are left untreated and dumped annually, while only 3.5 MT
of the collected textile waste was recycled and reused in 2017 [
24
]. China’s textile waste
generation is estimated to range from 20 to 26 MT per year, with a low utilization rate [
26
].
The Chinese government is encouraging businesses to recycle their own brand clothing
through mechanical and chemical recycling. China recognized the two-fold benefits of
donating textile waste as it gives clothes a second life while generating revenue for charity.
However, in the absence of effective recycling practices, used clothing is sent to waste-
to-energy (WTE) incinerators [
24
]. In 2013, China’s State Council mandated that textile
manufacturers create a circular value chain to promote environmental sustainability in the
disposal of post-consumer textiles [26].
The EU textile industry generates approximately 16 MT of waste annually. Euro-
pean consumers discard 5.8 MT of textiles per year, where only 26% is recycled, while
a significant fraction of this waste is disposed of into landfills or incinerated [
4
,
27
]. The
disposal cost of textile waste into landfills is about
€
60/ton in some countries in Europe,
including France [
28
]. The European Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) estab-
lished the fundamental waste management principle and requires the EU member states
to adopt a waste management hierarchy (prevention, reuse, recycling, and disposal) in
waste management plans and waste prevention programs [
29
]. Furthermore, the European

Textiles 2022,2177
Council (EC) promoted sustainability by substituting the Waste Framework Directive with
a Circular Economy Package, which set a target for the municipal solid waste (MSW)
recovery to 70% and limits the fraction to be landfilled to 10% by 2030 [
30
]. The extended
producer responsibility (EPR) policy was essential in achieving such targets. The EPR holds
the producers responsible for collecting, processing, and treatment, including recycling
and disposal of products at the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle [
31
]. The
EPR policy has led to an average annual increase of 13% in post-consumer textile collec-
tion [
4
]. Furthermore, the EPR policy encourages waste prevention at source, promotes
green product design, and encourages public recycling [
31
]. The financial responsibility of
the producer, as well as separate collection and recycling agencies, are critical to the success
of EPR-based environmental policies [32].
Furthermore, the EU establishes new waste management rules, with a focus on closed-
loop recycling from production to waste management, with the goal of making economies
more sustainable and environmentally friendly [
33
]. The closed-loop system reduces waste
by a repeated process of recycling and reusing materials until they become biodegradable
waste. The system can address the fashion industry’s intensive use of finite land, water, and
energy resources in a sustainable manner [
34
]. The EU member states’ reuse and recycling
targets for municipal waste have been set at 55% by 2025, 60% by 2030, and 65% by 2035.
By January 2025, a separate collection of textiles and hazardous waste from households will
be implemented [
33
]. Across the European countries, only 18% of clothing is reused and
recycled, while 30% is incinerated and a significant fraction of 70% goes to landfills [
16
]. In
France, 40% of the post-consumer textiles collected are exported to African countries for
reuse. As of 2017, France is the only European country that globally introduced EPR for
textiles, household linen, and shoes [
4
]. European companies are innovative in formulating
sustainability targets where the raw materials, design and development, manufacturing,
and end-of-use are the priority on the agenda [34].
In the US, the majority of textile waste in the MSW stream is discarded apparel.
However, other sources were identified such as furniture, carpets, tires, footwear, as well
as other non-durable goods such as towels, sheets, and pillowcases [
35
,
36
]. Textile waste
generation and the fraction of textile waste in MSW is increasing with time. In 2010, an
estimated 13.2 MT of textile waste were generated, which is equivalent to 5.3% of total
MSW stream. While in 2015 and 2017, the generated textile waste increased to 16.1 MT and
16.9 MT, accounting to 6.1% and 6.3% of the total MSW generation, respectively (Figure 3).
Approximately 85% of all textiles in the US end up in landfills, and only 15% is donated
or recycled [
37
]. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) estimated
that textile waste occupies nearly 5% of landfill space [37]. Among the leading economies
in the textile industry, the US has the highest share of landfilling textile waste, amounting
to 29.3 kg/ca in 2016 (Figure 4), and the estimated cost of textile waste sent to landfills is
$45/ton [
38
]. Since landfilling keeps the largest share in textile waste management in the
US, promoting recycling technologies to many textile industries is crucial. Composting is
not a common method of managing textile waste. Nevertheless, incineration and recycling
are gaining popularity in textile waste management (Figure 5).

Textiles 2022,2178
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 5
amounting to 29.3 kg/ca in 2016 (Figure 4), and the estimated cost of textile waste sent to
landfills is $45/ton [38]. Since landfilling keeps the largest share in textile waste manage-
ment in the US, promoting recycling technologies to many textile industries is crucial.
Composting is not a common method of managing textile waste. Nevertheless, incinera-
tion and recycling are gaining popularity in textile waste management (Figure 5).
Figure 3. Textile waste generation in the US [39].
Figure 4. Annual generation of landfilled textiles (in kg/ca) in 2016 [4].
Figure 5. Textile waste management in the US [40].
Figure 3. Textile waste generation in the US [39].
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 5
amounting to 29.3 kg/ca in 2016 (Figure 4), and the estimated cost of textile waste sent to
landfills is $45/ton [38]. Since landfilling keeps the largest share in textile waste manage-
ment in the US, promoting recycling technologies to many textile industries is crucial.
Composting is not a common method of managing textile waste. Nevertheless, incinera-
tion and recycling are gaining popularity in textile waste management (Figure 5).
Figure 3. Textile waste generation in the US [39].
Figure 4. Annual generation of landfilled textiles (in kg/ca) in 2016 [4].
Figure 5. Textile waste management in the US [40].
Figure 4. Annual generation of landfilled textiles (in kg/ca) in 2016 [4].
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 5
amounting to 29.3 kg/ca in 2016 (Figure 4), and the estimated cost of textile waste sent to
landfills is $45/ton [38]. Since landfilling keeps the largest share in textile waste manage-
ment in the US, promoting recycling technologies to many textile industries is crucial.
Composting is not a common method of managing textile waste. Nevertheless, incinera-
tion and recycling are gaining popularity in textile waste management (Figure 5).
Figure 3. Textile waste generation in the US [39].
Figure 4. Annual generation of landfilled textiles (in kg/ca) in 2016 [4].
Figure 5. Textile waste management in the US [40].
Figure 5. Textile waste management in the US [40].
In Canada, an estimated 500,000 tons of apparel waste is disposed of annually [
41
].
The average Canadian discards between 30 [
42
] and 55 [
43
] pounds of textiles annually [
44
];
almost 95% of those clothes could be reused or recycled [
45
]. Globally, textile waste has
increased dramatically due to the rise in clothing consumption and production [
45
]. In
Ontario, approximately 1.2 million people dispose their unwanted clothes into the waste
bin at a rate of roughly 45,000 tons annually [
46
]. In the Metro Vancouver Regional District,
an estimated 30,000 tons of textile waste are annually landfilled, accounting for 5% of the

Textiles 2022,2179
annual total waste volume in 2016 [
47
]. In Toronto, a survey was conducted to determine
if participants donated and/or disposed of their unwanted clothing [
46
]. According to
the findings, 17% of participants consider “disposal” to be the most convenient (10%) and
fastest (7%) method of getting rid of unwanted textile waste. In Manitoba, textile and carpet
waste materials are under the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME)
National Action Plan for EPR of the Waste Management Task Group [
48
]. Unwanted
clothing items that could be donated are usually dropped off at city drop-off bins or
collected by non-profit charitable organizations and municipal programs. Due to their poor
condition, some donated textiles are frequently discarded in landfills [49].
4. Textile Reuse and Recycling
Generally, textile reuse and recycling could reduce environmental impact because
it could potentially reduce virgin textile fiber production and avoid processes further
downstream in the textile product life cycle. Moreover, textile reuse and recycling are more
sustainable when compared to incineration and landfilling. However, reuse is considered
more beneficial than recycling, mainly when sufficiently prolonging the reusing phase [
50
].
Textile reuse encompasses various means for extending the useful service life of textile
products from the first owner to another [
51
]. This is commonly practiced by renting,
trading, swapping, borrowing, and inheriting, facilitated by second-hand stores, garage
sales, online and flea markets, and charities. On the other hand, textile recycling refers
to reprocessing pre-consumer and post-consumer textile waste for use in new textile or
non-textile products.
Textile recycling is typically classified as mechanical or chemical recycling. Mechanical
recycling degrades waste into a decoration, construction, agricultural, and gardening use.
Chemical recycling involves a process where polymers are depolymerized (polyester) or
dissolved (cotton and viscose). Chemical recycling can produce fibers of equal quality
compared to virgin materials [
24
,
50
]. The sorted textile waste could be chemically treated
to extract resources such as protein-based fibers to produce wood panel adhesives; and
cellulosic fibers for bioethanol production [27].
The textile recycling route can be classified based on the nature of the processes
involved or the level of disassembly of the recovered materials [
50
]. Fabric recycling
consists in recovering and reusing of a fabric into new products. Meanwhile, fiber recycling
involves disassembling of fabric but preserving the original fibers. Polymer/oligomer
recycling consists of disassembling of fibers while preserving the polymers or oligomers.
Moreover, monomer recycling consists of disassembling of polymers or oligomers, while
preserving the monomers [50].
Moreover, textile recycling can be classified into upcycling, downcycling, closed-loop,
and open-loop recycling. If the product made from recycled material is of higher quality or
value than the original product, it is termed ‘upcycling’; the opposite of this is known as
‘downcycling’. Closed-loop recycling involves recycling of a material from a product and
reusing it in a more or less identical product. In contrast, open-loop recycling consists of
recycling of a material from a product and reusing it in another product. Figure 6shows the
classification of various forms of reuse and recycling. The closed-loop recycling approach
recovers the raw material used to produce a polymer product and then reprocess it into the
same product of equivalent quality as that from the virgin material [50,52].
Furthermore, recycling technologies for fibers can be typically divided into primary,
secondary, tertiary, and quaternary approaches. Primary approaches involve recycling in-
dustrial scraps. Secondary recycling involves the mechanical processing of a post-consumer
product. Tertiary recycling involves pyrolysis and hydrolysis, converting plastic waste into
chemicals, monomers, or fuels. Quaternary recycling refers to burning the fibrous solid
waste and utilizing the heat generated [53].

Textiles 2022,2180
Textiles 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 7
Figure 6. Classification of textile reuse and recycling routes, reprinted with permission from [50].
Copyright 2018 Elsevier.
Furthermore, recycling technologies for fibers can be typically divided into primary,
secondary, tertiary, and quaternary approaches. Primary approaches involve recycling
industrial scraps. Secondary recycling involves the mechanical processing of a post-con-
sumer product. Tertiary recycling involves pyrolysis and hydrolysis, converting plastic
waste into chemicals, monomers, or fuels. Quaternary recycling refers to burning the fi-
brous solid waste and utilizing the heat generated [53].
5. Environmental Sustainability in Textile Recycling
Reuse and recycling of textile waste offers environmental sustainability. Upcycling
and closed-loop recycling are the potential recycling routes that maximize conservation
of resources such as raw materials, water, and energy, with minimal environmental im-
pact [8]. Moreover, textile reuse and recycling reduce environmental impact compared to
incineration and landfilling, and reuse is more beneficial than recycling [50]. Applying
ecological footprint in a textile tailoring plant revealed that the resources category has the
highest ecological footprint, followed by the energy consumed [54]. Resources recovery
can provide significant environmental gains by replacing products from primary re-
sources [55]. For every kilogram of virgin cotton displaced by second-hand clothing and
polyester could save approximately 65 kWh and 95 kWh, respectively [56].
6. Textile Recycling and Recovery Technology
Nowadays, various technologies can be chosen to promote textile waste recycling
and recovery. Technologies such as anaerobic digestion, fermentation, and composting
are among the biotechnology available for textile waste. The following sections also dis-
cuss thermal recovery and conversion of textile waste into insulation/building materials.
6.1. Anaerobic Digestion of Textile Waste
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is widely used to treat a biodegradable fraction of organic
waste for biogas production. Cotton was characterized by more than 50% cellulose, a po-
tential substrate for biological conversion (Table 1). Over the last decade, studies have
Figure 6.
Classification of textile reuse and recycling routes, reprinted with permission from [
50
].
Copyright 2018 Elsevier.
5. Environmental Sustainability in Textile Recycling
Reuse and recycling of textile waste offers environmental sustainability. Upcycling
and closed-loop recycling are the potential recycling routes that maximize conservation
of resources such as raw materials, water, and energy, with minimal environmental im-
pact [
8
]. Moreover, textile reuse and recycling reduce environmental impact compared to
incineration and landfilling, and reuse is more beneficial than recycling [
50
]. Applying
ecological footprint in a textile tailoring plant revealed that the resources category has the
highest ecological footprint, followed by the energy consumed [
54
]. Resources recovery can
provide significant environmental gains by replacing products from primary resources [
55
].
For every kilogram of virgin cotton displaced by second-hand clothing and polyester could
save approximately 65 kWh and 95 kWh, respectively [56].
6. Textile Recycling and Recovery Technology
Nowadays, various technologies can be chosen to promote textile waste recycling
and recovery. Technologies such as anaerobic digestion, fermentation, and composting are
among the biotechnology available for textile waste. The following sections also discuss
thermal recovery and conversion of textile waste into insulation/building materials.
6.1. Anaerobic Digestion of Textile Waste
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is widely used to treat a biodegradable fraction of organic
waste for biogas production. Cotton was characterized by more than 50% cellulose, a
potential substrate for biological conversion (Table 1). Over the last decade, studies have
been conducted on AD using cotton waste to produce methane-rich biogas. Cotton wastes
(cotton stalks, cottonseed hull, and cotton oil cake) can be treated anaerobically to produce
biogas [
57
]. Cotton waste from spinning mills is a potential substrate for AD [
58
]. The AD of
medical cotton industry waste under thermophilic condition with the use of cattle manure
as inoculum demonstrated an improved biogas yield of approximately 92% [
59
]. Pretreat-
ment methods enhance the biodegradation of complex organic matter in AD systems,
resulting in an increase in biogas quality and production and improved biosolids quality

Textiles 2022,2181
in reduced production [
60
,
61
]. Various pre-treatment technologies mainly mechanical,
thermal, chemical, biological, and their integration can be chosen to enhance the digestion
process [
60
,
62
]. Pretreatment prior to AD of waste jeans (60% cotton, 40% polyester) and
pure cotton waste substrates using 0.5 M Na
2
CO
3
at 150
◦
C for 120 min generates a maxi-
mum methane yield of 328.9 and 361.1 mL CH
4
/g VS, respectively [
63
]. Furthermore, a
comparable maximum methane production rate of 80% was obtained using single-stage
and two-stage digestions in batch reactors utilizing viscose/polyester or cotton/polyester
textiles with 20 g/L cellulose loading [
64
]. Table 2summarizes the optimum operating
conditions using batch process of anaerobic digestion from the reviewed literature.
Table 1. Characteristics of cotton waste [58].
Contents Percentage
Cellulose 54.00
Non-cellulose 16.00
Ether extractive 12.00
Moisture 8.80
Ash 7.20
Metals and others 3.20
Table 2. Optimum operating conditions for biogas production using cotton wastes
Cotton
Waste
Stream
Pretreatment Inoculum
Operating
Temperature
(◦C)
Digestion
Time (Days)
CH4Yield
(mL/g VS) CH4(%) Reference
Cotton waste
(cotton stalks,
cottonseed
hull, cotton
oil cake)
-
Effluent from
WWTP anaerobic
digester
35 ±2 23
65 (cotton
stalks);
86 (cotton
seed hull);
78 (cotton oil
cake)
60 [57]
Cotton waste
from
spinning
mills
-5–7.5% cow
dung/pig dung 30–32 50 - 77 [58]
Medical
cotton waste
Alkaline
(Na2CO3)
Cattle
manure 55 90 37.57 60–70 [59]
Waste jeans
(60% cotton)
Cotton waste
(100%)
0.5 M
Na2CO3at
150 ◦C for
120 min
Effluent from
municipal
WWTP anaerobic
digester
37 40
328.9 (60%
cotton);
361.08 (pure
cotton)
- [63]
Cotton textile
waste (100%
cotton)
0.5 M
Na2CO3at
150
◦
C for 3 h
Digested sludge
from municipal
WWTP anaerobic
digester
37 15 306.73 >50 [65]
6.2. Fermentation of Textile Waste for Ethanol Production
Investigation of cotton gin waste as feedstock for ethanol production started in 1979 at
Texas Tech University; however, limited studies investigated the efficacy of textile waste for
ethanol production [
66
]. The effect of alkali pretreatment to enhance ethanol production
was evaluated using polyester/cotton blend (polycotton) textile. The maximum ethanol
yield by simultaneous saccharification and fermentation was 70% after the pretreatment
with NaOH/urea at
−
20
◦
C, which was considered the most desirable [
67
]. Moreover, the
cotton part of the waste blue jeans (40% polyester/60% cotton) was investigated for ethanol
production, which involves the process of enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation [
63
].
Enzymatic hydrolysis converts cellulose to fermentable sugars [
58
]. The effect of corona

Textiles 2022,2182
pretreatment of non-mercerized and mercerized cotton fabrics enhanced the glucose and
ethanol yields. The cotton fabric demonstrated its potential as an alternative feedstock
for bioethanol production [
68
]. Table 3summarizes the optimum operating conditions for
ethanol production based on the reviewed literature.
Table 3. Optimum operating conditions for ethanol production using cotton wastes.
Cotton Waste
Stream Pretreatment Enzymatic
Hydrolysis
Fermentation
Condition Glucose Yield Ethanol Yield Reference
Cotton part
from polyester-
cotton
textile
NaOH/urea,
−20 ◦C,
72 h
Cellulase and
β-glucosidase
enzyme, pH 4.8,
45 ◦C, 72 h
S. cerevisiae, 36
◦C,
72 h
91% 70% [67]
Bleached and
mercerized
cotton fabric
(100% cellulose)
Corona
pretreatment of
mercerized
cotton fabrics
Celluclast
enzyme, 50 ◦C,
8 days
S. cerevisiae var
ellipsoideus, pH
5, 30 ◦C, 100
rpm
0.94 g/g 0.9 g/L·h [68]
Waste jeans
(60% cotton)
Cotton (pure)
1 M Na2CO3,
150 ◦C,
120 min
Cellulase and
β-glucosidase, 45 ◦C,
72 h, 120 rpm
S. cerevisiae, 36
◦C,
72 h
81.7% (60%
cotton)
88% (pure
cotton)
59.5% (60%
cotton)
69.4% (pure
cotton)
[63]
6.3. Composting of Textile Waste
Composting is a natural phenomenon of biodegradation of organic waste, such as
cotton waste, into a valuable soil supplement. Composting is a low technology, bio-
oxidative process that reduces the volume of organic waste by up to 50% over the active
phase of composting [
66
]. Composting utilized various microorganisms, including bacteria
and fungi, to convert complex organic matter into simpler substances in the presence of
air. Cotton waste poses a significant waste disposal problem nowadays, and composting
was viewed as an alternative in preventing the direct landfill disposal of cotton trash.
Composted and vermicomposted cotton trash could be an excellent long-term nutrient
source [69].
Vermicomposting is a biotechnological composting process that uses earthworms to
convert waste into compost with improved soil fertility that significantly exceeds conven-
tional compost [
69
]. Using cotton waste substrate, the number of bacterial diversity in
compost and vermicompost samples was similar. However, the vermicompost samples
contain a rich density of bacterial isolates when compared with compost samples which
produce better humus [70].
Vermicomposting of cotton textile waste in the form of willow waste from ginning
factories was investigated. Willow waste is undesirable for textile application and is
just disposed into landfill. The collected willow waste was mixed with cow dung slurry,
cellulase, and amylase enzymes (isolated from cow dung), and an effective microorganism
solution. The mixture was turned and sprinkled with water periodically. After 20 days, the
waste was wholly decomposed, and earthworms were introduced. The vermicomposting
process was ended when the waste mixture turned light brown or dark brown after 14 days.
The resulting vermicompost was then used to grow plants in pots and revealed that the
plants grown using the vermicompost made from willow waste had an excellent growth
rate in root length, shoot length, and leaf area index compared to the control pot [71].
Furthermore, cotton gin waste cannot be directly reused on-farm due to farm hygiene
risks, and composting of cotton gin waste is an accepted method [
66
]. Cotton gin waste
was used as a bulking agent for pig manure composting under two different proportions
of 4:3 and 3:4 of pig slurry:cotton gin waste [
72
]. This study concluded that the thermal
properties of the bulking agent were responsible for the temperature development and
aeration demand. The gaseous emissions were related to the organic matter degradation

Textiles 2022,2183
process. The compost with the higher proportion of pig slurry (4:3) had greater organic
matter humification and higher nutrient concentrations.
Furthermore, since the 1980s, the waste cotton substrate was utilized for oyster mush-
room cultivation. More than 90% of oyster mushroom growers utilized waste cotton
substrate for cultivation [
73
]. Cotton waste with fermented poplar sawdust exhibited the
highest yield on fruit bodies of oyster mushroom, equivalent to 742 g per 4 kg of sub-
strate [
73
]. A new cotton waste composting technology to cultivate oyster mushrooms
shows a higher mushroom yield of 65.1% over substrate dry weight when compared to a
traditional natural fermentation technology with a 43.6% yield [
74
]. The process involves
adjusting cotton waste moisture content to 65%, after which it was pre-composted for
two days by soaking in a lime solution. Then, the cotton substrate was sprayed with the
previously prepared Ctec2 enzyme under optimal enzymatic activity conditions (pH 5,
50
◦
C, 60 h, and enzyme to substrate ratio of 0.45%) and then inoculated in pure culture of
fungus. Then spawning, caring of the bed, and harvesting was conducted [74].
6.4. Fiber Regeneration from Textile Waste
Since the ‘export for reuse option’ is no longer a sustainable option for second-hand
clothing in many developing countries, virgin cotton fiber production demands the use
of extensive resources. Fiber regeneration by recycling cotton waste garments is a closed-
loop upcycling technology for cotton waste garments [
75
]. Fiber regeneration involves
transforming the waste cotton fabrics into pulp, dissolving the pulp using a solvent, and
spinning into fibers. The N-methylmorpholine N-oxide (NMMO) solvent can dissolve
cellulose completely without any degradation and is environmentally safe to use. Pulp
reclaimed from cotton-based waste garments can be blended with wood pulp to make
fibers similar to lyocell [76].
Furthermore, phosphoric acid pretreatment was applied to waste textiles to recover
polyester and glucose. The four pretreatment conditions investigated were the phosphoric
acid concentration, pretreatment temperature, time, and the textiles to phosphoric acid
ratio. The results showed that 100% polyester recovery was achieved with a maximum
sugar recovery of 79.2% at the optimized conditions of 85% phosphoric acid at 50
◦
C for
7 h and the ratio of textiles and phosphoric acid of 1:15 [
77
]. The feasibility of cellulase
production and textile hydrolysis using fungal cellulase vs. commercial cellulase via
submerged fungal fermentation (SmF) using textile waste was investigated. The study
demonstrated that glucose recovery yields of 41.6% and 44.6% were obtained using fungal
cellulase and commercial cellulase, respectively. Thus, the proposed process has great
potential in treating textile waste for the recovery of glucose and polyester as value-added
products [52].
6.5. Building/Construction Material from Textile Waste
Textile waste represents a source of raw materials for typical application in construc-
tion, such as insulation materials for noise and temperature and fillers or reinforcements of
concrete [
78
]. The conversion of fibrous carpet waste into a value-added product as soil
reinforcement demonstrated that fibrous inclusions derived from carpet wastes improve the
shear strength of silty sands [
79
]. Moreover, textile reinforced concrete (TRC) is a composite
concrete material that uses textile as reinforcement material used in various applications, in-
cluding precast constructions, repair, rehabilitation, and structural strengthening of existing
structures. This is innovated by the construction industry, which promotes sustainability
in building material by utilizing waste from the textile industry. It combines fine-grained
concrete and multi-axially oriented textiles which offers advantages such as thin size, good
load-bearing capacity, resistance to corrosion, excellent ductility, no magnetic disturbances,
and lightweight [
80
,
81
]. Furthermore, textile waste is used to produce thick ropes designed
for slope protection against sliding and erosion. Scraps of insulating materials produced
from poor quality wool and scraps of nonwoven produced from a blend of recycled fibers

Textiles 2022,2184
were used to produce ropes. The results confirmed the usefulness of the technology for the
protection of steep slopes [82].
6.6. Thermal Recovery
Incineration with the thermal recovery of unwanted textiles not suited for recycling
(carpets or textiles with unknown fibers) is considered a viable alternative to landfilling.
Carpet fibers have a high calorific value that can reduce the need for fuels, and the resulting
ash becomes raw material for cement [
1
]. The advantage of the incineration option is that
it can handle the most significant part of unsorted textile waste, and energy can be recov-
ered from combustion. However, burning textiles alone can cause irregular temperature
behavior, ignition rate, and weight loss percentage in the ignition propagation stage. For
this, textile waste should be mixed with waste cardboard upon incineration to maintain a
uniform burning behavior of textiles [
83
]. Incineration of 1 ton of household textile waste
can recover 15,800 MJ of energy, and 27 kg of ash is generated [84,85].
7. Textile Waste Management Challenges
The global increase in clothing consumption and production has resulted in a sig-
nificant increase in textile waste generation, posing alarming challenges in many leading
countries. Textile waste is recognized as the fastest-growing waste stream in MSW across
the globe. However, waste collection and economically viable sorting infrastructure remain
a challenge. Sorting of textile waste involves intensive time and labor and complications
by arising from variations in fiber blends pose a significant challenge. Automation for
sorting and innovations in textile recycling are growing interests [
4
]. Textile reuse, the most
preferred option, suffers a shrinking market due to banning imported used clothing in
some countries. Textile reuse and recycling to produce new products should be driven by
economic incentives to make it feasible for the operating industry. Sustainable blended ma-
terials made from recycled fibers are innovative to reduce environmental impact. Further
work on the characterization of the structure and properties of cellulosic fibers regener-
ated from cotton-based waste is essential. Moreover, recycling technologies to sustainably
manage other textile waste, such as man-made cellulosic fiber (MMCF) and other fibers
(polyamide, wool, rayon, silk, acrylic, etc.), need to be investigated. MMCFs are a group
of fibers derived primarily from wood and in other sources of cellulose, which constitute
the third most commonly used fiber in the world, behind polyester and cotton. MMCF
accounts for approximately 6.4% of total fiber production, with an annual production
equivalent of about 7.1 MT [11,86].
Moreover, developing non-conventional fibers—such as bast fibers—and a chemical-
free binding technology promote sustainability. Natural fibers—such as bast fibers (among
them hemp, flex, nettle, and jute)—can yield significant benefits due to a smaller en-
vironmental footprint when compared to conventional plant-based fibers. Innovations
supporting the circular economy and closed-loop recycling systems include recycling tech-
nologies that can produce new fibers comparable to virgin fibers. Shifting from a current
linear economy into a circular economy yields tremendous environmental benefits for the
fashion industry while mitigating the effects of greater demand for garments due to a rising
world population [34].
8. Conclusions
The global rise in population, industrial growth, and improved living standards
have caused a global fiber consumption that generates an alarming amount of unwanted
textiles. Economic and environmental sustainability should be incorporated into the long-
term textile waste management program. Though the application of EPR policy in textile
waste is still limited, it is considered essential in promoting a circular economy system.
EPR makes the producers responsible for the overall textile waste management from the
collection to the disposal at the end of the product’s life cycle. Besides EPR, there is a
holistic approach involving major stakeholders (industry, government, private agencies,

Textiles 2022,2185
and consumers) who must work in unity to promote a dynamic circular system. The
emerging economies in textile manufacturing should take the lead in shifting from a linear
economy to a circular economy.
Textile reuse and recycling are more sustainable than incineration and landfilling, but
reuse is more beneficial than recycling. For this, designing a textile product by prolonging
the service life quality could promote reuse. In addition, it is essential to promote consumer
awareness to foster an environmentally friendly consumption behavior on textile products.
Leading economies should manage their textile waste in a closed-loop circular approach,
mainly when exporting textile waste to developing countries is being outlawed. Various
streams of textile recycling technologies are available and continue to innovate new ideas
with biotechnology advancement. Applying holistic technologies, and not relying upon a
single technology, to manage a complex textile waste is deemed essential.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, Q.Y., J.P.J.-L.; Literature review, J.P.J.-L. and Q.Y.; Method-
ology, J.P.J.-L. and Q.Y.; Writing—original draft preparation, J.P.J.-L. and Q.Y.; Writing—review and
editing, Q.Y., J.P.J.-L. and I.V.L.; Supervision, Q.Y.; Funding acquisition, Q.Y. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding:
The research support was provided by the federal funds appropriated to the Graduate
Enhancement of Tri-Council Stipends (GETS), the University of Manitoba and the Natural Sciences
and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC RGPIN-2014-05510).
Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.
Abbreviations
AD, anaerobic digestion; CCME, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment; EC, Euro-
pean Council; EU, European Union; EPR, extended producer responsibility; LDCs, least developed
countries; MMCF, man-made cellulosic fiber; MMT, million metric tons; MT, million tons; MSW,
municipal solid waste; NMMO, N-Methylmorpholine N-oxide; SmF, submerged fungal fermentation;
TRC, textile reinforced concrete; US, United States; VS, volatile solids; WTE, waste-to-energy.
References
1. Wang, Y. Fiber and textile waste utilization. Waste Biomass Valor. 2010,1, 135–143. [CrossRef]
2. Lin, S.D. Recycled fiber industry facing opportunities and challenges in the new situation. Resour. Recycl. 2012,11, 44–47.
3.
Claudio, L. Waste couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry. Environ. Health Perspect.
2007
,115, A448–A454.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
4.
Bukhari, M.A.; Carrasco-Gallego, R.; Ponce-Cueto, E. Developing a national programme for textiles and clothing recovery. Waste
Manag. Res. 2018,36, 321–331. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5.
TTRI Taiwan Textile Research Institute. Low Carbon Intelligent Operations for Textile Industry in APEC Economies. 2013.
Available online: https://www.apec.org/docs/default-source/Publications/2013/8/Low-Carbon-Intelligent-Operations-for-
Textile-Industry-in-APEC-Economies---Project/TOC/Main-Report.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2021).
6. Athalye, A. Carbon footprint in textile processing. Colourage 2012,59, 45–47.
7.
Rana, S.; Pichandi, S.; Karunamoorthy, S.; Bhattacharyya, A.; Parveen, S.; Fangueiro, R. Carbon footprint of textile and clothing
products. In Handbook of Sustainable Apparel Production; Subramanian, S.M., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; pp.
141–165. [CrossRef]
8. Chavan, R.B. Environmental sustainability through textile recycling. J. Text. Sci. Eng. 2014. [CrossRef]
9.
Ekstrom, K.M.; Salomonson, N. Reuse and recycling of clothing and textiles: A Network Approach. J. Macromarketing
2014
,34,
383–399. [CrossRef]
10.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning Fashion’s Future. 2017. Available online: https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications (accessed on 10 January 2021).
11.
Textile Exchange. Preferred Fiber & Materials, Market Report. 2020. Available online: https://textileexchange.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/06/Textile-Exchange_Preferred-Fiber-Material-Market-Report_2020.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2021).
12.
WTO (World Trade Organization). World Trade Statistical Review. 2018. Available online: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/
statis_e/wts2018_e/wts2018_e.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2019).

Textiles 2022,2186
13.
Statista. Production Volume of Textile Fibers Worldwide 1975–2017. 2018. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/
263154/worldwide-production-volume-of-textile-fibers-since-1975/ (accessed on 6 December 2019).
14.
Textile World. Man-Made Fibers Continue to Grow. 2015. Available online: https://www.textileworld.com/textile-world/fiber-
world/2015/02/man-made-fibers-continue-to-grow/ (accessed on 6 December 2019).
15.
HIS Markit. Natural and Man-Made Fibers Overview. 2015. Available online: https://ihsmarkit.com/products/fibers-chemical-
economics-handbook.html (accessed on 6 December 2019).
16.
GFA & BCG (Global Fashion Agenda and the Boston Consulting Group). Pulse of the Fashion Industry. 2017. Available online:
https://www.globalfashionagenda.com/publications/#pulseofthefashionindustryreport (accessed on 22 November 2018).
17.
Caulfield, K. Sources of Textile Waste in Australia; Apical International Pty. Ltd.: Melbourne, Australia, 2009; Available online:
https://studylib.net/doc/18791293/sources-of-textile-waste-in-australia (accessed on 22 November 2018).
18. Domina, T.; Koch, K. The textile waste lifecycle. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 1997,15, 96–102. [CrossRef]
19.
BIR (Bureau of International Recycling). Textiles 2014. Available online: http://www.bir.org/industry/textiles (accessed on 3
September 2018).
20.
Akay, Ö.; Gündüz, S.; Gündüz, F.F. The factor affecting textile production amounts of leading countries in textile export dynamic
panel data analysis. Nicel Bilimler Derg. 2020,2, 1–13.
21.
Zhang, M.; Kong, X.X.; Ramu, S.C. The transformation of the clothing industry in China. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN
and East Asia (ERIA) Discussion Paper Series. 2015. Available online: https://www.eria.org/ERIA-DP-2015-12.pdf (accessed on
25 November 2018).
22.
Pepermans, A. China as a Textile Giant Preserving its Leading Position in the World, and what it Means for the EU. Taiwan.
J. Political Sci.
2019
,80, 63–108. Available online: http://ntupsr.s3.amazonaws.com/psr/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/03-4
-Astrid-Pepermans.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2021).
23.
Dudin, M.N.; Lyasnikov, N.V.; Kahramanovna, D.G.; Kuznecov, A.V. Chinese Textile Industry: Sustainable Development
Challenges and Competitiveness issues in Economic Environment Dynamics. Fibers Text. East. Eur. 2015,23, 14–18. [CrossRef]
24.
Collective Responsibility. Unspoken Crisis: Mounting Textile Waste in China. 5 July 2018. Available online: https://www.
coresponsibility.com/unspoken-crisis-mounting-textile-waste-in-china (accessed on 20 June 2019).
25.
Xu, J.; Liu, Y.; Yang, L. A comparative study of the role of China and India in sustainable textile competition in the U.S. market
under green trade barriers. Sustainability 2018,10, 1348. [CrossRef]
26.
Spuijbroek, M. Textile Waste in Mainland China. 2019. Available online: https://zakendoeninchina.org/wp-content/uploads/20
19/08/report_Textile-Waste-in-Mainland-China_small.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2021).
27.
EC (European Council). Circular Economy in Practice-Reducing Textile Waste. 2017. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/
easme/en/news/circular-economy-practice-reducing-textile-waste (accessed on 3 September 2018).
28.
EC (European Council). Costs for Municipal Waste Management in the EU. 2002. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/
environment/waste/studies/pdf/eucostwaste.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2018).
29.
EC (European Council). Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and
Repealing Certain Directives. European Commission: Brussels, Belgium. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098 (accessed on 4 September 2018).
30.
European Parliament. Waste: Boost Recycling, Cut Landfilling and Curb Food Waste, Parliament Says. 2017. Available
online: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20170308IPR65671/waste-boost-recycling-cut-landfilling-and-
curb-food-waste-parliament-says (accessed on 5 September 2018).
31.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). Extended Producer Responsibility. A Guidance Manual for
Governments. 2001. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/extended-producer-responsibility_978926
4189867-en (accessed on 5 September 2018).
32.
Gupt, Y.; Sahay, S. Review of extended producer responsibility: A Case Study Approach. Waste Manag. Res.
2015
,33, 595–611.
[CrossRef]
33.
EC (European Council). Waste Management and Recycling: Council Adopts New Rules. 2018. Available online: https://www.
consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2018/05/22/waste-management-and-recycling-council-adopts-new-rules/# (ac-
cessed on 11 March 2019).
34.
GFA & BCG (Global Fashion Agenda and the Boston Consulting Group). Pulse of the Fashion Industry. 2018. Available online:
https://www.globalfashionagenda.com/publications/#pulseofthefashionindustryreport (accessed on 15 January 2021).
35.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2015 Fact Sheet 2018.
Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-07/documents/2015_smm_msw_factsheet_07242018_fnl_50
8_002.pdf (accessed on 15 January 2021).
36.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2018 Fact Sheet 2020.
Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-01/documents/2018_tables_and_figures_dec_2020_fnl_508.
pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
37. CTR (Council for Textile Recycling). Available online: http://www.weardonaterecycle.org/ (accessed on 7 April 2018).
38.
Wicker, A. Fast Fashion is Creating an Environmental Crisis. 2016. Available online: http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/09
/old-clothes-fashion-waste-crisis-494824.htm (accessed on 10 May 2018).

Textiles 2022,2187
39.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2014 Tables and Figures.
2016. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/2014_smm_tablesfigures_508.pdf
(accessed on 10 March 2019).
40.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). Facts and Figures about Materials, Waste and Recycling 2021. Textiles:
Material-Specific Data, Summary Table and Graph. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-
waste-and-recycling/textiles-material-specific-data#TextilesTableandGraph (accessed on 15 January 2022).
41.
Storry, K.; Mckenzie, A. Unravelling the Problem of Apparel Waste in the Greater Vancouver Area. 2018. Available online: https://
businessinsurrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/UnravellingtheProblemofApparelWasteintheGreaterVancouverAreaMarch2
2018.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2019).
42.
TWD (Textile Waste Diversion). The Potential for Textile Recycling in Canada. 2013. Available online: http://textilewastediversion.
com/the-potential-for-textile-recycling-in-canada/ (accessed on 20 April 2018).
43.
Marsales, C. Report to General Committee: Textile Recycling Smart Bin Program. City of Markham. 2016. Available on-
line: http://www2.markham.ca/markham/ccbs/indexfile/Agendas/2016/General/gc160418/Textile%20Recycling%20Smart%
20Bin%20Program.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2018).
44.
Malilay-Pimentel, C.E. Reducing Textile Waste in Metro Vancouver Landfills. 2017. Available online: http://summit.sfu.ca/item/
17761 (accessed on 25 April 2018).
45.
WRW (Waste Reduction Week), Canada. Textiles Tuesday. 2017. Available online: http://wrwcanada.com/en/2017-theme-days/
textiles-tuesday (accessed on 25 April 2018).
46.
Weber, S. How Consumers Manage Textile Waste. Master’s Thesis on Environmental Studies 2015, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2015.
47.
Tetra Tech. Metro Vancouver Waste Composition Monitoring Program. 2015. Available online: http://www.metrovancouver.
org/services/solid-waste/SolidWastePublications/2015_Waste_Composition_Report.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2018).
48.
Recycling and Waste Reduction-Association of Manitoba Municipalities. 2015. Available online: http://www.amm.mb.ca/
download/.../Recycling%20and%20Waste%20Reduction.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2018).
49.
Lyons, P. Textile Recycling Added to Eco Centre Services. Okotoks, Alberta, Canada. 2017. Available online: https://www.
okotoks.ca/municipal-government/newsroom/news/textile-recycling-added-eco-centre-services-0 (accessed on 10 May 2018).
50.
Sandin, G.; Peters, G.M. Environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling—A review. J. Clean. Prod.
2018
,184, 353–365.
[CrossRef]
51.
Fortuna, L.M.; Diyamandoglu, V. Optimization of greenhouse gas emissions in secondhand consumer product recovery through
reuse platforms. Waste Manag. 2017,66, 178–189. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52.
Wang, H.; Kaur, G.; Pensupa, N.; Uisan, K.; Du, C.; Yang, X.; Sze Ki Lin, C. Textile waste valorization using submerged filamentous
fungal fermentation. Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018. [CrossRef]
53. Ignatyev, A.I.; Thielemans, W.; Vander Beke, B. Recycling of polymers: A review. ChemSusChem 2014,7, 1579–1593. [CrossRef]
54.
Herva, M.; Franco, A.; Ferreiro, S.; Alvarez, A.; Roca, E. An approach for the application of the ecological footprint as environ-
mental indicator in the textile sector. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008,156, 478–487. [CrossRef]
55.
Zamani, B. Towards Understanding Sustainable Textile Waste Management: Environmental Impacts and Social Indicators. 2014.
Available online: http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/204502/204502.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2018).
56.
Woolridge, A.C.; Ward, G.D.; Phillips, P.S.; Collins, M. Life cycle assessment for reuse/recycling of donated waste textiles
compared to use of virgin material: An UK Energy Saving Perspective. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2006,46, 94–103. [CrossRef]
57. Isci, A.; Demirer, G.N. Biogas production potential from cotton wastes. Renew. Energy 2007,32, 750–757. [CrossRef]
58.
Raj, C.S.; Arul, S.; Sendilvelan, S.; Saravanan, C.G. Biogas from Textile Cotton Waste—An Alternate Fuel for Diesel Engines. Open
Waste Manag. J. 2009,2, 1–5. [CrossRef]
59.
Ismail, Z.Z.; Talib, A.R. Recycled medical cotton industry waste as a source of biogas recovery. J. Clean. Prod.
2016
,112, 4413–4418.
[CrossRef]
60.
Shrestha, B.; Hernandez, R.; Fortela, D.L.B.; Sharp, W.; Chistoserdov, A.; Gang, D.; Revellame, E.; Holmes, W.; Zappi, M.E. A
review of pretreatment methods to enhance solids reduction during anaerobic digestion of municipal wastewater sludges and the
resulting digester performance: Implications to Future Urban Biorefineries. Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 9141. [CrossRef]
61.
Ariunbaatar, J.; Panico, A.; Esposito, G.; Pirozzi, F.; Lens, P.N.L. Pretreatment methods to enhance anaerobic digestion of organic
solid waste. Appl. Energy 2014,123, 143–156. [CrossRef]
62.
Pilli, S.; Pandey, A.K.; Katiyar, A.; Pandey, K.; Tyagi, R.D. Pre-treatment Technologies to Enhance Anaerobic Digestion. In
Sustainable Sewage Sludge Management and Resource Efficiency; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. Available online: https://www.
intechopen.com/chapters/72862 (accessed on 15 January 2022). [CrossRef]
63.
Hasanzadeha, E.; Mirmohamadsadeghia, S.; Karimi, K. Enhancing energy production from waste textile by hydrolysis of synthetic
parts. Fuel 2018,218, 41–48. [CrossRef]
64.
Jeihanipour, A.; Aslanzadeh, S.; Rajendran, K.; Balasubramanian, G.; Taherzadeh, M.J. High-rate biogas production from waste
textiles using a two-stage process. Renew. Energy 2013,52, 128–135. [CrossRef]
65.
Juanga-Labayen, J.; Yanac, K.; Yuan, Q. Effect of substrate-to-inoculum ratio on anaerobic digestion of treated and untreated
cotton textile waste. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021,18, 287–296. [CrossRef]

Textiles 2022,2188
66.
Hamawand, I.; Sandell, G.; Pittaway, P.; Chakrabarty, S.; Yusaf, T.; Chen, G.; Seneweera, S.; Al-Lwayzy, S.; Bennett, J.; Hopf, J.
Bioenergy from Cotton Industry Wastes: A Review and Potential. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016,66, 435–448. [CrossRef]
67.
Gholamzad, E.; Karimi, K.; Masoomi, M. Effective conversion of waste polyester–cotton textile to ethanol and recovery of
polyester by alkaline pretreatment. Chem. Eng. J. 2014,253, 40–45. [CrossRef]
68.
Nikoli, S.; Lazi, V.; Veljovi, D.; Mojovi, L. Production of bioethanol from pre-treated cotton fabrics and waste cotton materials.
Carbohydr. Polym. 2017. [CrossRef]
69.
Mahitha, U.; Dhaarini Devi, G.; Akther Sabeena, M.; Shankar, C.; Kirubakaran, V. Fast Biodegradation of Waste Cotton Fibers
from Yarn Industry using Microbes. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2016,35, 925–929. [CrossRef]
70.
Selvi, C.P.; Koilraj, A.J. Bacterial Diversity in Compost and Vermicompost of Cotton Waste at Courtallam, Nellai District in
Tamilnadu, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 2015,4, 582–585.
71.
Aishwariya, S.; Amsamani, S. Evaluating the efficacy of compost evolved from bio-managing cotton textile waste. J. Environ. Res.
Dev. 2012,6, 941–952.
72.
Santos, A.; Bustamante, M.A.; Tortosa, G.; Moral, R.; Bernal, M.P. Gaseous emissions and process development during composting
of pig slurry: The Influence of the Proportion of Cotton Gin Waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2016,112, 81–90. [CrossRef]
73.
Oh, S.J.; Park, S.J.; Shin, P.G.; Yoo, Y.B.; Jhune, C.S. An improved compost using cotton waste and fermented sawdust for
cultivation of oyster mushroom. Mycobiology 2004,32, 115–118. [CrossRef]
74.
Phuong, T.T. Development of a New Cotton Waste Composting Technology for Cultivation of Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus
Ostreatus). ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2016,11, 12607–12613.
75.
Haule, L.V.; Carr, C.M.; Rigout, M. Preparation and physical properties of regenerated cellulose fibers from cotton waste garments.
J. Clean. Prod. 2016,112, 4445–4451. [CrossRef]
76. Woodings, C.R. The development of advanced cellulosic fibers. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 1995,17, 305–309. [CrossRef]
77.
Shen, F.; Xiao, W.; Lin, L.; Yang, G.; Zhang, Y.; Deng, S. Enzymatic saccharification coupling with polyester recovery from
cotton-based waste textiles by phosphoric acid pretreatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2018,130, 248–255. [CrossRef]
78.
Pichardo, P.P.; Martínez-Barrera, G.; Martínez-López, M.; Ureña-Núñez, F.; Ávila-Córdoba, L.I. Waste and Recycled Textiles as
Reinforcements of Building Material. In Natural and Artificial Fiber-Reinforced Composites as Renewable Sources; 2017; Available
online: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/56947 (accessed on 3 September 2018).
79.
Ghiassian, H.; Poorebrahim, G.; Gray, D.H. Soil Reinforcement with Recycled Carpet Wastes. Waste Manag. Res.
2004
,22, 108–114.
[CrossRef]
80.
Williams, N.; Lundgren, K.; Wallbaum, H.; Malaga, K. Sustainable potential of textile-reinforced concrete. J. Mater. Civil. Eng.
2015
,27, 1–12. Available online: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001160 (accessed on 15 January
2021). [CrossRef]
81.
Anjana, E.A.; Shashikala, A.P. Sustainability of construction with textile reinforced concrete—A state of the art. In Proceedings of
the International Conference on Materials, Mechanics and Structures, Kerala, India, 14–15 July 2020; IOP Conference Series; Materials
Science and Engineering: Kerala, India, 2020. Available online: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/936/1/01
2006/pdf (accessed on 15 January 2021).
82.
Broda, J.; Przybyło, S.; Gawłowski, A.; Grzybowska-Pietras, J.; Sarna, E.; Rom, M.; Laszczak, R. Utilisation of textile wastes for the
production of geotextiles designed for erosion protection. J. Text. Inst. 2018,110, 435–444. [CrossRef]
83.
Ryu, C.; Phan, A.N.; Yang, Y.; Sharifi, V.N.; Swithenbank, J. Ignition and burning rates of segregated waste combustion in packed
bed. Waste Manag. 2007,27, 802–810. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
84.
Swedish EPA. Förbränningsanläggningar för Energiproduktion Inklusiverökgaskondensering, s.l.: Swedish Environmental
Protection Agency 2005. Available online: https://www.naturvardsverket.se/globalassets/media/publikationer-pdf/8100/91-
620-8196-9.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2018).
85.
Youhanan, L. Environmental Assessment of Textile Material Recovery Techniques. Examining Textile Flows in Sweden. Master ’s
Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2013. Available online: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/
diva2:630028/FULLTEXT01.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2018).
86.
Hugill, R.; Ley, K.; Rademan, K. Coming Full Circle: Innovating towards Sustainable Man-Made Cellulosic Fibres. Available
online: https://reports.fashionforgood.com/report/coming-full-circle-innovating-towards-sustainable-man-made-cellulosic-
fibres/ (accessed on 15 January 2022).