increasing open loop recycling, increasing reuse and a shift in the market to a larger ... Where the energy use impacts
Final Report
A Carbon Footprint for UK Clothing and Opportunities for Savings
July 2012
1
WRAP’s vision is a world without waste, where resources are used sustainably. We work with businesses, individuals and communities to help them reap the benefits of reducing waste, developing sustainable products and using resources in an efficient way. Find out more at www.wrap.org.uk
Written by: Bernie Thomas, Matt Fishwick, James Joyce and Anton van Santen Environmental Resources Management Limited (ERM)
Front cover photography: [Add description or title of image.]
While we have tried to make sure this report is accurate, we cannot accept responsibility or be held legally responsible for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. This material is copyrighted. You can copy it free of charge as long as the material is accurate and not used in a misleading context. You must identify the source of the material and acknowledge our copyright. You must not use material to endorse or suggest we have endorsed a commercial product or service. For more details please see our terms and conditions on our website at www.wrap.org.uk
Document reference: [eg WRAP, 2006, Report Name (WRAP Project TYR009-19. Report prepared by…..Banbury, WRAP]
2
0.0
Executive summary Environmental Resources Management Limited (ERM) was commissioned by WRAP to conduct a life cycle carbon footprint study for UK clothing. The objective of the research was to provide WRAP with an overview of the carbon impacts of UK clothing through the clothing life cycle, identifying the most significant contributions to the carbon footprint (ie the ‘hotspots’), and quantifying opportunities for carbon footprint reduction.
Estimated Current Carbon Footprint for UK Clothing A strategic-level carbon footprint study was undertaken based on published data and information about UK clothing. UK Clothing is defined as all clothing, both new and existing, in use in the UK over the period of one year. The analysis covers both clothing manufactured and used in the UK and clothing manufactured abroad and used in the UK. The datum is 2009, as the year for which the most recent data are available. The study’s results present the annual climate change impact associated with UK clothing, in terms of its carbon footprint. This includes the impacts associated with the quantity of clothes that are produced for the UK and consumed and disposed of each year, as well as the impacts associated with clothing that is actively worn and cleaned each year (approximately 1.1 million tonnes of new clothing is consumed in the UK each year, ~2.5 million tonnes is in active use. Note that this is greater than the annual consumption of clothing, because clothes last for more than one year).
Figure 1 presents the baseline (current) carbon footprint estimate for all clothing in use in the UK in 2009. The results are broken down by both life cycle stage and fibre type to show their relative contributions to the total footprint. The following conclusions can be drawn from the results.
The total annual carbon footprint of all garments, both new and existing, in use in the UK in 2009 (i.e. the volume consumed, and the actively worn quantity) is approximately 38 million tonnes of CO2e (~0.6 tonnes per person per year). Because the majority of clothing is manufactured outside the UK, it is estimated that ~32% occurs within the UK (contributing to the UK’s direct carbon footprint) and 68% occurs abroad. Based on this estimate, the direct impact of clothing in the UK can be estimated to be ~12 million tonnes of CO2e. Note that this baseline analysis does not examine the effect of uncertainties, which are considered further in the sensitivity analysis section of the report (Section 4.6).
To put this carbon footprint of UK clothing into context, the total direct GHG emissions in the UK in 2009 were reported as 566 million tonnes of CO2e (DECC, 2011). It should be noted that this total for the UK does not include GHG emissions associated with imported goods or services or international travel. Therefore, the direct carbon footprint of clothing contributes approximately 2% to the UK’s total direct carbon footprint.
The carbon footprint of new garments ONLY, in use in the UK in 2009, can also be calculated by dividing the carbon footprint of both new and existing clothing by its anticipated lifetime. This figure is approximately 17 million tonnes of CO2e.
The most dominant life cycle stage is fabric production (comprising weaving/knitting etc. and treatment of fabric), representing 33% of total life cycle GHG impacts.
The carbon footprint of a tonne of garments, both new and existing, in use in the UK in 2009 ranges from around 15 to 46 tonnes CO2e, depending on the fibre type of the garment.
The carbon footprint of each garment, both new and existing, in use in the UK in 2009 ranges from around 1 to 17 kg CO2e.
The per person carbon footprint of all garments, both new and existing, in use in the UK in 2009 is around 0.6 tonnes of CO2e.
3
Figure 1: Carbon footprint all clothing in use in the UK in 2009, whether manufactured in or imported to the UK, represented as a total for the UK, broken down by life cycle stage and fibre type
4
Savings Achieved in the Central scenario The study also quantifies the potential effect of a number of example impact reduction measures relative to the estimated baseline footprint. Reduction measures are presented for a realistic ‘Central’ future reduction scenario, and also an aspirational ‘What If?’ reduction scenario. Options for reduction are considered across the life cycle (eg eco-efficiency in the manufacture, retail and distribution of clothing, washing at lower temperatures, increasing load size, more reuse etc.).
Table 1 and Figure 2 below present the estimated carbon saving from the baseline footprint for 2009. Baseline (t CO2e)
Reduction (t CO2e)
Reduction %
Eco-efficiency across supply chain (production, distribution and retail) Central scenario - 5% reduction for all fibres across supply chain
38,175,293
1,563,219
-4.1%
Design for Durability (and product lifetime optimisation) - Central scenario - 10% longer lifetime of clothing
38,175,293
2,941,203
-7.7%
Shift in market to higher proportion of synthetic fibres - Central scenario replace 10% of cotton with 50:50 polycotton. [Data exclude in-use savings]
38,175,293
164,150
-0.4%
Clean clothing less - Central scenario washes per year reduced by 10%
38,175,293
989,905
-2.6%
Wash at lower temperature - Central scenario - weighted average wash temperature of 39.3C
38,175,293
549,604
-1.4%
Increase size of washing and drying loads - Central scenario - load increases to 3.7kg
38,175,293
531,538
-1.4%
Use the tumble dryer less - Central scenario - 30% reduction in tumble dryer use in summer
38,175,293
430,367
-1.1%
Dispose less - reuse more - Central scenario – 15.4% of clothing ultimately reused in UK
38,175,293
272,063
-0.7%
Start closed loop recycling of synthetic fibres - Central scenario - 5% of all clothing is recycled (closed loop)
38,175,293
352,144
-0.9%
Dispose less - recycle more (open loop) Central scenario - 38% of all clothing is recycled open loop
38,175,293
195,729
-0.5%
7,989,921
-20.9%
Reduction measure
Cumulative reduction
Table 1: Savings achieved by each reduction measure of the Central scenario
5
Figure 2: Savings achieved by each reduction measure of the Central scenario
From the estimates presented in Table 1 and Figure 2, the following points are evident.
A potential 21% reduction in the carbon footprint of UK clothing would occur if all reduction measures considered for the Central scenario were achieved.
The largest carbon footprint reductions are achieved by extending product lifetime (8%), ecoefficiency across the supply chain (4% reduction) and washing clothing less (3% reduction).
As calculated, reduction measures resulting in minimal reductions in carbon footprint include increasing open loop recycling, increasing reuse and a shift in the market to a larger proportion of synthetic fibres. [Note: the term ‘synthetics’ is used here to include man-made fibres such as viscose.]
Table 2 presents all the reduction measures considered in order of effectiveness for the Central scenario. Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Reduction Measure
Stakeholder
Design for Durability (and Product lifetime optimisation) - central scenario - 10% longer lifetime of clothing Eco efficiency across supply chain (production, distribution and retail) - central scenario - 5% reduction for all fibres across supply chain
Manufacturer/ consumer
Clean clothing less - central scenario - Washes per year reduced by 10% Wash at lower temperature - central scenario - weighted average wash temperature of 39.3C
Consumer
Increase size of washing and drying loads - central scenario - load increases to 3.7kg Use the tumble dryer less - central scenario - 30% reduction in tumble dryer use in summer Start closed loop recycling of synthetic fibres - central scenario - 5% of all clothing is recycled (closed loop)
Consumer
Dispose less - reuse more - central scenario - 15.4% of clothing reused in the UK Dispose less - recycle more (open loop) - central scenario - 19.5% of all clothing is recycled open loop Shift in market to higher proportion of synthetic fibres - central scenario - Replace 10% of cotton with 50:50 poly-cotton
Consumer
Manufacturer
Consumer
Consumer Consumer
Consumer Manufacturer/ consumer
Table 2: Reduction measures of the Central scenario in order of effectiveness
6
Savings Achieved in the What If? Scenario Figure 3 presents the potential estimated carbon saving from the baseline generated by each reduction measure in a more ambitious ‘What If?’ scenario.
Figure 3: Savings achieved by each reduction measure of the ‘What If?’ scenario
The estimated reductions presented in Figure 3 indicate the following.
A 71% reduction in the carbon footprint of UK clothing will occur if all reduction measures considered by the ‘What If?’ scenario are achieved.
The largest carbon footprint reductions are achieved by extending product lifetime (27% reduction), eco-efficiencies across the supply chain (24% reduction) and washing less (4% reduction).
Reduction measures resulting in the smallest reductions in carbon footprint include increasing closed loop recycling, increasing open loop recycling and a shift to a higher proportion of synthetics.
In addition to the reduction measures presented in the above scenarios, a series of consumer interventions were analysed in the study to examine their influence on carbon footprint results. The impact of ten post-sale in-use interventions was examined through a change in the behaviour of 10% of the UK population under each measure). The purpose of this exercise was to compare the effectiveness of a variety of measures to change consumer behaviour during the use phase once the clothing has been purchased. Consistent with the findings of the main scenarios, the in-use interventions resulting in the greatest savings are a shift towards behaviours that lead to an increase in clothing lifetime by one year and cleaning clothing less, followed by less reliance on tumble drying. The report also presents a series of sensitivity analyses to investigate the study’s key uncertainties. These examine the sensitivity of the results and conclusions to a change in a particular assumption or data point. The sensitivity analyses undertaken were: the influence of a future decarbonised electricity grid on the impact of the use phase; the influence of fibre type on washing and drying impacts; the influence of product lifetime on results; the influence of washing frequency on results; and the influence of UK fibre mix on results. The findings of these analyses indicate the following.
Future ‘decarbonisation’ of UK electricity will decrease the direct carbon footprint associated with the cleaning of clothing. The significance of the use phase (primarily washing and drying)
7
impacts, relative to upstream life cycle stages (raw materials, manufacture and distribution, retail) and end of life impacts will reduce.
Where the energy use impacts of tumble drying are allocated to clothing based on the relative drying time of fibre types (rather than by its mass only as they are in the main analysis), the carbon footprint increases from the baseline for natural fibres (by ~2-5%) and decreases for synthetic fibres (by ~3-5%). The total remains the same.
Where loads are mixed and drying energy is based on the slowest drying item of clothing (ie natural fibres), the carbon footprint for each fibre type increases from the baseline. This reflects an increase in the drying time of all fibre types caused by a natural fibre type being present in each load. This is in comparison to a baseline average energy usage where some loads are mixed and some are separated.
When the difference in washing temperature is also considered, the reduction achieved from the shift towards synthetics in both the central and ‘What If?’ scenarios is around a third larger.
The longer the lifetime of clothing (eg from clothing simply being retained in use by the consumer for longer, design for durability, reuse, or from leasing or resale), the lower the carbon footprint (reduced supply chain impacts, primarily) and the shorter the lifetime of clothing that is used, the higher the carbon footprint.
Where it is assumed in the analysis clothing is washed 5 times per kilogram per year, the total carbon footprint is 13% less than that of the main analysis (where it is assumed clothing is washed 9.9 times). The carbon reductions achieved through use phase improvement actions are less and those of non-use phase improvement action are greater. Where it is assumed clothing is washed 15 times per kilogram per year, the total carbon footprint is 13% greater than that of the main analysis carbon footprint. The carbon reductions achieved through use phase improvement actions are greater and those of non-use phase improvement action are less.
The baseline carbon footprint total with an alternative Carbon Trust fibre mix data set for UK clothing consumption is 12% less than the baseline total where the Biointelligence fibre mix data is used. For the ‘What if?’ scenario, the reduction achieved where Carbon Trust fibre mix data is used is 11% less than the reduction achieved where Biointelligence fibre mix data is used. Although absolute reduction values change, the order of improvement actions changes less with the new fibre mix, with the top three and bottom three improvement actions remaining the same with both fibre data. (The Metrics group of the Sustainable Clothing Action
Plan is currently (July 2012) preparing to collate actual UK retailer data on fibre mix and sales volumes, which could allow the footprint analysis to be updated at a later date.)
Conclusions Overall, the total carbon footprint associated with clothing produced for, and in use in, the UK in 2009 is estimated at approximately 38 million tonnes of CO2e (~0.6 tonnes per person per year). Because the majority of UK clothing is manufactured outside the UK, it must be noted that ~32% occurs within the UK and ~68% occurs overseas as a consequence of the garments manufactured for UK consumers. Per tonne of clothing, the footprint ranges from around 15 to 46 tonnes CO2e per year, depending on the fibre type of the garment. To put this carbon footprint of UK clothing into context, the total direct GHG emissions in the UK in 2009 were reported as 566 million tonnes of CO2e (DECC, 2011). It should be noted that this total for the UK does not include GHG emissions associated with imported goods or services or international travel. Therefore, the direct carbon footprint of clothing is approximately 2% of the UK’s total direct carbon footprint.
8
Ten potential options for carbon footprint reduction are presented. According to the study, measures aimed at reducing the impacts associated with the production of clothing (in design and eco-efficiency measures in the supply chain and reuse), and also the use phase (less and better washing and drying by the consumer), show the greatest potential. This is not unexpected, since these life cycle phases currently contribute the greatest impacts. For the reduction measures examined in the Central scenario, the combined effect of the ten measures across the entire life cycle is estimated to be 21%. In the aspirational What If? Scenario, this is increased to an estimated carbon reduction of 71%. However, it should be noted that the study does not examine the practicability of implementing each option, or consider other non-carbon sustainability impacts for these options. It should also be noted that these reductions from the baseline do not include the potential decarbonisation of energy (electricity) production, which will also reduce the carbon footprint of clothing in future. The findings from the study sensitivity analysis indicate that, amongst other factors, the fibre mix of UK clothing affects the magnitude of the footprint and the overall savings achievable, but has less influence on the order of the reduction measures. Overall, the analysis confirms the rationale for encouraging reduction measures at each and every stage of the life cycle, including nudging consumer behaviour towards favourable outcomes. If UK electricity is decarbonised, the sensitivity analysis undertaken for the study indicates sustainable production and consumption measures aimed at reducing the production impacts of clothing will further increase in importance over time, relative to use phase interventions. The study provides an initial analysis into the potential indirect effects on the washing and drying footprint if the market is shifted towards one type of fibre over another. There are uncertainties associated with the findings of this analysis, but it indicates that fibre choice affects the magnitude of impact in the use phase.
9
Contents 0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Executive summary ..................................................................................................................... 3 Estimated Current Carbon Footprint for UK Clothing ........................................................................... 3 Savings Achieved in the Central scenario ........................................................................................... 5 Savings Achieved in the What If? Scenario ......................................................................................... 7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 About this study .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Goal of this Study ................................................................................................................ 1 Project Approach ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Project Scope...................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 System Boundary ................................................................................................................ 2 2.3 Functional Unit .................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Literature Search................................................................................................................. 5 2.5 Carbon Footprint Calculation ................................................................................................ 5 2.6 Reduction Measures ............................................................................................................ 6 2.7 Baseline and Future Scenarios .............................................................................................. 7 2.8 Further In-use Interventions ................................................................................................ 7 2.9 Sensitivity Analyses ............................................................................................................. 7 2.10 Excel Model ........................................................................................................................ 7 Life Cycle Inventory ................................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Life cycle Description ......................................................................................................... 10 3.1.1 Production of Fibre ................................................................................................ 10 3.1.2 Production of Yarn ................................................................................................ 10 3.1.3 Production of Fabric .............................................................................................. 10 3.1.4 Treatment of Fabric .............................................................................................. 11 3.1.5 Production of Garments ......................................................................................... 11 3.1.6 Distribution and Retail ........................................................................................... 11 3.1.7 Use...................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.8 End of Life ........................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Key Data Sources .............................................................................................................. 13 3.3 Key Data – All Life cycle Stages .......................................................................................... 18 3.4 Key Data - Production of Fibre, Yarn, Fabric and Garments ................................................... 19 3.5 Key Data - Distribution and Retail ....................................................................................... 21 3.6 Key Data – Use ................................................................................................................. 22 3.6.1 Washing............................................................................................................... 22 3.6.2 Drying ................................................................................................................. 23 3.6.3 Ironing................................................................................................................. 23 3.7 Key Data - End of Life........................................................................................................ 24 3.8 Reduction Measures .......................................................................................................... 26 3.9 Baseline and Future Scenarios ............................................................................................ 26 3.10 Data Quality ..................................................................................................................... 29 Impact Assessment ................................................................................................................... 31 4.1 Baseline Scenario .............................................................................................................. 31 4.1.1 Carbon Footprint of all Clothing in Use in the UK in 2009, whether manufactured in or imported to the UK – UK Total ............................................................................................ 31 4.1.2 Carbon Footprint of all Clothing in Use in the UK in 2009, whether manufactured in or Imported to the UK – per person ........................................................................................ 34 4.1.3 Carbon Footprint of all Clothing in Use in the UK in 2009, whether manufactured in or Imported to the UK – per tonne.......................................................................................... 36 4.1.4 Carbon Footprint of all Clothing in Use in the UK in 2009, whether manufactured in or Imported to the UK – per garment ...................................................................................... 38 4.2 Savings Achieved in the Central Scenario ............................................................................. 40 4.3 Savings Achieved in the ‘What If?’ Scenario ......................................................................... 43 4.4 Benchmarking Against Other Studies ................................................................................... 45 4.5 Further Analysis ................................................................................................................ 46
10
4.5.1 Further In-use Interventions .................................................................................. 46 Sensitivity Analyses ........................................................................................................... 48 4.6.1 Decarbonisation of Grid Electricity (Sensitivity 1)...................................................... 48 4.6.2 Influence of Fibre Type on Drying (Sensitivity 2a and 2b) ......................................... 53 4.6.3 Influence of Fibre Type on Washing (Sensitivity 3) ................................................... 56 4.6.4 Longer Product Lifetimes (Sensitivity 4a and 4b) ...................................................... 58 4.6.5 Washing Frequency (Sensitivity 5) .......................................................................... 62 4.6.6 UK Fibre Mix (Sensitivity 6) .................................................................................... 62 4.7 Conclusions of Sensitivity Analyses ..................................................................................... 63 4.7.1 Decarbonisation of Grid Electricity (Sensitivity 1)...................................................... 63 4.7.2 Influence of Fibre Type on Drying (Sensitivity 2a and 2b) ......................................... 64 4.7.3 Influence of Fibre Type on Washing (Sensitivity 3) ................................................... 65 4.7.4 Longer Product Lifetimes (Sensitivity 4a and 4b) ...................................................... 65 4.7.5 Washing Frequency (Sensitivity 5) .......................................................................... 66 4.7.6 UK Fibre Mix (Sensitivity 6) .................................................................................... 66 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 66 5.1 Summary of this Study ...................................................................................................... 66 5.2 Summary of Baseline Results.............................................................................................. 67 5.3 Summary of Reduction Scenarios ........................................................................................ 67 5.4 Further Analysis Findings ................................................................................................... 68 5.5 Findings from Sensitivity Analyses ....................................................................................... 69 5.6 Concluding Remarks .......................................................................................................... 69 5.7 Suggested Next Steps ........................................................................................................ 70 References ................................................................................................................................. 71 4.6
5.0
6.0
11
1.0
Introduction
1.1
About this study WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme) works in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to help businesses and individuals reap the benefits of reducing waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficient way. Environmental Resources Management Limited (ERM) was commissioned by WRAP to conduct a life cycle carbon footprint study for UK clothing and indicate the scope for footprint reduction. Many previous studies have assessed the carbon impacts of various clothing types and modelled reduction initiatives. However, none has focused on measuring the carbon footprint of UK clothing as a whole and modelled the total potential for reduction. To this end, WRAP commissioned ERM to undertake research on the life cycle carbon impact of clothing in the UK. This study required a strategiclevel carbon footprint for UK clothing, based on published data and information. The footprint was expressed in a number of ways to show the contribution and scope for reduction. Furthermore, a scenario assessment was made for a number of different options for footprint reduction.
1.2
Goal of this Study The stated objective of this research was to provide WRAP with an overview of the impacts of UK clothing on carbon emissions through the clothing life cycle, identifying the most significant contributions to the carbon footprint (ie the hotspots), and quantifying opportunities for savings. The study follows on from a study undertaken for WRAP by URS on the water footprint of UK clothing entitled ‘Review of Data on Embodied Water in Clothing and Opportunities for Savings’ (URS, 2011).
2.0
Project Approach This section describes the scope considered in the project and summarises the approach used.
2.1
Project Scope The scope of the project was to undertake a strategic-level carbon footprint of UK clothing over the entire life cycle using secondary data available in the literature. UK clothing has been defined in this study as all clothing, both new and existing, in use in the UK over the period of one year. The analysis covers both clothing manufactured and used in the UK and clothing manufactured abroad and used in the UK. The comparatively small amount of clothing manufactured in the UK and exported abroad was not considered in the analysis. The datum for this analysis is 2009, as the year for which the most recent data are available. The project assesses total quantities of all major fibre types purchased (and in use) within the UK during 2009. The fibre types assessed comprise:
acrylic; cotton; flax / linen; polyamide (nylon); polyester; polypropylene; silk; viscose; and wool.
1
These are the fibres selected by the Metrics group of the Sustainable Clothing Action Plan as the most important fibres within their sales mix. There are other fibres in use, but rather less significant in terms of quantity sold. The scope of the project also includes consideration of a number of example reduction measures (eg washing at lower temperatures, increasing load size etc.), whereby potential savings in relation to the 2009 ‘baseline’ are quantified for a ‘Central’ reduction scenario and a ‘What If?’ reduction scenario. In addition to carbon footprint results for each of these three defined scenarios, the scope includes the provision of an Excel model for use in this project that allows the modeller to examine new scenarios, where values for each reduction measure can be changed. The study provides a carbon footprint assessment. Therefore, it does not consider other potential social, economic and environmental impacts such as toxicity or labour standards.
2.2
System Boundary The entire life cycle of UK clothing is considered. Therefore, this study can be considered a full cradle-tograve or business-to-consumer carbon footprint. Exclusions to the assessment have been made following the general specifications given in PAS 2050 (1). In addition, other exclusions have been made based on their ‘materiality’, ie any process anticipated to contribute
