Did someone say Bamboo is sustainable?
Man-made Cellulosic Fibers and their sustainability issues
Welcome to another issue of The Crisps – your newsletter on anti-greenwashing and honest fashion communication. You can support us by subscribing to a free or pro subscription, liking, sharing, or commenting on our posts.
They are often framed as “sustainable” or “nature-based” fibers and have misled consumers into believing bamboo leggings are the ultimate choice.
With 6.4% of the global fiber market in 2021, Man-made Cellulosic Fibers (MMCFs) make up a rather small percentage of fibers used in textiles.1 But they play an important role in the industry’s sustainability discussion.
So it’s finally time to talk about them and share our insights and thoughts on fabrics like lyocell, modal, and more MMCFs with you.
Man-made Fibers, Man-made Cellulosic Fibers: Let’s get the definitions straight first
Man-made fibers are fibers whose chemical composition, structure, and properties are significantly altered during manufacturing. Unlike natural fibers, which are directly derived from plants and animals, man-made fibers are created through chemical synthesis and are engineered to have specific characteristics.
Man-made fibers can be broadly categorized into two main types: synthetic fibers and regenerated fibers. Synthetic fibers are entirely made from petrochemicals and include polyester, nylon, acrylic, and spandex. Regenerated fibers are derived from natural cellulose, typically wood pulp or cotton linters. This group includes rayons such as viscose, lyocell, modal, cupro, and acetate. They are also called Man-made Cellulosic Fibers (MMCFs).2
We will focus on MMCFs in this issue.
Natural Fibers vs. MMCFs
Even though MMCFs are often marketed as “natural” fibers, there are important differences between the fiber groups. Let’s get into it in more detail:
Origin
Natural fibers are derived directly from plants or animals. This group includes cotton, linen, hemp, wool (animal-based), and silk (animal-based).
MMCFs are produced from natural cellulose, such as wood pulp from eucalyptus, spruce, and pine trees, but can also be made from cotton or bamboo. This group includes rayons such as viscose, lyocell, modal, cupro and acetate.
Production Process
Natural fibers are obtained through mechanical processing such as spinning and require chemical processing. Processing chemicals are used in farming and in production stages — for example in dyeing and finishing.
MMCFs involve a more complex chemical process in processing. The cellulose is dissolved and regenerated with the help of chemical input before it’s spun into yarns.
Properties
Natural fibers are often valued for their comfort and breathability. However, they can be less durable and more susceptible to damage from elements like water and sunlight.
MMCFs combine some of the favorable properties of both natural and synthetic fibers. They are generally smooth, absorbent, and can be engineered to enhance durability and versatility.3
In the sourcing and production of MMCFs, there are several environmental and social issues. But before we get into them, let’s look at some numbers. According to CanopyPlanet:
More than 150 million trees are logged every year and turned into cellulosic fabric.
Dissolving pulp (the base material for rayon/viscose) wastes approximately 70% of the tree and is a chemically intensive manufacturing process.
Less than 20 percent of the world’s ancient forests remain in intact tracts large enough to maintain biological diversity.4
Deforestation & Biodiversity Loss
MMCFs are mostly sourced from wood pulp which leads to deforestation and biodiversity loss in several regions around the world. Countries like Indonesia and Malaysia are among the major producers. Brazil and other South American countries also contribute to deforestation for cellulose production, particularly in the Amazon rainforest and the Cerrado biome. The same goes for North American countries such as the USA and Canada which are logging forests for wood pulp production in their hemisphere. The short-term economic benefit destroys long-term sustainability.
Through deforestation critical habitats and species diversity are lost, impacting ecosystems and contributing to global biodiversity decline. Stored carbon gets released into the atmosphere as forests act as carbon sinks.
But there are not just environmental concerns caused by deforestation. Deforestation destroys people’s livelihoods. Local water cycles disrupt and the soil erodes. Both affect the water quality and availability for communities downstream. Indigenous peoples face displacement and lose traditional lands.
According to the World Bank, 25% of the global population — 1.6 billion people — depends on forests for their survival and livelihood. To address deforestation for fiber production and promote sustainable land management practices government regulations and international agreements are necessary.5 Is the EU Deforestation Regulation the solution? We will get into it in more detail in a bit.
Chemical Use
Pulp production and the conversion of pulp into fiber typically require significant amounts of acid and toxic chemicals, leading to air and water pollution if they are not managed correctly.
Air emissions from these processes can include sulfur, nitrogen oxides, carbon disulfide, and hydrogen sulfide. Chlorine compounds used in bleaching, as well as VOCs (volatile organic compounds) from outdoor wood chip storage, can also be released into the atmosphere.
Water Pollution
Also waterways are affected by the production of MMCFs. Water emissions may contain nitrates, phosphates, iron, zinc, oil, grease, and often have low dissolved oxygen levels, threatening aquatic life. Effluent from bleach plants contains AOX6 and chlorate, which are toxic to the aquatic environment. Chlorine bleaching can also produce dioxins, persistent organic pollutants that are highly toxic to humans and the environment. That’s why a responsible treatment of chemicals is essential for MMCFs.
Criticism the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) faces
The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) aims to reduce the EU's consumption-driven deforestation by ensuring that products entering its market do not contribute to deforestation or forest degradation. It promotes sustainable land management practices and tries to reduce the environmental and social impacts of deforestation through establishing a legal framework for combating deforestation and requiring companies to conduct due diligence in their supply chains to ensure that imported products comply with sustainability standards.
It covers seven commodities (cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, rubber, soya, and wood), as well as many derived products listed in the annex to the regulation (for example meat products, leather, chocolate, coffee, palm nuts, palm oil derivatives, glycerol, natural rubber products, soybeans, soy-bean flour and oil).
But the EUDR faces criticism for not effectively addressing the broader issue of deforestation. It’s also criticized for compliance with the regulation across complex and global supply chains is challenging to enforce. Monitoring and verifying the origin and sustainability of imported products may be difficult. Plus, there are concerns companies may exploit loopholes to circumvent the regulation's requirements. Weak enforcement mechanisms could undermine its effectiveness.
Another criticism the EUDR faces is the fact that stringent regulations may disproportionately burden origin countries in the Global South that rely on commodity exports for economic growth.
You might wonder, why we’re not discussing forest stewardship certifications like FSC or PEFC in this issue. Both topics are huge and would require an entire issue. We’d love to get into them soon but what about you? Interested?
Next week, we will get into the (misleading) communication of MMCFs. Among others, we will look at TENCEL (TM) in more detail.
Best,
Tanita & Lavinia
🔹 Learned something in this issue? Share The Crisps with your friends and colleagues.
🔹 Like our content? Support our work with a paid subscription.
🔹 Got feedback or topics we should cover? Send us an email to thecrisps@substack.com
Disclaimer: The content and opinions presented in The Crisps newsletter are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal, ethical, or professional advice. The Crisps does not endorse any specific brands or products mentioned in its content.
Textile Exchange. (n.d.). Man-made cellulosics. Retrieved from https://textileexchange.org/manmade-cellulosics/
Periyasamy, A. P., & Militky, J. (2020). Sustainability in regenerated textile fibers. Sustainability in the Textile and Apparel Industries: Sourcing Synthetic and Novel Alternative Raw Materials, 63-95.
Ryszard M, K., Maria, M. T., Malgorzata, M., & Jorge, B. B. (2012). Future of natural fibers, their coexistence and competition with man-made fibers in 21st century. Molecular Crystals and Liquid Crystals, 556(1), 200-222.
Canopy. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://canopyplanet.org/
United Nations. (2021). Global Forest Goals Report 2021. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/esa/forests/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Global-Forest-Goals-Report-2021.pdf
AOX stands for Adsorbable Organic Halides. It is a measure used in environmental chemistry to quantify the amount of halogenated organic compounds in water, particularly those that can be adsorbed onto activated carbon. These compounds often originate from industrial processes, such as the production of paper and textiles, and can include substances like chlorine, bromine, and iodine. Monitoring AOX levels is important for assessing water pollution and the effectiveness of wastewater treatment processes.