Spotlight: Recycling Crisis

Beyond Chemical Promises: Why Textile Recycling Needs a Technology Reality Check

Chemical recycling attracts billions in investment promises while proven mechanical methods remain underutilised. With 73% of collected textile waste still landfilled or incinerated globally, industry experts question whether technological tunnel vision is preventing immediate impact and realistic circularity solutions.

Long Story, Cut Short
  • Advanced sorting technologies could create maximum impact across recycling value chains by optimising material routing.
  • Chemical recycling shows promise for complex blends but faces significant gaps between laboratory results and industrial deployment.
  • Textile blends dominate markets due to consumer preferences, creating legacy challenges requiring multiple complementary technologies.
With Europeans producing 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste annually and most still ending up burned, dumped, or exported, the industry needs solutions that can deliver impact today, not in decades. The frenzied rush towards chemical recycling, while potentially transformative, risks creating expensive, exclusive pathways that leave the majority of textile waste unaddressed.
Solutions needed With Europeans producing 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste annually and most still ending up burned, dumped, or exported, the industry needs solutions that can deliver impact today, not in decades. The frenzied rush towards chemical recycling, while potentially transformative, risks creating expensive, exclusive pathways that leave the majority of textile waste unaddressed. AI-Generated / Sora

This Spotlight series on textile recycling is timed with the Textiles Recycling Expo 2025 being held in Brussels, Belgium on 4–5 June 2025. texfash is a Media Partner for the event. 

Many in the textile recycling industry are quite taken in by chemical recycling's big promise to transform complex fibre blends into virgin-quality materials. There are investment flows increasingly towards companies claiming breakthrough technologies that can separate polyester from cotton or dissolve specific components chemically. Yet, while billions chase these chemical solutions, mechanical recycling—despite its proven track record and immediate applicability—often gets dismissed as outdated or insufficient.

What was till the other day a technological dichotomy has now become a technological hierarchy, something that critics argue may represent a rather dangerous oversimplification. With Europeans producing 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste annually and most still ending up burned, dumped, or exported, the industry needs solutions that can deliver impact today, not in decades. The frenzied rush towards chemical recycling, while potentially transformative, risks creating expensive, exclusive pathways that leave the majority of textile waste unaddressed.

The reality is more nuanced than the divisive either-or technology choices suggest. Different materials require different approaches, and the most effective recycling systems will likely combine multiple technologies strategically. However, this requires honest assessment of each technology's current capabilities, limitations, and realistic deployment timelines rather than promotional narratives that often characterise industry discourse.

The Sorting Revolution

When asked which single part of the textile recycling value chain would create the most impact if redesigned, Chloé Salmon Legagneur, Director of CETIA, chooses sorting without hesitation: "If I had to select just one, I think I would choose to act on the sorting part. Automated detection and sorting solutions can be used to qualify the textile collected, so that it can be channelled towards the best recycling routes."

This perspective challenges the industry's current fascination with end-of-pipe chemical solutions. Rather than developing new ways to process mixed materials, improving sorting could ensure each material type reaches its optimal recycling pathway. The ripple effects could transform the entire value chain's economics and effectiveness.

Salmon Legagneur elaborates on sorting's potential: "The detection part can include recognition of composition (pure material, mixture, %), colour (multicolour, single-colour, red, white, etc.), but there can also be extensive image processing via artificial intelligence, such as recognition of logos/brands, typologies (t-shirts, trousers, jackets, etc.)."

CETIA's own work integrates multiple sensor technologies to achieve comprehensive material characterisation. "We are working in particular on these subjects at CETIA, integrating a multi-sensor approach (SENSOR HUB project)," she explains. This approach recognises that effective sorting requires combining different detection methods rather than relying on single-sensor solutions.

Koen Warmerdam, Co-founder and Brand Director of Aware, supports this sorting-first approach: "Recycling is complex, and while sorting technologies are improving, they need time and trusted input to scale. Verified data from fibre to finish would streamline operations, reduce loss, and unlock trust."

The economic impact of improved sorting extends beyond individual facilities. When materials are properly characterised and routed to appropriate recycling technologies, overall system efficiency increases dramatically. Chemical recycling plants receive better-suited feedstock, mechanical recycling achieves higher quality outputs, and reuse channels capture materials still suitable for direct application.

Luna Aslan, Project Manager at Noosa, identifies the systemic barriers: "EU legislation is slow and there's no harmonised systems between countries. Many players hesitate to invest in harmonised systems due to uncertain ROI and the complexity of coordinating across diverse stakeholders and regions."

However, sorting technology offers a pathway to harmonisation that doesn't require coordinated regulatory change. Standardised detection and classification systems could operate across borders, creating common material characterisation protocols that enable efficient resource flows regardless of local regulations.

Tetiana Pushkarova, Development Manager at Re:inventex, emphasises sorting's practical importance: "Even if every brand adopted eco-design principles today, we'd still face a legacy of billions of garments made from complex fibre blends. These materials won't disappear, and we urgently need to develop technologies that can handle what's already on the market."

Advanced sorting provides this capability by identifying which materials can benefit from mechanical recycling, which require chemical processing, and which might be better suited for energy recovery or other applications. This triage function maximises value recovery across the entire waste stream.

Chloé Salmon Legagneur
Chloé Salmon Legagneur
Director
Cetia
Koen Warmerdam
Koen Warmerdam
Co-founder and Brand Director
Aware
Luna Aslan
Luna Aslan
Project Manager
Noosa
Tetiana Pushkarova
Tetiana Pushkarova
Development Manager
Re:inventex

Chemical vs. Mechanical: The False Choice

The industry's growing emphasis on chemical recycling reflects legitimate technical challenges with mechanical approaches, particularly regarding fibre quality degradation and blend separation. However, presenting these technologies as competing alternatives rather than complementary solutions may impede overall progress.

Salmon Legagneur underscores the need for technological diversity: "Chemical recycling remains a promising option for managing specific material flows on a potentially large scale. Mechanical and thermomechanical recycling is also an interesting option, which is already working effectively and should not be overlooked. All of these solutions can complement each other."

This complementary approach recognises the fact that different materials and contamination levels suit different processing methods. Pure cotton garments might benefit from mechanical recycling, poly-cotton blends could require chemical separation, and heavily contaminated materials might need advanced chemical processing.

Luna Aslan talks about chemical recycling's unique advantages: "While mechanical recycling has its advantages, it remains limited by the complexity of textile materials and the quality degradation that occurs with repeated cycles. Chemical processes can break down complex blends and contaminated fibres into their foundational monomers, enabling near-infinite recycling without quality loss."

However, Salmon Legagneur has a word of caution on overestimating chemical recycling's current capabilities: "It is true that solutions are emerging and highlight their ability to separate, for example, cotton and polyester, or to chemically disassemble garments. It should always be borne in mind that this is frequently laboratory or pilot work, and that it sometimes involves limited production rates and specific preparation of the material."

The technology readiness level (TRL) gap represents a critical consideration often overlooked in investment decisions. "The TRL level of the solution should always be considered, as it can be a long way from a solution that can be deployed on a large scale and have a major impact on the industry," Salmon Legagneur warns.

Pushkarova offers another perspective: "We are not specialists in chemical recycling, but we follow the developments closely. From what we see, many current technologies are not yet capable of processing complex fibre blends—the very materials that dominate textile waste today."

This reality implies the need for parallel development paths. "We advocate for a dual approach: invest in future-ready chemical solutions, but also scale and improve mechanical recycling for the near term," Pushkarova explains.

Mechanical recycling's immediate applicability offers crucial advantages during the transition period. While chemical technologies mature, mechanical systems can process the significant volumes of suitable materials currently being laid to waste. Improving mechanical recycling efficiency and output quality could deliver substantial impact while chemical solutions develop.

The most effective approach integrates both technologies strategically. "Whatever happens, the detection/sorting and material preparation stages will remain essential to qualify and homogenise the deposits to be treated with one or other of the processes, depending on each of the specifications," Salmon Legagneur concurs.

Mechanical Recycling Check
  • Proven technology already operating effectively across Europe with established infrastructure and supply chains.
  • Quality degradation occurs with repeated cycles but remains suitable for many applications and blends.
  • Lower capital requirements and shorter implementation timelines compared to chemical alternatives.
  • Can process significant volumes of suitable materials currently being wasted during technology transition.
  • Requires improved sorting and preparation to maximise output quality and market acceptance.
Chemical Recycling Gaps
  • Laboratory results often involve limited production rates and specific material preparation requirements.
  • Technology Readiness Levels frequently overestimated in investment and policy discussions.
  • Many solutions require upstream design changes for effective deployment across supply chains.
  • Complex fibre blends remain challenging despite marketing claims about separation capabilities.
  • Scale-up timelines typically longer than promotional materials suggest for commercial viability.

The Blend Challenge

Textile blends dominate modern fashion because they deliver performance characteristics that single-fibre materials simply cannot match. Nevertheless, these same blends create the most significant challenges for recycling systems, requiring either separation technologies or processing methods that can handle mixed compositions.

Pushkarova explains this fundamental incongruity: "This contradiction reflects how deeply design priorities remain disconnected from end-of-life realities. Blended textiles exist because they meet a range of consumer demands: stretch, softness, durability, and affordability. Unfortunately, recyclability is rarely factored in at the design stage."

Consumer preferences accentuate this apparent disconnect. Shoppers expect garments that combine cotton's comfort with polyester's durability and elastane's stretch. Pure-fibre alternatives often sacrifice performance characteristics that consumers value, creating market resistance to more recyclable designs. The scale of this legacy challenge is humongous. 

Chemical recycling companies often target these blends as their primary opportunity. However, Salmon Legagneur points out the complexity of this assertion: "In the case of yarns that can dissolve under specific conditions, this implies integrating the yarn into the design and manufacture of textiles, i.e. upstream of processes, without disrupting production lines."

This integration requirement illustrates a broader challenge with chemical solutions. Many require design modifications during production to enable effective recycling, but implementing these changes across global supply chains requires coordination and investment that may take years to achieve. Some are willing to take the plunge; others are more circumspect.

"The process could work, but to be feasible on a large scale it would mean, for example, that garments put on the market would have to incorporate this solution on a massive scale," Salmon Legagneur explains. The network effects necessary for success create chicken-and-egg problems similar to those facing other recycling infrastructure.

Alternative approaches focus on processing existing blends without requiring upstream design changes. "At Re:inventex, we're testing solutions, adapting our processes, and partnering with innovators to explore how even partially recyclable or reusable outputs from blended materials can be recovered," Pushkarova describes.

This matter-of-fact approach concedes the fact that partial solutions of today may be more valuable than the perfect solutions of tomorrow that remain unscalable. Recovering even 60–70% of value from blended materials could significantly impact overall recycling rates if implemented broadly.

And, add to this a tricky issue to handle: consumer awareness, which represents another crucial element. "Consumers themselves are not yet making choices that prioritise circularity," Pushkarova notes. However, changing consumer preferences requires both better communication about recycling challenges and improved availability of high-performance, recyclable alternatives.

Design education too—needless to say—offers a long-term pathway to addressing the exasperating blend challenge. "Designers are being trained to make them aware of the end-of-life implications of the products they bring to market, and in particular the recyclability potential of their products. This training work will also require time," Salmon Legagneur explains.

CETIA provides direct support for this transition: "CETIA also offers a support service for product designers to help them deal with the question of the recyclability of their products." Such services could accelerate the shift toward more recyclable designs while maintaining performance characteristics consumers expect.

Tailender

The textile recycling industry's success depends on abandoning false choices between competing technologies in favour of strategic integration. While chemical recycling offers long-term potential for processing complex materials, mechanical approaches provide immediate opportunities for impact with existing infrastructure. 

The sorting revolution represents the most critical near-term opportunity, enabling optimal material routing that maximises value recovery across all recycling pathways. Rather than betting everything on single solutions, the industry needs technology portfolios that address different material types and contamination levels appropriately. 

This requires honest assessment of current capabilities, realistic timelines for emerging technologies, and coordinated investment in the sorting infrastructure that enables all recycling methods to operate effectively.

Different materials require different approaches, and the most effective recycling systems will likely combine multiple technologies strategically. However, this requires honest assessment of each technology's current capabilities, limitations, and realistic deployment timelines rather than promotional narratives that often characterise industry discourse.
Different materials require different approaches, and the most effective recycling systems will likely combine multiple technologies strategically. However, this requires honest assessment of each technology's current capabilities, limitations, and realistic deployment timelines rather than promotional narratives that often characterise industry discourse. AI-Generated / Gemini
 
 
 
  • Dated posted 3 June 2025
  • Last modified 3 June 2025