<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Functional clothing, an overlooked source of persistent textile fibers in the global microplastic pollution

Ya Gao, Feng Ning, Hui Wang, Jie Han, Eric Lichtfouse

► To cite this version:

Ya Gao, Feng Ning, Hui Wang, Jie Han, Eric Lichtfouse. Functional clothing, an overlooked source of persistent textile fibers in the global microplastic pollution. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 2025, 23, pp.915-921. 10.1007/s10311-024-01796-2. hal-04864838

HAL Id: hal-04864838

https://hal.science/hal-04864838v1

Submitted on 5 Jan 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

Public Domain
# Functional clothing, an overlooked source of persistent textile fibers in the global microplastic pollution

Ya Gao<fnref n="1" /> · Feng Ning<fnref n="1" /> · Hui Wang<fnref n="2" />,<fnref n="3" /> Ⓓ Jie Han<fnref n="1" /> Ⓓ · Eric Lichtfouse<fnref n="2" /> Ⓓ

Millions of microplastics are produced in one washing machine cycle, and laundry is a major contributor of microfibers in the oceans. Here we discuss microplastic pollution with focus on textile shedding by functional clothing, the influence of plastic properties and washing conditions, the incomplete removal of microfibers by sewage treatment plants, the role of some microfibers as potential chemical sinks for other contaminants, and other under-investigated scenarios of microfiber shedding from clothing and textiles.

## Laundry, a major contributor to oceanic microplastics

Microplastic pollution has recently become a public health issue and an intensive research field [1–5]. Most microfibers are chemically stable, and as a result, do not degrade easily and stay in the environment for a long time [6]. In 2019, it was estimated that 1,500,000 trillion microfibers occurred in the oceans [7]. Synthetic textiles account for about 73% of all fiber consumption around the globe [8]. Most synthetic textile fibers are petroleum-based polymers that are persistent and slow to degrade in the natural environment [9]. Microfibers released into the marine environment pose a persistent hazard to marine species and birds [7]. Therefore,

knowledge on the sources of microplastics is needed to abate their transfer to the environment.

Microplastics originate from a wide range of sources [10–12]. In particular, microfibers shed from machine laundering of textiles are a major source of water contamination [13–16]. Indeed, over one-third of the microplastics released into the oceans comes from the debris shed from synthetic textiles during machine washing [17]. By estimates, the laundry of synthetic textiles generates more than 500,000 tonnes of primary microplastics into the oceans per year [17]. About 90% of primary microplastics in oceans, i.e., plastics that are intentionally manufactured in sizes smaller than 5 mm, are microfibers [18, 19].

## 18 Million microfibers produced in one washing cycle

Shedding of common synthetic textiles during machine laundering has been well studied, revealing that substantial amounts of microfibers were produced and ended up in washing machine effluents [18, 20, 21]. An average amount of 68 mg microplastics per cubic meter are discharged in wastewater by household washing machines, most of which in the form of microfibers and micro-sized fragments [22]. Napper and Thompson reported that about 700,000 microfibers were released within one washing cycle using a 6-kg front load washing machine [23]. Later, Galvao et al. reported the release of 18 million microfibers from an 8-kg front load washing machine with an average weight of 3.85-kg washing in one wash cycle [24]. Kärkkäinen and Sillanpää found that during the first wash, microfibers shed from testing fabrics ranged between 0.1 and 6.3 million pieces per kilogram of washing effluent, and the shedding continued during the tumble drying on a scale of 10 to 1,700 mg per kilogram [25]. The shedding intensity diminished after the initial cycle, and then the release of microfibers decreased

<footnote>☒ Jie Han
jiehan@xjtu.edu.cn</footnote>

<footnote>☑ Eric Lichtfouse
eric.lichtfouse@icloud.com</footnote>

<footnote n="1">¹ School of Human Settlements and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² State Key Laboratory of Multiphase Flow in Power Engineering, International Research Center for Renewable Energy, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Donghua University, Shanghai 201620, People’s Republic of China</footnote>
sequentially as the wash-and-drying continued on the same fabrics.

## Microfiber shedding depends on washing conditions

Synthetic textiles display different shedding dynamics under different conditions of machine washing. For instance, the use of fabric softeners reduces the shedding of microfibers [26]. By contrast, longer washing cycles, elevated water temperatures, and larger volumes of washing water could intensify the shedding of microfibers from synthetic textiles [27]. In addition, fabric textures, e.g., fleece versus woven fabrics, is an important attribute that strongly affects the microfiber shedding dynamics during machine laundering [16, 28].

## Incomplete microfiber removal by sewage treatment plants

Microfibers shed from machine laundering are discharged into sewers and eventually to municipal sewage treatment plants, where the removal of microfibers varies [29–31]. Most microfibers removed from raw influents are transferred to the sewage sludge [32, 33]. The sewage sludge is then disposed of into municipal landfills after dewatering or applied to land as biosolids after stabilization [15, 34]. While the removal rate of microfibers is generally high, e.g., over 90% in some sewage treatment plants, the quantities of microfibers remaining in the treated effluents are still elevated, which are then discharged into receiving water bodies on a continuous basis [35, 36]. Since synthetic microfibers are very slow to degrade in aquatic environments or during sewage sludge stabilization, they can accumulate in the aquatic and terrestrial environmental compartments over time [6, 37, 38].

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** As consumers' demand grows for comfort garments and functional apparel, synthetic textiles such as Spandex, Gore-Tex, and neoprene have found wide applications in consumers' garments. While data are still lacking, these functional textiles are expected to show vastly different shedding characteristics during machine laundering and eventually, different fate in aquatic and terrestrial environments.</figcaption></figure>

Given the significant contribution of microfibers shed from synthetic textiles to the overall release of microplastics, a refined approach is needed to address the shedding dynamics, transport, and fate of these functional microfibers in natural environments.
A wide variety of functional fibers
in the apparel industry

The common synthetic microfibers found in wastewater dis-
charged from machine laundering are polyester, polyamide
(nylon), acrylic, and polyolefins [8, 18]. Besides, synthetic
fabrics comprise a wide variety of functional fibers used in
the modern apparel industry, such as expanded polytetra-
fluoroethylene (ePTFE) in Gore-Tex fabrics, neoprene, and
several flame-retarding textile fibers. Their unique chemistry
and structure influence their shedding during machine laun-
dering and their fate in the environment (Fig. 1).

Enhanced fibers are chemically treated, blended, and nanotechnology-enabled composite textile fibers that have specific or enhanced properties to meet the consumers' ever-growing demand. These enhanced fibers are marketed as value-added products, such as nano-silver antimicrobial fibers, heat-retaining fibers, antistatic no-shock fibers, and flame-retarding fibers [39-43]. Here we will focus on pristine fibers, namely, synthetic fibers that are chemically distinct from those commonly used in the apparel industry and not commonly reported in the microplastic research domain [15, 18, 44].

Spandex, Gore-Tex, eVent, and neoprene are functional fibers of high popularity in consumers' garments and functional apparel (Table 1). Spandex, also known as Elastane or Lycra, is a segmented polyurethane made up by alternating rigid urea and soft ether or ester segments. These segments are formed by the reaction of diisocyanates with a polymerized diol, e.g., a polyether or polyester diol. A distinct feature of Spandex is its excellent elasticity which allows those fibers to stretch up to 4–8 times its normal

length [45]. Owing to its high elasticity, good breathability, and moderate moisture-wicking abilities, Spandex has found extremely wide applications in consumers' garments such as skinny jeans, leggings, socks, underwear, and a wide range of athletic wear, e.g., yoga pants and swim suits [45, 46].

Gore-Tex is another popular functional fabric that is widely used in outdoor apparel and sportswear, e.g., rain shells, winter jackets, and cycling wear. Gore-Tex is made by heating and rapidly stretching blocks of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) to form a thin filament [49]. Under the microscope, Gore-Tex is an expanded, highly porous form of PTFE, which makes the fabrics waterproof and at the same time, breathable [53–55]. Gore-Tex is commonly sewn underneath the uppermost layers of garments to provide them with outstanding waterproof, breathable, and windproof performance [49]. Like Gore-Tex, eVent is also made by expanded PTFE with similar microscopic structures. This fabric has a proprietary Direct Venting technology and is more breathable, albeit less durable, than Gore-Tex [50]. In comparison with Gore-Tex, eVent is less prone to overheating, making it a good alternative for comfort-oriented outdoor wear [50].

Neoprene, also known as the scuba fabric, is often used in wetsuits as the name suggests. This synthetic fabric is stretched into textile fibers from chloroprene, has high stretchability and heat retention abilities, and is entirely waterproof [52]. These attributes make Neoprene ideal for making wetsuits to insulate against wet and cold environments.

Some specialty textile fibers are mainly used in occupa-
tional settings. For instance, Nomex and Kevlar are known
for their high heat resistance. They belong to aramid fibers
which have intrinsic thermal and chemical resistance, with

<table><caption>**Table 1** The main types of machine-washable functional textiles used in consumers' garments [47–52]</caption>
   <thead>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Commercial name
     </td>
     <td>
      Chemical composition
     </td>
     <td>
      Main attribute
     </td>
     <td>
      Prone to pilling
     </td>
     <td>
      Annual production (tonnes)
     </td>
     <td>
      Types of textiles made
     </td>
    </tr>
   </thead>
   <tbody>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Spandex, also known as Elastane or Lycra
     </td>
     <td>
      Urea-polyether copolymer, also available as urea-polyester copolymer
     </td>
     <td>
      Exceptionally high stretchability
     </td>
     <td>
      High
     </td>
     <td>
      1.24 million tonnes (2022 global estimate)
     </td>
     <td>
      Athletic wear, yoga pants, skinny jeans, leggings, stretch pants, underwear, socks
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Gore-Tex
     </td>
     <td>
      Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene
     </td>
     <td>
      Waterproof, breathable, and windproof
     </td>
     <td>
      Low
     </td>
     <td>
      Not available
     </td>
     <td>
      Rain shells, wind jackets, gloves, backpacks, and dry sacks
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      eVent
     </td>
     <td>
      Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene
     </td>
     <td>
      Similar as Gore-Tex but more breathable, i.e., vents moisture and body heat more easily
     </td>
     <td>
      Low
     </td>
     <td>
      Not available
     </td>
     <td>
      Similar as Gore-Tex
     </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
     <td>
      Neoprene
     </td>
     <td>
      Polychloroprene
     </td>
     <td>
      Entirely waterproof, high heat retention abilities; high stretchability
     </td>
     <td>
      Moderate
     </td>
     <td>
      0.43 million tonnes (2023 global estimate)
     </td>
     <td>
      Wetsuits, swimsuits, sportswear, sports bras
     </td>
    </tr>
   </tbody>
  </table>
high impact resistance, good toughness, and low mate-
rial densities [56, 57]. They are widely used in military,
aerospace, and firefighting applications, as well as other
types of protective clothing in hostile environments. A
similar class of specialty fibers is the polyimide fibers,
e.g., P84® manufactured by Evonik Industries, which are
strong, chemical-resistant, flexible, and fire-proof. With a
limit oxygen index (LOI) of 38%, polyimide woven fabrics
can withstand temperatures up to 300 °C, while still offer-
ing good strength and comfort of wearing. These fabrics
are mainly used in protective clothing for armored forces,
racing suits, flight suits, and firefighters' suits, hood cov-
ers, and gloves.

Unknown shedding characteristics
and environmental fate

While many functional fabrics bearing remarkable
properties have been produced by the apparel and
sportswear industry, their shedding and fate in the
environment is poorly understood. Spandex and Neoprene,
for instance, are prone to pilling, which means they can
shed microfibers or debris more easily during machine
washing. Although Gore-Tex and eVent fabrics are
oleophobic and extremely chemical-resistant, they are
prone to abrasion and can be easily damaged by abrasive
substances or objects [58].

Functional fibers shed during machine washing may enter the soil and water environments. In water, they may undergo photolysis, hydrolysis, and microbial degradation. Within the same Elastane family, the polyester-type Elastane is easily hydrolyzed, whereas the polyether-type Elastane is resistant to hydrolysis [59]. The latter is also resistant to microbial degradation but susceptible to degradation by ultraviolet light [60, 61]. Spandex fibers can be degraded in municipal drinking water treatment plants because hypochlorous acid, which is used for water disinfection, can break the urethane links between the rigid and soft segments [62].

Neoprene is slightly soluble in water, difficult
to hydrolyze, hardly biodegradable, and thus can
accumulate in waterways [63, 64]. Fluoropolymers are
extremely persistent, hydrophobic, and oleophobic in the
environment owing to their high chemical, photochemical,
hydrolytic, and biological stability [65]. As a consequence,
garments made with Gore-Tex or eVent fabrics, and the
debris shed from them during machine laundering, can
remain in the environment for a very long time after
disposal. Noteworthy, in order to maintain breathability,
Gore-Tex and eVent fabrics need regular treatment with
durable water repellents [49, 50]. Without the treatment,
garments made with these fabrics become less breathable

and more prone to overheating [49, 66]. However, these
repellents contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS), a class of organofluorine compounds that have
been under intense scrutiny for their persistence and
toxicities [67]. Upon washing, these substances may enter
the waterways along with the debris shed from repellent-
treated fabrics [68].

Chemical sinks

Microplastics are chemical sinks because they can adsorb other contaminants on their surface [69]. For instance, the ether-type Spandex, which shares the macromolecular structure as ether-type polyurethane foam, is a suspected absorptive sink of lipophilic Lewis acids in aquatic environments, a characteristic behavior attributed to its nucleophilic and highly flexible ether segments [70, 71]. This class of chemicals encompasses a large variety of priority substances, many of which are under regulatory reviews for their documented adverse effects at low concentrations [72–74]. Aliphatic polyamides, i.e., nylons, which represent a major group of common textile fibers, also showed this behavior due to the presence of free amide groups within the amorphous domains of their semicrystalline polymer structures [75–77]. Petroleum-based elastomers, i.e., synthetic rubbers such as polychloroprene, the polymer of the neoprene fabric, are strong candidates of absorptive sinks for hydrophobic organic compounds in aquatic environments [15, 78].

Overall, machine washing is a complex process inducing
physical and chemical alteration of fibers, under the influence
of abrasion, water temperature, and detergents. The shedding
depends on textile and fiber properties. For instance, area
density, fabric structure (knit or woven), tightness of the
yarn, age of the fabric, yarn length, width, and twist, and
the finishing and cutting of the fabric change the microfiber
shedding dynamics [16, 18, 79, 80]. These attributes should
be taken into account to assess the shedding characteristics
of functional fabrics during machine laundering, and their
shedding dynamics should be explored in specific washing
environments under real-world scenarios.

Inhalable fibers and life cycle assessment

Both machine laundering and tumble drying are major
pathways for the release of persistent textile microfibers
into the environment. While they are the most extensively
studied routes of environmental release, they are not the
sole contributors [11, 15, 16, 18, 20]. In fact, fibers are
constantly shed from clothing and textiles due to abrasions
during their wear and use, which can linger in air and
accumulate in indoor dust [79, 81]. The manufacturing
process also releases microfibers into the environment,
including the ambient air, posing inhalation risks to workers
and residents nearby [21, 79, 82]. Lastly, worn-out clothes
that are routinely disposed of often end up in landfills,
completing their life cycle, although their "second life" in
the environment has just begun [83, 84]. To address these
sources of microfiber pollution, it is essential to adopt a
holistic approach by implementing new designs, mandates,
and effective control measures. Starting from January 2025,
all newly manufactured washing machines in France will be
mandated to include a microfiber filter to prevent fibers shed
from textiles from contaminating waterways [85, 86]. Other
countries are expected to follow suit. Actions must also
include reconsideration and innovation in textile design and
manufacturing processes, as well as providing consumers
with guidelines to minimize the shedding and environmental
discharge of microfibers from laundry and drying practices.

**Authors' contribution** YG and FN have equally contributed to write the drafts as co-first authors. HW, JH, EL have revised the manuscript.

**Declaration**

**Competing interests** JH and EL are Editors of Environmental Chemistry Letters.

**References**

1. Botterell ZLR, Beaumont N, Dorrington T, Steinke M, Thompson RC, Lindeque PK (2019) Bioavailability and effects of microplastics on marine zooplankton: a review. Environ Pollut 245:98-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.065

2. Chia RW, Lee JY, Kim H, Jang J (2021) Microplastic pollution in soil and groundwater: a review. Environ Chem Lett 19:4211-4224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-021-01297-6

3. Huang H, Mohamed BA, Li LY (2023) Accumulation and fate of microplastics in soils after application of biosolids on land: a review. Environ Chem Lett 21:1745-1759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01577-3

4. Lei J, Ma Q, Ding X, Pang Y, Liu Q, Wu J, Zhang H, Zhang T (2024) Microplastic environmental behavior and health risk assessment: a review. Environ Chem Lett 22:2913-2941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-024-01771-x

5. Ross PS, Chastain S, Vassilenko E, Etemadifar A, Zimmermann S, Quesnel SA, Eert J, Solomon E, Patankar S, Posacka AM, Williams B (2021) Pervasive distribution of polyester fibres in the Arctic Ocean is driven by Atlantic inputs. Nat Commun 12(1):4-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20347-1

6. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (2019) Annex XV restriction report proposal for a restriction. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/05bd96e3-b969-0a7c-c6d0-441182893720Accessed 10 Oct 2024

7. Mishra S, Rath CC, Das AP (2019) Marine microfiber pollution: a review on present status and future challenges. Mar Pollut Bull 140:188-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.039

8. Xu X, Hou QT, Xue YG, Jian Y, Wang LP (2018) Pollution characteristics and fate of microfibers in the wastewater from textile dyeing wastewater treatment plant. Water Sci Technol 78(10):2046-2054. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2018.476

9. Henry B, Laitala K, Klepp IG (2019) Microfibres from apparel and home textiles: prospects for including microplastics in environmental sustainability assessment. Sci Total Environ 652:483-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.166

10. Li CR, Busquets R, Campos LC (2020) Assessment of microplastics in freshwater systems: a review. Sci Total Environ 707:135578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135578

11. Osman AI, Hosny M, Eltaweil AS, Omar S, Elgarahy AM, Faraghali M, Yap PS, Wu YS, Nagandran S, Batumalaie K, Gopinath SCB, John OD, Sekar M, Saikia T, Karunanithi P, Hatta MHM, Akinyede KA (2023) Microplastic sources, formation, toxicity and remediation: a review. Environ Chem Lett 21:2129-2169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01593-3

12. Wang CH, Zhao J, Xing BS (2021) Environmental source, fate, and toxicity of microplastics. J Hazard Mater 407:124357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124357

13. Barrows APW, Cathey SE, Petersen CW (2018) Marine environment microfiber contamination: global patterns and the diversity of microparticle origins. Environ Pollut 237:275-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.02.062

14. Ramesh K, Chellam PV, Sundaram B (2024) Transport of layered and spherical microplastics in aqueous ecosystems: a review. Environ Chem Lett 22:1221-1255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-024-01730-6

15. Thompson RC, Courtene-Jones W, Boucher J, Pahl S, Raubenheimer K, Koelmans AA (2024) Twenty years of microplastics pollution research—what have we learned? Science 386:eadl2746. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adl2746

16. Vassilenko E, Watkins M, Chastain S, Mertens J, Posacka AM, Patankar S, Ross PS (2021) Domestic laundry and microfiber pollution: exploring fiber shedding from consumer apparel textiles. PLoS ONE 16(7):e0250346. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250346

17. Boucher J, Friot D (2017) Primary microplastics in the oceans: a global evaluation of sources. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2017-002-En.pdf Accessed 10 Oct 2024

18. Gaylarde C, Baptista-Neto JA, da Fonseca EM (2021) Plastic microfibre pollution: how important is clothes’ laundering? Heliyon 7(5):e07105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07105

19. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2024) Microplastics research. https://www.epa.gov/water-research/microplastics-research Accessed 10 Oct 2024

20. Acharya S, Rumi SS, Hu Y, Abidi N (2021) Microfibers from synthetic textiles as a major source of microplastics in the environment: a review. Textile Res J 91:2136-2156. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040517521991244

21. Zhang YQ, Lykaki M, Alrajoula MT, Markiewicz M, Kraas C, Kolbe S, Klinkhammer K, Rabe M, Klauer R, Bendt E, Stolte S (2021) Microplastics from textile origin – emission and reduction measures. Green Chem 23:5247-5271. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1GC01589C

22. Praveena SM, Syahira Asmawi M, Chyi JLY (2021) Microplastic emissions from household washing machines: preliminary findings from Greater Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia). Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(15):18518-18522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10795-z

23. Napper IE, Thompson RC (2016) Release of synthetic microplastic plastic fibres from domestic washing machines: effects of fabric type and washing conditions. Mar Pollut Bull 112(1-2):39-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.025
24. Galvao A, Aleixo M, De Pablo H, Lopes C, Raimundo J (2020) Microplastics in wastewater: microfiber emissions from common household laundry. *Environ Sci Pollut Res* 27(21):26643-26649.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08765-6

25. Kärkkäinen N, Sillanpää M (2021) Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying. *Environ Sci Pollut Res* 28:16253-16263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11988-2

26. Rathinamoorthy R, Raja Balasaraswathi S (2021) Investigations on the impact of handwash and laundry softener on microfiber shedding from polyester textiles. *J Text Ins* 113:1428-1437. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2021.1929709

27. Cotton L, Hayward AS, Lant NJ, Blackburn RS (2020) Improved garment longevity and reduced microfibre release are important sustainability benefits of laundering in colder and quicker washing machine cycles. *Dyes Pigment* 177:108120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dyepeg.2019.108120

28. Raja Balasaraswathi S, Rathinamoorthy R (2021) Effect of fabric properties on microfiber shedding from synthetic textiles. *J Text Inst* 113:789-809. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2021.1906038

29. Crini G, Lacalamita D, Lichtfouse E, Morin-Crini N, Liu C, Wilson LD, Picos-Corrales LA, Akhere MA, Sotiropoulou M, Bradu C, Mongioví C (2024) Characterization and treatment of industrial laundry wastewaters: a review. *Environ Chem Lett* 22:2257-2292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-024-01770-y

30. Moraczewska-Majkut K, Nocon W, Zygula M, Wisniowska E (2020) Quantitative analysis of microplastics in wastewater during selected treatment processes. *Desalin Water Treat* 199:352-361. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2020.26019

31. Pedrotti ML, Petit S, Eyheraguibel B, Kerros ME, Elineau A, Ghiglione JF, Loret JF, Rostan A, Gorsky G (2021) Pollution by anthropogenic microfibers in North-West Mediterranean Sea and efficiency of microfiber removal by a wastewater treatment plant. *Sci Total Environ* 758:144159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144195

32. Hamidian AH, Ozumchelouei EJ, Feizi F, Wu C, Zhang Y, Yang M (2021) A review on the characteristics of microplastics in wastewater treatment plants: a source for toxic chemicals. *J Clean Prod* 295:126480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126480

33. Jiang J, Wang X, Ren H, Cao G, Xie G, Xing D, Liu B (2020) Investigation and fate of microplastics in wastewater and sludge filter cake from a wastewater treatment plant in China. *Sci Total Environ* 746:141378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141378

34. Collivignarelli MC, Abbà A, Frattarola A, Carnevale Miino M, Padovani S, Katsoyiannis I, Torretta V (2019) Legislation for the reuse of biosolids on agricultural land in Europe: overview. *Sustainability* 11:6015. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216015

35. Sun J, Dai X, Wang Q, van Loosdrecht MCM, Ni BJ (2019) Microplastics in wastewater treatment plants: detection, occurrence and removal. *Water Res* 152:21-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.12.050

36. Yang L, Li K, Cui S, Kang Y, An L, Lei K (2019) Removal of microplastics in municipal sewage from China's largest water rec- lamation plant. *Water Res* 155:175-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.046

37. Doucet CV, Labaj AL, Kurek J (2021) Microfiber content in freshwater mussels from rural tributaries of the Saint John River. *Canada Water Air Soil Pollut* 232(1):32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-020-04958-4

38. Koutnik VS, Alkidim S, Leonard J, DePrima F, Cao SQ, Hoek EMV, Mohanty SK (2021) Unaccounted microplastics in wastewater sludge: where do they go? *ACS ES&T Water* 1(5):1086-1097. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.0c00267

39. Ascend (2016) A No-Shock® anti-static fiber. https://www. ascendmaterials.com/brochures/no-shock/ Accessed 10 Oct 2024

40. Simonic B, Klemencic D (2016) Preparation and performance of silver as an antimicrobial agent for textiles: a review. *Text Res J* 86(2):210-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040517515586157

41. Uniqlo (2021) How does HEATTECH clothing actually work? https://www.uniqlo.com/in/en/news/topics/2020121401/ Accessed 10 Oct 2024

42. Zhang S, Horrocks AR (2003) A review of flame retardant poly- propylene fibres. *Prog Polym Sci* 28:1517-1538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2003.09.001

43. Aramid Hpm (2024) Belltron® conducting anti-static fiber. https:// aramid.com/belltron/ Accessed 10 Oct 2024

44. Cesa FS, Turra A, Baruque-Ramos J (2017) Synthetic fibers as microplastics in the marine environment: a review from textile perspective with a focus on domestic washings. *Sci Total Environ* 598:1116-1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.172

45. Senthilkumar M, Anbumani N, Hayavadana J (2011) Elastane fabrics - a tool for stretch applications in sports. *Indian J Fibre Text Tes* 36:300-307

46. Bhat G, Chand S, Yakopson S (2001) Thermal properties of elastic fibers. *Thermochim Acta* 367:161-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0040-6031(00)00673-0

47. Textile Exchange (2023) Materials market report. https://textileexc hange.org/app/uploads/2023/11/Materials-Market-Report-2023. pdf Accessed 10 Oct 2024

48. Sewport (2024) What is Spandex fabric: properties, how it's made and where. https://sewport.com/fabrics-directory/spandex-fab ric Accessed 10 Oct 2024

49. Sewport (2024) What is Gore-Tex fabric: properties, how it's made and where. https://sewport.com/fabrics-directory/gore-tex- fabric Accessed 10 Oct 2024

50. Sewport (2024) What is eVent fabric: properties, how it's made and where. https://sewport.com/fabrics-directory/event-fab ric Accessed 10 Oct 2024

51. Global Information (2024) Neoprene market report by manu- facturing route, grade, application, end-user, and region 2024- 2032. https://www.giiresearch.com/report/imarc1467758-neopr ene-market-report-by-manufacturing-route.html Accessed 10 Oct 2024

52. Sewport (2024) What is Neoprene fabric: properties, how it's made and where. https://sewport.com/fabrics-directory/neopr ene-fabric Accessed 10 Oct 2024

53. Ebnesajjad S (2016) Properties, characteristics, and applications of expanded PTFE (ePTFE) products. Expanded PTFE applica- tions handbook. *William Andrew Publishing, Oxford, pp* 163-170

54. Sabir T (2018) Fibers used for high-performance apparel. *High- performance apparel. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, pp* 7-32

55. Sewport (2024) What is Sympatex fabric: properties, how it's made and where. https://sewport.com/fabrics-directory/sympa tex-fabric Accessed 10 Oct 2024

56. Loos M (2015) Composites. *Carbon nanotube reinforced compos- ites. William Andrew Publishing, Oxford, pp* 37-72

57. Mahbub RF, Ratnapandian S, Wang L, Arnold L (2013) Evalua- tion of comfort properties of coated Kevlar/Wool ballistic fabric. *Adv Mat Res* 821-822(1):342-347. https://doi.org/10.4028/www. scientific.net/AMR.821-822.342

58. Durlon (2023) Pros & cons of ePTFE gasket material. https:// www.durlon.com/wp-content/uploads/ProsConsEPTFE_Durlon- Articles_2023.pdf Accessed 10 Oct 2024

59. Marjo CE, Gatenby S, Rich AM, Gong B, Chee S (2017) ATR- FTIR as a tool for assessing potential for chemical ageing in Span- dex/Lycra (R)/elastane-based fabric collections. *Stud Conserv* 62(6):343-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393630.2016.1198868
60. Aglan H, Calhoun M, Allie L (2008) Effect of UV and hydrothermal aging on the mechanical performance of polyurethane elastomers. J Appl Polym Sci 108:558-564. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.27049

61. Wierckx N, Narancic T, Eberlein C, Wei R, Drzyzga O, Magnin A, Ballerstedt H, Kenny ST, Pollet E, Avérous L, O'Connor KE, Zimmermann W, Heipieper HJ, Prieto A, Jiménez J, Blank LM (2018) Plastic biodegradation: challenges and opportunities. Consequences of microbial interactions with hydrocarbons, oils, and lipids: biodegradation and bioremediation. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1-29

62. Khatua S, Hsieh YL (1997) Chlorine degradation of polyether-based polyurethane. J Polym Sci Pol Chem 35(15):3263-3273. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0518(19971115)35:15%3c3263::AID-POLA20%3e3.0.CO;2-8

63. Kumar A, Kiran AR, Hombalmath M, Mathad M, Rane SS, Patil AY, Kotturshettar BB (2020) Design and analysis of engine mount for biodegradable and non-biodegradable damping materials. J Phys Conf Ser 1706:012182. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1706/1/012182

64. Pagan I (2007) Chloroprene: overview of studies under consideration for the development of an IRIS assessment. Chem-Biol Interact 166(1-3):341-351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbi.2006.12.001

65. Henry BJ, Carlin JP, Hammerschmidt JA, Buck RC, Buxton LW, Fiedler H, Seed J, Hernandez O (2018) A critical review of the application of polymer of low concern and regulatory criteria to fluoropolymers. Integr Environ Assess Manag 14(3):316-334. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4035

66. Gore-Tex (2023) Durable water repellent (DWR). https://www.gore-tex.com/support/care/dwr Accessed 10 Oct 2024

67. Buck RC, Franklin J, Berger U, Conder JM, Cousins IT, de Voogt P, Jensen AA, Kannan K, Mabury SA, van Leeuwen SPJ (2011) Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins. Integr Environ Assess Manag 7(4):513-541. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.258

68. Schellenberger S, Jonsson C, Mellin P, Levenstam OA, Liagkouridis I, Ribbenstedt A, Hanning A-C, Schultes L, Plassmann MM, Persson C, Cousins IT, Benskin JP (2019) Release of side-chain fluorinated polymer-containing microplastic fibers from functional textiles during washing and first estimates of perfluoroalkyl acid emissions. Environ Sci Technol 53(24):14329-14338. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b04165

69. Sharma VK, Ma X, Lichtfouse E, Robert D (2023) Nanoplastics are potentially more dangerous than microplastics. Environ Chem Lett 21:1933-1936. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-022-01539-1

70. Han J, Cao Z, Qiu W, Gao W, Hu J, Xing B (2017) Probing the specificity of polyurethane foam as a 'solid-phase extractant': extractability-governing molecular attributes of lipophilic phenolic compounds. Talanta 172:186-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.05.020

71. Han J, Qiu W, Tiwari S, Bhargava R, Gao W, Xing B (2015) Consumer-grade polyurethane foam functions as a large and selective absorption sink for bisphenol A in aqueous media. J Mater Chem A 3:8870-8881. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5TA00868A

72. European Chemistry Agency (ECHA) (2024) Endocrine disruptor assessment list. https://echa.europa.eu/ed-assessment Accessed 10 Oct 2024

73. European Union (EU) (2024) Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1223/oj Accessed 10 Oct 2024

74. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (2024) CCL 5 Chemical contaminants. https://www.epa.gov/ccl/ccl-5-chemical-contaminants Accessed 10 Oct 2024

75. Han J, Cao Z, Gao W (2013) Remarkable sorption properties of polyamide 12 microspheres for a broad-spectrum antibacterial (triclosan) in water. J Mater Chem A 1:4941-4944. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3TA00090G

76. Han J, Qiu W, Cao Z, Hu JY, Gao W (2013) Adsorption of ethinylestradiol (EE2) on polyamide 612: molecular modeling and effects of water chemistry. Water Res 47:2273-2284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2013.01.046

77. Kohan MI (1995) Nylon plastics handbook. Hanser Publishers, Cincinnati, Ohio

78. Magnér JA, Alsberg TE, Broman D (2010) Evaluation of poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate-co-carbon monoxide) and polydimethylsiloxane for equilibrium sampling of polar organic contaminants in water. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:1874-1880. https://doi.org/10.1897/09-036.1

79. Ramasamy R, Subramanian RB (2021) Synthetic textile and microfiber pollution: a review on mitigation strategies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(31):41596-41611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14763-z

80. Zambrano MC, Pawlak JJ, Daystar J, Ankeny M, Cheng JJ, Vendiatti RA (2019) Microfibers generated from the laundering of cotton, rayon and polyester based fabrics and their aquatic biodegradation. Mar Pollut Bull 142:394-407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.02.062

81. De Falco F, Cocca M, Avella M, Thompson RC (2020) Microfiber release to water, via laundering, and to air, via everyday use: a comparison between polyester clothing with differing textile parameters. Environ Sci Technol 54:32883296. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06892

82. Prata JC (2018) Airborne microplastics: consequences to human health? Environ Pollut 234:115126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.043

83. Wan Y, Chen X, Liu Q, Hu H, Wu C, Xue Q (2022) Informal landfill contributes to the pollution of microplastics in the surrounding environment. Environ Pollut 293:118586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118586

84. Andini E, Bhalode P, Gantert E, Sadula S, Vlachos DG (2024) Chemical recycling of mixed textile waste. Sci Adv 10:eado6827. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ado6827

85. Susnjara N (2021) France the first to introduce mandatory microfibre filters on washing machines from 2025. https://blog.plane.tcare.org/france-microfibre-filters-washing-machines/ Accessed 4 Dec 2024

86. Periyasamy AP (2023) Environmentally friendly approach to the reduction of microplastics during domestic washing: prospects for machine vision in microplastics reduction. Toxics 11:575. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11070575