4
Textiles: Desired Future State and Solution Pathways

The textiles breakout group began its discussions by defining the problem and current challenges before describing some overarching ideas for moving toward circularity in textiles. The group approached this task by thinking about the life cycle of a garment and considering the meaning of textile reuse, whether that is repairing a garment to maintain its designed state indefinitely, downcycling to other uses at its end of life, or recycling (mechanical or chemical) to base monomers to be remade into another product. The group noted the importance of all of these pathways within a circular textile system. Changes in consumer behavior, manufacturing, design, policy, and infrastructure can contribute to the value of textiles as reusable commodities.

The group organized its ideas for a desired future state of plastics in textiles and pathways to achieve that future state into intervention categories: collection and sorting, recycling, reuse, repair, redesign, reduction/elimination, and rethink (Table 4-1). This organization supports coverage of the end state and strategies for reaching it broadly across various actions.

The first category addressed was collection and sorting. Protection of increased opportunities for formal and informal textile waste sorting may be necessary, which some group members highlighted as both a domestic and international concern. The group described the importance of subsidize sorting opportunities and increased infrastructure at the local, regional, and national scales, which could increase access to collection. To achieve this goal, the group envisioned the development of hubs where collected items can be sorted based on their suitability for repair, reuse, and recycling. These hubs can also help to promote job opportunities.

The discussion of textile recycling covered the potential requirements for the composition of materials to be recycled, diversion of textiles from landfill to recycling, and infrastructure and industry needs. The aim is transparency about the chemicals and polymer types used in textiles, along with recycled plastic content requirements such as those

TABLE 4-1 Summary of Desired State and Example Pathways Prepared by the Textiles Breakout Group

NOTES: This summary from the breakout session reflects the discussion of the group and should not be construed as reflecting consensus of the group. Underlined bullets were emphasized by some participants. EPR: extended producer responsibility.

that exist in packaging. Pathways are desired for down- or upcycling products beyond their repair life to give textiles an extra “loop of life” before recycling. The group saw room for further discussion about whether it is best to outsource products from where they are utilized or purchased to consolidate recycling or to have more local recycling centers. These actions could all help to achieve a goal of at least 85 percent diversion of textiles from landfills to recycling and other interventions.

To reach this state, the group discussed potential infrastructure, technology, and policy changes. It noted the importance of building facilities to handle the increased amount of textiles to be recycled and of developing a competitive market for recycled textile materials. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) or similar policies can help to create market competition for textiles. Other infrastructure changes include technology development such as near infrared spectroscopy (NIR), which is used for automated sorting. Some polyblends and clothing with mixed materials are not always properly identified with NIR, which causes problems for recycling. The group noted that new technology or the expansion of mixed material recycling is also important. Another challenge is the lack of useful data on how long textiles remain in a circular state; most information is peer-to-peer sharing with limited or no hard data.

Regarding the reuse intervention, the group discussed expansion and creation of new systems that encourage longer use of clothing, for example expanding online platforms for renting or sharing clothing. These platforms exist to a small extent but are not widely used even when available. To encourage reuse, brands could fund buy-back or repair programs (some already exist, e.g., Patagonia and Levis) and educate consumers through storytelling of a garment life cycle or circular pathways for garments. In addition, the development or improvement of social media and apps that make reusing or renting clothing easier can help to increase consumer use.

Next, the textiles breakout group considered ways to make clothing repair more accessible, affordable, and culturally acceptable. Increased right-to-repair policies could be included in EPR regulations. Policies could be paired with nationwide education and encouragement of clothing repair. This idea relates to the earlier one of aggregation hubs that could host onsite repair shops, tailors, and education facilities for people who want to learn how to repair their own clothing, and provide workforce development to staff the hub.

To make many of the intervention areas work, it is important that clothing be redesigned in the first place, for durability, repairability, deconstruction at end of life, and recyclability. Phasing out of problematic polymers (e.g., chemicals that disrupt recycling processes) and materials that harm the environment (e.g., fleece and materials that easily shed microfibers/microplastics) and items that are difficult to recycle at the end of life is a key to the success of these interventions. Several group members stressed the importance of consumer trust in the safety of their textile products; transparency of product safety, understanding of the environmental impacts, and traceability and sustainability can foster that trust. More research and development could support creation of sustain-

able textiles in more modular designs that can be repaired and are designed for recycling (either mechanical or chemical). Incorporation of the social costs of textiles into virgin synthetic textiles could support this effort. The group also mentioned that legislation requiring microfiber filters in laundry and EPR along with digital passports for clothing items may be pathways to support the redesign efforts.

Finally, the group discussed rethinking and shifting the global culture away from fast fashion and consumerism. Finding ways to normalize clothing swaps and regifting and to remove stigma around thrifting can be useful methods to pursue. Nationwide campaigns to educate people on the life cycle of textiles and problems of excess consumerism could support these shifts and counteract the strong appeal of buying the next newest item or trend. The group described this problem as a socioeconomic problem that goes beyond clothing and textiles and is challenging to address.

Overall, many participants believed a decrease in consumer consumption, decline of fast fashion, and reduction of synthetic packaging for clothing to be important pathways to reduce and eventually eliminate textile waste. Research on the tradeoffs of natural fiber textiles versus synthetic textiles that explores the economic and socials costs, human and environmental health implications, and access to different materials could provide valuable to this endeavor. Several group members also highlighted that flexibility in the system could enhance responses to disruptions, for example, changes to consumer practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of tariffs on supply chains.

In closing, many participants noted a growing trend to consider ways to make textiles more circular, akin to existing work in the packaging space.