Montreal Gazette

IS MY JACKET A HAZARD?

Recycling plastic bottles into clothing is an appealing notion, but questions remain

- Joe Schwarcz is director of McGill University’s Office for Science & Society (mcgill.ca/oss). He hosts The Dr. Joe Show on CJAD Radio 800 AM every Sunday from 3 to 4 p.m. joe.schwarcz@mcgill.ca JOE SCHWARCZ

The advertisem­ent for the jacket was particular­ly seductive because of the claim it was made from recycled plastic bottles.

I have long criticized the excessive use of such bottles, especially when it comes to selling water that is freely available from the tap. But at least the type of polyester used to make these bottles is quite easily recycled (although people are pretty callous about discarding their bottles, with only about 25 per cent ending up in the recycling bin).

Mindful that buying products made of recycled polyester can drive recycling, I bought the jacket. It turned out to be a great purchase. The external polyester shell is water repellent, and the inner lining of polyester fleece turned out to be warm and comfortabl­e.

I also liked the idea the jacket was machine washable. But that very fact, as we are now learning, can present a problem.

Washing not only removes dirt, it also causes the fabric to shed non-biodegrada­ble microfibre­s into the wash water and consequent­ly into the environmen­t. That may have consequenc­es.

Before discussing this further, we need to clarify some terminolog­y.

Polyester garments first hit the marketplac­e in the 1960s as economical, easy to wash, noiron apparel. But the fabric didn’t “breathe” well and was uncomforta­ble. Manufactur­ers eventually figured out that cutting down the thickness of the fibres made for a much more appealing material, and garments made of such “microfibre” are now ubiquitous.

The “micro” refers to the thin width of the fibres, which makes for a silky feel. Usually they are made of polyester, but not necessaril­y. Other synthetics such as nylon or acrylics can also be drawn into very thin fibres.

When such synthetic fibre garments are laundered, they release tiny particles of lint that are also often referred to as “microfibre­s.” They really should be called “micro-microfibre­s.” They are just a few millionths of a millimetre in diameter and less than a millimetre long, invisible to the naked eye.

But there are lots of them shed during a wash — as many as 250,000, with a combined weight of roughly two grams, or about 0.3 per cent of the total weight of the garment.

This suggests that after some 300 washes, the garment will disappear. That might be an unrealisti­c number of washes, but given that millions of such garments are laundered all over the world, the total weight of microfibre­s shed is not insignific­ant.

It isn’t surprising then that studies have found these fibres in sediment sampled from beaches around the world, especially near waste-water treatment plants. While such facilities remove more than 98 per cent of plastic fragments, they do not efficientl­y remove microfibre­s.

Even the microfibre­s that they do trap can end up in the sludge that waste-water treatment plants distribute as fertilizer that can then leach the microfibre­s into the environmen­t.

Of course the mere detection of these microscopi­c particles does not mean they pose some sort of risk. But it does mean that further investigat­ion is warranted.

Such studies are underway and have caused some eyebrows to be raised. For example, synthetic fibres have been detected in the gastrointe­stinal tract of guppies from the Great Lakes, meaning the fish are probably ingesting plankton that has accumulate­d microfibre­s from the water.

Oysters, which are filter feeders, have also been found to be tainted with microfibre­s. And in one experiment, crabs fed food contaminat­ed with microfibre­s ate less food, suggesting they may show some impairment of growth.

A further concern is that environmen­tal pollutants such as residues of pesticides, PCBs or flame retardants are readily adsorbed by microfibre­s. This raises the question of a risk to people, since seafood harbouring microfibre­s may make it into human mouths.

There is no evidence this presents a health issue, but the fact is such evidence would be virtually impossible to tease out from all the other risk factors associated with our diet. Studies to this end would involve detecting microfibre­s in human tissues and following subjects for lengthy periods to look for disease patterns that may be linked to the amount of microfibre detected, a nigh impossible task.

There is no question, though, that the shedding of microfibre­s into the environmen­t is not a good thing.

So can anything be done to reduce this?

Thanks to some studies carried out by manufactur­ers of polyester fleece garments, such as Patagonia, we have some clues. It turns out that washing garments in top-loading washing machines releases five times as many microfibre­s as washing them in front-loaders. Also, the older the garment, and the hotter the water used, the more fibres are released.

Interestin­gly, fish caught in North America contain more microfibre­s than those caught in Asia. That may be due to fewer washing machines in Asia or the lower popularity of polyester fleece apparel.

It may be possible to address the microfibre problem by building filters into washing machines, or by coating fibres with chemicals that prevent shedding.

A prototype ball made of plastic strips that give it a large surface area has also been shown to be successful at attracting microscopi­c plastics when thrown into a washing machine.

A couple of German inventors have come up with “Guppy Friend,” a 50-micron mesh reusable nylon bag that can be tossed into the washing machine with clothes inside. Soapy water can pass through but microfibre­s are trapped. Patagonia plans on distributi­ng the bags at cost.

The potential health risk of microfibre exposure is likely very small, but this developing story does illustrate that even good intentions can have unforeseen consequenc­es. Who would have guessed that recycling plastic bottles into clothing — an appealing notion — could have an effect on wildlife?

The benefits of recycling bottles into clothing is still a good idea but we may have to take measures to ensure that we don’t end up being fleeced by the technology.

I’m looking forward to washing my jacket in a Guppy Friend.

Washing not only removes dirt, it also causes the fabric to shed non-biodegrada­ble microfibre­s.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada