Understanding Fashion’s Carbon Footprint

For brands keen to reduce their carbon footprint, the first step is getting to grips with where your emissions come from. And while your own operations contribute - through energy consumed in your stores and HQ, commuting and travel - the vast majority of your impact will lie within the lifecycle of your garments. From raw materials, to distribution, and even customers' usage and disposal of the garment, every stage has a carbon impact.

‍

In this guide, we’ll walk through the full lifecycle of a garment, highlighting the carbon impact at each stage, and how you as a brand can start to take action.

1. Fibre Production: Where It All Begins

The first stage in the garment lifecycle is the production of raw fibres, whether natural, synthetic, or semi-synthetic. For many, this is the stage that first comes to mind when we think of the carbon impact of our clothes.

Let’s take a quick look, splitting out the different categories of fibre. We’ll keep this high-level for now, so watch out for more detailed explainers in the future!

‍Plant-Based  Natural Fibres (e.g., Cotton, Linen)

For natural plant-based fibres, emissions mainly stem from making and moving the inputs needed for the crop itself - water, pesticides, and fertilisers. On top of this, nitrogen-based fertilisers also produce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions after they’re applied to the soil. Finally, there’s the fossil fuel use in agricultural machinery (tractors, harvesting equipment) and emissions from land use changes (deforestation or soil degradation from intensive farming).‍

Livestock-Based  Natural Fibres (e.g., Wool, Cashmere)

‍When it comes to animal-derived fibres, emissions are again created in producing and transporting the inputs needed to raise livestock, such as water and animal feed. You’ll spot that growing grains to feed livestock creates emissions in the same way as our plant-based fibres discussed just now.

However, the main impact of animal-based fibres is from the production of methane by ruminant animals (e.g. sheep and cows) through their digestive processes. Methane is a much more potent GHG in comparison to CO2. Although these animals might be raised primarily for their meat, lifecycle studies "allocate" a proportion of the methane emissions to the production of fibres. This tends to make animal-based fibre production more GHG-intensive than other fibre types.

Processing fibres - shearing, washing, and preparing them for textile production - also has an energy and carbon footprint.

Synthetic Fibres (e.g. polyester, nylon)‍

These fibres are made from fossil fuels, meaning emissions occur at multiple points including extraction and refining. The production of synthetic fibres is energy-intensive, but on the flip side, they tend to be more durable, which can extend garment life.

Perhaps counterintuitively, synthetic fibres can also be lower emission overall versus natural fibres. Importantly, however, synthetic fibres aren’t part of a natural carbon cycle. Instead, they are introducing previously locked-away carbon into the atmosphere, contributing to long-term climate change.

Semi-Synthetic  Fibres (e.g., Viscose, Lyocell)‍

The carbon footprint of semi-synthetic fibres is comparable to plant-based natural fibres, since synthetics are derived from plant-based sources like wood pulp. However, semi-synthetics then go-through another layer of chemical processing, which increases energy use, and therefore CO2 emissions, if the underlying energy is fossil-fuel based.

Reducing emissions: There’s no perfect fibre, and making an informed choice of material requires a detailed comparison of fibre-types beyond the scope of this overview article (keep an eye out for our follow-up fibre-focussed blog!). However,  as a general rule, brands can reduce their carbon impact by:

1. Choosing organic / regenerative when opting for natural fibres.
2. Using recycled over virgin materials.

It’s also vital to consider impacts beyond carbon, such as:

• Waste – what is the end of life process of a material (durability, recyclability, biodegradability)?
• Long-term sustainability – should we be relying on fossil fuels long-term?
• Biodiversity – does the material rely on intensive farming practices that harm wildlife?

2. Fabric Production: Spinning, Weaving & Knitting

Once fibres are ready, they need to be spun into yarn, woven or knitted into fabric.‍

A huge amount of power is needed to run the machinery that automates spinning, weaving, and knitting. The carbon impact of this depends on the underlying fuel source for these machines – factories using fossil fuel-based electricity add significantly to emissions, whereas fabric produced in an electrified factory where the grid-mix is weighted toward renewables will have a lower impact. Ultimately, then, this is a question of geography. ‍

Reducing emissions: Brands can work with suppliers using renewable energy. In practice, this often means shifting supply to a country where the grid mix has a high proportion of renewables, and there is a strong textiles industry (e.g. Portugal).

3. Fabric Production: Dyeing & Finishing

In the next stage, the fabric is dyed and finished, ready to be made into garments. This stage is often overlooked but is both energy and water intensive.

According to a study funded by the United Nations Environment Programme, wet finishing is the highest impact stage of the garment lifecycle. This is because it involves heating large volumes of water, and this process is generally powered by fossil fuels. It’s also highly water-intensive, and transport and treatment of that water, and reliance on synthetic/petrochemical derived chemicals, adds further greenhouse gas emissions.

The greenhouse gases emitted from burning fossil fuels (particularly coal) to generate the heat and electricity required in these stages of textile production account for their high contribution to climate impact.

Sustainability and Circularity in the Textile Value Chain - United Nations Environment Programme

Reducing emissions: Brands can work with suppliers using renewable energy, innovative low-impact dyeing methods (e.g. natural/waterless dyes), and closed-loop water systems to cut down on waste.

4. Garment Manufacturing: Cutting, Sewing & Assembly

At this stage, fabric is cut, sewn, and assembled to make the final product. Emissions predominantly come from energy use (to power machinery, lighting, heating etc.) and waste material or offcuts that are sent to landfill.

Reducing emissions: Factories switching to renewable energy, adoption of efficient pattern-cutting technology, and fabric recycling programs can help reduce waste and emissions here.

5. Distribution: Transport

We often think of the transport that happens post assembly - between warehouses or stores and the end consumer. However, because the typical garment value chain is so fragmented, with each stage of processing happening in different farms, factories, and even countries, transport is needed between (and sometimes within) each stage of the garment lifecycle. This means the carbon impact of garment transport can add up to be significant.

Reducing emissions: Switching from air to sea freight where possible, and reducing the distance that your garments travel, are the key levers here. Ultimately, influencing both of these things requires significant changes to your operations, even your brand's business model:

• Building in sufficient time between design and launch to allow for sea freight.
• Changing consumer expectations around the frequency of releases, and delivery times.
• Evaluating supply chain partners, and the possibility of manufacture closer to home.

6. Customer Use: Washing, Drying, & End-of-Life

The carbon impact of garments continues as your customers wash, dry, and ultimately dispose of what they buy. Interestingly, the UNEP estimates the customer use phase to be the second biggest carbon hotspot, behind dyeing and finishing.

Washing and drying account for a significant portion of a garment’s total carbon footprint - especially when washing is at higher temperatures, and when tumble dryers are used.

According to the latest data published by WRAP, about 50% of UK post consumer textiles are sent to landfill or incineration in the UK, with a further 30% exported abroad (some of which will also end up as waste). Waste textiles generate emissions, whether it's CO2 through incineration or methane through decomposition.

Reducing emissions: First and foremost, brands can educate customers on better care practices (low-temperature washing, air drying), as well as promoting and enabling repair, resale, and recycling. Brands can choose to develop partnerships with third-party repair and resale platforms, promote peer to peer exchange, or develop their own initiatives in-house. Durability is another key feature, reducing waste by extending the garment lifecycle. Another key factor is material composition, because mixed fibre garments are significantly more challenging to recycle.

Reducing the Carbon Footprint of Fashion

Fashion’s carbon footprint is complex, but every step presents an opportunity to reduce carbon and make an impact. The challenge for brands is identifying where they can make the biggest difference - whether that’s material sourcing, factory energy use, or product longevity - focussing efforts on high impact areas.

Final Thoughts

For sustainability managers, merchandisers, and operations leaders at SME fashion brands, tackling carbon emissions isn’t just about compliance - it’s about building a responsible, trusted, future-proof business.

Need help measuring and reducing your carbon footprint? We work with 50+ fashion brands to simplify carbon measurement and decarbonisation planning. We'd love to chat.