Material Science at Crossroads: The Disconnect between Scientists and Creative Industries

The original name was Hemp Textiles International. What was the need to change the name? Was it because you felt the need to diversify and expand the scope of materials?
Samuel Goldstein: Yes, our original name, Hemp Textiles International, reflected our early focus on hemp-based materials. At the time, hemp was an underutilised yet highly sustainable fibre, and we were the pioneers in bringing it to the mainstream textile industry.

However, as we grew, we recognised the need to broaden our material portfolio beyond hemp. Sustainability is not about a single fibre—it’s about building a system of regenerative, high-performance materials that can cater to diverse industries and applications. This led us to innovate with a wider range of natural, bio-based, and recycled materials, expanding our scope beyond just hemp.

Rebranding as Earth Protex was a strategic decision that aligned with our commitment to material innovation, sustainability, and adaptability. The name itself embodies our mission—"Pro" represents progress and professionalism, "Tex" signifies textiles, and "Protex" reflects our core purpose: protecting the earth through responsible materials.

 This shift allowed us to reflect our evolving vision—to develop materials that are not only environmentally responsible but also commercially viable, functional, and scalable across multiple industries. The new name represents a larger vision: leading the future of sustainable materials while protecting the planet.

You have worked on hemp products with Adidas, Levi’s, Nike, Patagonia, VF, etc. Why do you think hemp has not really taken off? The plus points of hemp are too well known. Where do you think the problem lies: willingness of brands to experiment with new materials, or acceptance by consumers, or the cost factor?
Samuel Goldstein: Hemp is one of the most sustainable, durable, and versatile natural fibres available, and its benefits—low water usage, no need for pesticides, and soil regeneration—are well known. However, despite collaborations we did with leading brands like Adidas, Levi’s, Nike, Patagonia, and VF, and extensive experimentation with hemp with many other large international brands, hemp has yet to achieve mass adoption in mainstream textiles.

One of the key challenges is that the textile industry needs more "cotton-like" fibres—materials that are soft to the touch, behave, and perform like cotton, making them easy to integrate into existing supply chains. Traditional hemp fibres, while strong, are coarser and require additional processing to achieve the softness and drape consumers expect.

The current method to make hemp "cotton-like" involves a process called degumming, which removes the stiff lignin and pectin from the fibre. However, conventional degumming is highly resource-intensive, consuming large amounts of energy, chemicals, and water. This makes cottonised hemp costly and less sustainable than it could be. Developing new, more sustainable, and cheaper degumming processes will be essential for large-scale adoption of hemp fibres.

Other barriers include:

1. Scaling & processing challenges – Hemp requires specialised processing, and the supply chain is not as developed as conventional cotton or synthetics. Unlike cotton, which has been optimised for industrial-scale production for over a century, hemp processing infrastructure is still catching up.
2. Cost & market economics – While hemp is inherently sustainable, it remains costlier than conventional cotton and polyester due to limited supply chains and high processing costs. Brands operating in cost-sensitive markets find it difficult to justify the premium.
3. Consumer perception & familiarity – Hemp has long been associated with rough textures and alternative lifestyles rather than mainstream fashion. While innovations have improved softness and versatility, shifting consumer perception takes time.
4. Brand risk aversion – Large brands are often cautious about committing to new materials at scale due to the risks associated with production consistency, supply chain security, and regulatory uncertainties in some regions.

That said, change is happening. As material science advances, processing costs decrease, and brands increasingly prioritise sustainability, hemp is regaining momentum. At Earth Protex however, we are already focused on the next generation of natural cotton-like fibres, micro and nanofibrillated cellulose, made from agricultural residues like wheat straw, rice straw and sugarcane bagasse.

The challenge is not whether hemp will succeed—it’s about how quickly the industry can adapt to make its adoption seamless. Innovation in degumming technology will be a key factor in that transformation.

Tell us about Polylana. It is recycled polyester. To me that sounds counter-intuitive since Earth Protex is all about the earth and nature. Why would you want to handle polyester? Same thing for the Tex2Tex project.
Samuel Goldstein: Polylana is an innovative alternative to acrylic, which is a less sustainable fibre due to its reliance on petrochemicals and its heavy environmental impact during production. Polylana, being based on recycled polyester, provides a more sustainable solution by reducing the need for virgin acrylic. By using RPET, we can divert plastic waste from landfills and reduce the carbon footprint of acrylic manufacturing.

However, our focus at Earth Protex remains on our Tex2Tex technology and business scope, which specifically targets textile-to-textile recycling of polyester. Recycled polyester is one of the most sustainable fibres from a manufacturing and life cycle standpoint, due to its lower energy consumption and reduced waste generation compared to producing virgin polyester. Our Thermo-Mechanical Reactor recycling technology plays a crucial role in making this process efficient, enabling easy and scalable recycling of polyester textiles.

1. Circular economy focus: Tex2Tex embodies the core principles of the circular economy by converting textile waste back into valuable recycled polyester fibres and yarns. This process aligns perfectly with Earth Protex’s commitment to reducing waste and reusing resources in a way that keeps materials in circulation, preventing them from ending up in landfills or getting incinerated.
2. Sustainability from start to finish: The entire lifecycle of Tex2Tex is designed to minimise environmental impact. By using recycled polyester from pre-consumer textiles and post-consumer garments (coming soon), the need for virgin polyester is reduced, which helps conserve petrochemical resources and decreases carbon emissions. This aligns with our broader goal of creating a more sustainable, closed-loop system for textile production. We have also demonstrated that we are the lowest impact commercially available poster fibre available globally.
3. Energy efficiency and reduced emissions: Recycling polyester through Tex2Tex is more energy-efficient than producing virgin polyester. Our recycling process uses significantly less energy, emits fewer greenhouse gases, and requires fewer raw materials. This results in lower overall environmental costs and contributes to a reduction in our industry’s carbon footprint.
4. Durability and life cycle advantage: Recycled polyester has excellent durability and a long life cycle, meaning that garments made from this material can last longer. This supports the principles of a sustainable product life cycle by reducing the frequency of garment replacement and extending the lifespan of each item, reducing textile waste over time. This, however, clearly doesn’t address the issue of over-consumption and the fact that consumers throw away perfectly good, close to new products, which we recognise as a serious issue which is endemic globally.
5. Easy-to-implement recycling process: Our Thermo-Mechanical Reactor technology facilitates a streamlined and efficient polyester recycling process. By effectively breaking down textiles and restoring the polyester to near original quality, the technology ensures that polyester can be recycled multiple times without a significant drop in quality. This not only makes the recycling process scalable but also ensures that the material is viable for high-performance applications.
6. Pragmatic approach to circularity: The textile industry faces significant challenges with circularity and sustainability, especially with the complexities of mixed fibres and waste management. Tex2Tex offers a practical solution by focusing on polyester, one of the most commonly used fibres in the textile industry. While other fibres are harder to recycle, polyester can be effectively recycled with current technologies, making it an ideal starting point for broader industry-wide sustainability efforts.
7. Addressing the full life cycle of textiles: Tex2Tex fits seamlessly with our goal of addressing both new material development and end-of-life solutions. It’s an integral part of our strategy to close the loop on textile waste by designing products that can be easily recycled and reused, thus contributing to the long-term sustainability of the textile industry.

By focusing on Tex2Tex, Earth Protex is contributing to a much-needed transformation in the textile industry, aligning innovation with environmental responsibility. Through this project, we’re able to significantly reduce waste, promote recycling, and make a meaningful impact in advancing textile sustainability.

You have seen the fashion ecosystem for a long time. What do you think is the main problem: too many stakeholders? Or is it that the industry has still nor understood what it will take to clean itself up and go totally sustainable/circular? Then again, both sustainability and circularity means different things to different people.
Samuel Goldstein: The fashion industry is at a pivotal point in its journey toward sustainability and circularity, and while significant progress is being made, there are still key challenges that need to be addressed.

One of the primary problems is the overconsumption and lack of quality. Fast fashion, which is driven by trends and the constant need for new products, leads to an unsustainable demand for cheap, low-quality clothing. This contributes not only to a massive increase in textile waste but also to a culture where garments are often discarded after only a few uses. In this environment, it's difficult for circularity to thrive, as items are designed for obsolescence, not reuse or recycling. Consumers have become accustomed to buying more and more, often without considering the long-term environmental impact.

Too many stakeholders also complicates matters. While collaboration is necessary for driving systemic change, the fashion industry is highly fragmented, with multiple players involved across the supply chain—manufacturers, retailers, designers, consumers, recyclers, and more. Each stakeholder has different priorities, timelines, and levels of commitment to sustainability. The lack of a unified standard or agreement on what sustainability and circularity truly mean has led to confusion and slow progress.

The fashion industry has still not fully understood what it will take to clean itself up. Many companies are experimenting with sustainable materials, ethical production practices, and recycling technologies, but these efforts are often piecemeal, and the industry as a whole lacks a cohesive strategy to drive large-scale change. While many brands are pledging to become more sustainable, they may not be addressing the root causes—like overproduction and poor design choices—that would make a truly circular system possible.

The lack of rigorous compliance and oversight mechanisms is another barrier to progress. Without stringent regulations or standards for sustainability, companies can often make vague claims about their eco-friendliness, without truly backing them up. This creates a "greenwashing" problem, where companies can market themselves as sustainable without making the fundamental changes necessary to drive real impact. There’s also the challenge of monitoring the entire supply chain, especially when production is spread across countries with varying levels of environmental regulations.

However, despite these challenges, I do believe the industry is heading in the right direction. There is a growing awareness among consumers, companies, and policymakers about the importance of sustainability and circularity. More brands are adopting sustainable practices, and there’s an increasing shift toward creating products that are durable, repairable, and recyclable. Technologies like Tex2Tex and the development of recycling infrastructure are key steps in the right direction, and we’re seeing greater collaboration among industry players to solve the big problems.

The road to a completely sustainable and circular fashion industry will be long and complicated, but the momentum is building. It's clear that the fashion ecosystem is evolving, and as we continue to improve technologies, create clearer regulations, and demand better practices, we're getting closer to a future where fashion truly aligns with sustainability and circularity. It may take time, but the changes are happening, and we are heading toward a more responsible and regenerative fashion industry.

And last, especially since you have worked for long in China. Do you think all initiatives and projects are too dominated by the West? China is the biggest in terms of cotton, textiles, and garment production. Yet, when it comes to all big ticket events, one never gets to see Chinese leaders. Same for India. Comments, please.
Samuel Goldstein: This is a great point, and it really highlights the ongoing challenge of global representation when it comes to sustainability and circularity efforts in the fashion industry. It's true that many initiatives and high-profile events related to sustainability are often dominated by the West. This can sometimes overlook the significant contributions and leadership potential of countries like China and India, which are not only central to the global textile and garment production but also increasingly involved in sustainable practices.

China’s role: China is the largest producer of cotton, textiles, and garments, and has made considerable progress in sustainability in recent years, especially in the areas of textile waste recycling, eco-friendly materials, and energy-efficient manufacturing. The country has also been investing heavily in research and development of clean technologies, from low-carbon industrial processes to innovations in recycling and textile-to-textile systems.

However, despite these advancements, China’s presence in global sustainability dialogues is often underrepresented. Part of the reason could be geopolitical dynamics, as the focus of international sustainability events often remains on Western-led initiatives. China’s sustainability efforts are sometimes perceived through a political lens rather than an innovation lens, which limits its visibility in the global conversation. Additionally, Chinese leadership is often more focused on domestic goals and policy-driven initiatives rather than international visibility, which results in less participation in global sustainability forums.

India’s role: India, with its massive textile industry and growing presence in organic cotton and eco-friendly garment production, also plays a critical role in the global supply chain. The Indian government has made strides in promoting sustainability, with initiatives like the textile Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs) and circularity in fashion gaining attention. India’s leadership in areas such as organic cotton and sustainable agriculture also makes it an important player in global discussions about textile sustainability.

However, like China, India’s voice is often marginalised in major sustainability events, despite its significant market share and innovations in sustainability. This can partly be attributed to the perception that sustainability in the context of developing economies is still evolving and often overshadowed by the larger-scale initiatives in the West.

The West’s dominance: The Western world, particularly countries like the US, Germany, and the UK, have been more vocal and proactive in terms of setting sustainability goals and creating global frameworks. The fact that major sustainability events like the UN Climate Change Conference (COP) or initiatives from Fashion for Good often showcase Western leadership may contribute to the perception that sustainability is a “Western issue.” Additionally, Western markets often demand the highest sustainability standards, which leads companies to prioritise these markets, inadvertently sidelining Asian producers who are still navigating the complexities of their own development.

Why this matters: What’s missing is a balanced representation of all regions, especially since China and India are major hubs of production and have an immense opportunity to influence the future of sustainable fashion. Both countries face different challenges and opportunities compared to the West, and they are developing innovative solutions based on their unique needs and scale. Their voices and experiences should be more prominently featured in global conversations.

The way forward: To create a truly global and inclusive approach to sustainability in fashion, there needs to be more emphasis on cross-cultural collaboration. Initiatives should encourage China and India to not only be part of the conversation but also lead it in many ways, considering their scale and the impact they have on the global textile industry. This might involve fostering more conversations between the West and Asia, breaking down the barriers to participation in international events, and creating spaces for these countries to showcase their innovations, technologies, and sustainable practices.

As the industry continues to evolve, there’s an increasing need for collective action—one that isn’t dominated by one region but rather integrates solutions from across the globe. For true sustainability and circularity to take hold, all regions need to be represented equally, bringing their unique perspectives and contributions to the table.

This will ultimately help us achieve a more equitable and effective global strategy for tackling textile waste, reducing environmental impact, and creating a sustainable, circular economy.

If we talk about Agraloop, the prospects of "transforming left-overs from crops into scalable high-value natural fibre fashion products" has been known for a while. There are many around the world who are working on agro-waste for textiles. Yet, beyond being niche products, these are yet to make a dent in the fashion world. What's wrong?
Samuel Goldstein: The idea of transforming crop leftovers into scalable, high-value natural fibre fashion products has been around for a while, but it's still facing challenges in making a significant impact in the fashion world. While there are many initiatives working on using agro-waste for textiles, the industry has yet to see this concept go mainstream, and there are several key reasons for that.

Firstly, our agro-waste valorization technology is now called the Agrefinery. Agraloop,  which was developed under our co-founded company Circular Systems—was instrumental in pioneering this concept. In the early 2000s, Earth Protex was the first to introduce innovative oilseed hemp and oilseed flax (linen) fibres made from agro-waste, and these fibres were certified organic. Despite the novelty and potential of these fibres, scaling the technology to have a real impact on the broader fashion market has been slow.

One of the primary challenges is the difficulty of agriculture waste collection logistics. Unlike traditional feedstocks such as cotton, agro-waste is often dispersed across large agricultural areas and lacks the centralised collection systems that would make it easy to process. This creates inefficiencies in gathering enough waste in a timely manner, which is crucial for large-scale production.

Another issue is that agriculture waste is not homogeneous like other feedstocks. For example, waste from different crops like rice, wheat, or hemp can vary in fibre composition, moisture content, and quality. This variability makes it harder to process these materials consistently and efficiently compared to more standard materials like cotton or polyester. The variation in waste material also requires customised processing techniques, which complicates scaling.

In addition to these logistical and material challenges, scalability is another significant hurdle. Processing agricultural waste into high-quality fibres requires time, innovation, and the restructuring of supply chains. Supply chain restructuring is particularly important because it involves redesigning agricultural and manufacturing processes to handle these new feedstocks efficiently. This takes investment, time, and collaboration across different industries—agriculture, technology, and fashion—which has slowed the widespread adoption.

Despite these challenges, we believe the potential for using agro-waste as a sustainable textile feedstock is enormous and presents among the only solutions available to sustainably increase global natural fibre market share.