Environmental impact of Recover cotton in textile industry
F.A. Esteve-Turrillas and
M. de la Guardia
Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 2017, vol. 116, issue C, 107-115
Abstract:
A comparative evaluation of the life cycle assessment (LCA) of Recover cotton, obtained from recycled garments, and virgin one, cultivated from traditional and organic crops, has been made based on the quantification of environmental impact categories, such as abiotic depletion, global warming, water use, acidification and eutrophication potential. LCA data reported in the literature for the steps of cultivation, ginning/cutting, and dyeing were compared in order to clearly show the environmental advantages of moving from traditional practices, to organic cultivation and the use of Recover cotton, a novel procedure that involves the production of cotton yarns from coloured and well characterized recycled materials. Studies made evidenced that the use of organic cotton cultivation avoids the use of pesticides and chemicals, reducing environmental impacts, but maintaining those related to ginning and dyeing steps. However, the use of Recover cotton avoids the impact of both, cotton cultivation and dyeing steps, based on an appropriate selection of raw materials obtained from textile wastes, being only increased the energy costs of cutting/shredding processes as compared to ginning ones. In short, it can be concluded that the use of Recover cotton for the production of high quality textiles involves an added value of the products from an environmental point of view, being costs and electrical consumes also reduced and providing a second life for produced textiles.
Keywords: Life cycle assessment; Cotton; Recover; Upcycled textile system; Organic; Conventional; Recycled (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344916302828
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:recore:v:116:y:2017:i:c:p:107-115
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.09.034
Access Statistics for this article
Resources, Conservation & Recycling is currently edited by Ming Xu
More articles in Resources, Conservation & Recycling from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kai Meng ().