Environmental benefits from reusing clothes

DISCUSSION ARTICLE

Abstract

Background, aim, and scope

Clothes are often discarded when much of their potential lifetime is left. Many charitable organizations therefore collect used clothing and resell it as second-hand clothes for example in Eastern Europe or Africa. In this connection, the question arises whether reusing clothes actually results in a decrease of the environmental burden of the life cycle of clothing. The environmental burden of clothing has been studied in several studies. However, most of these studies focus solely on the energy consumption aspects and pay little attention to the potential benefits of diverting used clothing from the waste stream. The aim of the study was to assess the net environmental benefits brought by the disposal of used clothing through charities who return them for second-hand sales assuming that second-hand clothes to some extent replace the purchase of new clothes.

Materials and methods

The extent to which second-hand clothes (SHC) introduces such a replacement was investigated applying a methodology in which a questionnaire-based survey was conducted on more than 200 consumers in second-hand shops. The survey was done in Sweden and Estonia, and Africa was included by estimation. Based on the identification of the different profiles of the consumers questioned, a methodology was developed to get a quantitative evaluation of the replacement of new clothes enabled by second-hand clothing consumption. A life cycle assessment was conducted based on the EDIP methodology. The life cycle impacts of clothes that are directly disposed of by incineration were compared with the life cycle impacts of clothes that are collected and sorted after consumer use in order to be reused. Two products were assessed: a cotton T-shirt and a pair of polyester (65%)/cotton (35%) trousers. The functional unit was 100 garments in the use stage.

Results

Based on the survey result and the methodology applied, the purchase of 100 second-hand garments would save between 60 and 85 new garments dependent of the place of reuse. Based on information about the second-hand clothing activities conducted by Humana People to People in Sweden and Estonia, it was assumed that over 100 collected items 60 would be reused, 30 recycled in other ways, and ten go to final disposal. Using these inputs, the LCA showed that the collection, processing, and transport of second-hand clothing has insignificant impacts on the environment in comparison to the savings that are achieved by replacing virgin clothing. The reduction of impacts resulting from collecting 100 garments for reuse range from 14% decrease of global warming for the cotton T-shirt to 45% reduction of human toxicity for the polyester/cotton trousers.

Discussion

The approach applied is a fair way of establishing the net benefits from introducing clothes reuse. Indeed, it enables to take into consideration all the activities connected to reusing clothes, including, for instance, recycling and disposal of the collected clothes not suitable for reuse. In addition, the routes followed by the collected clothes have been determined based on real figures. A main assumption concerns the estimation of avoided production of new clothes brought by clothes reuse. The method used, based on questionnaires, could be further developed but still suggests an approach on an issue that had not been investigated so far.

Conclusions

The results of the study show that clothes reuse can significantly contribute to reducing the environmental burden of clothing.

Recommendations and perspectives

It would be beneficial to apply other methods for estimating the avoided production of new clothes in order to check the validity and reliability of the results obtained in the current study. Such further work could include the possible difference in the lifetime of second-hand clothes compared to new clothes.

Keywords

Clothes reuse Clothing Environmental design of industrial products (EDIP) methodology Environmental benefits Reusing clothes Second-hand clothes (SHC) Second-hand shops 

References

  1. Allwood J, Laursen SE, Malvido de Rodriguez C, Bocken N (2006). Well dressed? The present and future sustainability of clothing and textiles in the United Kingdom. University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing. Available at http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/sustainability/. Accessed Feb 13, 2008.
  2. Baden S, Barber C (2005) The impact of the second-hand clothing trade on developing countries. Oxfam IntGoogle Scholar
  3. EDIPTEX (2007) Environmental assessment of textiles. Danish Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Protection AgencyGoogle Scholar
  4. EIPRO (2006) Environmental impact of products. Analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the final consumption of the EU-25. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological StudiesGoogle Scholar
  5. ERM (2002a) Streamlined life cycle assessment of textile recycling. Report completed for the Salvation Army Trading Company Ltd by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) LtdGoogle Scholar
  6. ERM (2002b) Streamlined life cycle assessment of two Marks & Spencer plc apparel products. Report completed for Marks & Spencer by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) LtdGoogle Scholar
  7. Farrant L (2008) Environmental benefits from reusing clothes. Master Thesis at the Technical University of DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  8. Fenger C (2007) Personal communication with Christian Fenger, general manager of The Gaia Movement in SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  9. Fields S (2004) The beneficial nature of the second-hand clothing trade in Sub-Saharan AfricaGoogle Scholar
  10. Gram-Hanssen K (2008) Understanding everyday routines of energy consumption. Chapter 1: heat comfort and practice theory. Aalborg University. Danish Building Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  11. Hansen K (2004) Helping or hindering? Controversies around the international second-hand trading trade. Anthropol Today 20(4):3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hansen J (2008) Personal communication with John Hansen from the Danish Technological InstituteGoogle Scholar
  13. Hauschild M (2007) Lecture slides on human toxicity and ecotoxicity. Master course Life Cycle Assessment of Products and Systems. Technical University of DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  14. Nakano Y (2006) Perception towards clothes with recycled content and environmental awareness: the development of end markets. Centre for Design Research, Northumbria University, UKGoogle Scholar
  15. Oakdene Hollins Ltd, Salvation Army Trading Company Ltd & Nonwovens Innovation & Research Institute Ltd (2006) Recycling of Low Grade Clothing WasteGoogle Scholar
  16. Piibeleht P (2008) Personal communication with Pille Piibeleht, manager of Humana’s sorting center in Tallinn, EstoniaGoogle Scholar
  17. Reckwitz A (2002) Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing. Eur J Soc Theory 5(2):245–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schatzki TR (2002) The site of the social. A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania State University PressGoogle Scholar
  19. Wenzel H, Hauschild MZ, Alting L (1997) Environmental assessment of products. Vol. 1: methodology, tools and case studies in product development. Kluwer, Hingham, MA, USA (ISBN 0 412 80800 5)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Farrant
    • 1
  • Stig Irving Olsen
    • 1
  • Arne Wangel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management Engineering (DTU-MAN)Technical University of DenmarkKgs. LyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations