Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Resources, Conservation and Recycling

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec

Life cycle assessment of cotton textile products in Turkey

G. Baydar a , N. Ciliz a,b, , A. Mammadov a,b
a
b

Bogazici University Institute of Environmental Sciences, 34342 Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey

Bogazici University, Sustainable Development and Cleaner Production Center, 34342 Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 11 December 2014
Received in revised form 10 August 2015
Accepted 11 August 2015
Available online 17 October 2015
Keywords:
Textile industry
Organic agriculture
Cleaner production
Life cycle assessment

a b s t r a c t
Cotton textile and clothing industry is a complex and multi-tiered system that consists of cotton cultivation and harvesting, ber production, yarn manufacturing, fabric preparation, fabric processing that
includes bleaching and dying sub-processes among others and fabrication of the nal product. An array of
environmental concerns are associated with this sector, the most signicant of which are issues related
to use of agrochemicals in the cultivation of cotton and water, energy and chemical consumption in the
fabric processing stage. Textile industry is a signicant contributor to the Turkish economy constituting
18% of total export volume in 2013 according to Turkish Statistical Institute. In the study, environmental impacts of Eco T-shirts produced from organically grown cotton and processed with green dyeing
recipe were compared to that of conventional T-shirts, in terms of their contributions to global warming,
acidication, aquatic and terrestrial eutrophication and photochemical ozone formation using life cycle
assessment methodology. The results reveal that Eco T-shirts have lower impact potentials across all
inspected categories, with the most dramatic reduction in aquatic eutrophication potential (up to 97%)
due to elimination of nitrogen and phosphorus containing chemical based fertilizers. The results also
show that global warming potential is by far the largest environmental impact for both conventional and
Eco T-shirts with the main impact coming from use phase, followed by cultivation and harvesting and
fabric processing phases. The results of the analysis underline the importance of utilizing sustainable raw
materials in all life cycle stages of cotton textile products and the necessity of focusing on the consumer
behavior and sustainable practices in the use phase of the products as well.
2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The textile and clothing sector consists of a wide number of subsectors, from sourcing of raw materials (bers) to semi-processed
(yarns, woven and knitted fabrics with their nishing process)
and nal consumer products (carpets, home textiles, clothing and
industrial use textiles). The complexity of the sector complicates a
clear-cut classication system for the different activities involved
(EC, 2001a,b). Fibers used in the textile industry are classied into
two main categories: natural and man-made. The natural bers
are derived from vegetable or animal sources. In the year 2010,
man-made bers and natural bers shared about 60.1% and 39.9%
of global textile ber consumption, respectively. Cotton is the
most widely utilized natural ber in the world, accounting for
over 82% of global natural ber consumption (FAO-ICAC, 2013).
Approximately 32.4 million hectares of agricultural land area is

Corresponding author at: Bogazici University, Sustainable Development and

Cleaner Production Center, 34342 Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey. Tel.: +90 212 359 6947;
fax: +90 212 257 5033.
E-mail address: cilizn@boun.edu.tr (N. Ciliz).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.08.007
0921-3449/ 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

allocated for cotton plant, grown in more than 75 countries. The

latest gures for the 2013/14 season show world lint production
at 25.6 million tons with six countries: China, India, USA, Pakistan,
Brazil and Uzbekistan, accounting for about 80% of total production
and the remainder is spread across a large number of smaller producers, with Turkey ranking 7th following Uzbekistan (FAO-ICAC,
2015; USDA, 2015).
Textile and clothing sector constitutes an important part of
Turkeys economy with the export volume of 27.7 billion USD in
the year 2013, which corresponds to 18% of all the total exports
(TUIK, 2013). Cotton cultivation has also been constantly expanding to accommodate the growing demand of the textile industry,
reaching 2.25 million ton production in 2013 (TUIK, 2013).
The complex nature of textile products life cycle as well as
impacts they have on the environment require comprehensive
assessment methodology to evaluate potential environmental burdens in the context of sustainability approach. One such approach,
namely life cycle assessment (LCA), provides successful interpretation associated with the whole cycles of selected products, services
and processes. This methodology, standardized by ISO 14040:2006
and 14044:2006 is a decision support tool for evaluation of environmental impacts of products and services, required for a particular

214

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

unit of function and includes compilation and meaningful evaluation of all inventory data associated with those products.
1.1. LCA of textile products
LCA methodology has been widely applied in textile industry
to evaluate various aspects and life cycle stages of the products,
from cultivation and ber production up until fabric processing
and disposal of used products. Barber and Pellow (2006) aimed
to determine total energy use and carbon dioxide emissions of
New Zealand merino wool. Results showed that merino wool ber
production required a total energy use of 46 MJ/kg half of which
occurred on farm and that on-farm activities accounted for two
thirds of carbon dioxide emissions. Morley et al. (2006) evaluated recycling/recovery/reuse options for second-hand clothing
and observed that, in the context of the CO2 emissions from waste
management choices, the reuse of clothing has a signicant benet over recycling or disposal. It is stated that the maximum reuse
benets are of the order of 33 kg CO2 -eq/kg clothing for a sample of cotton and polyester clothes, compared to a maximum of
about 8 kg CO2 -eq/kg of ber recycling, citing the study conducted
by Marks & Spencer that showed extracted energy of cotton product
and ber manufacture as 5.3 times greater than cotton manufacture alone and 2.9 times greater when comparison is done for
polyester clothes. Woolridg et al. (2006) demonstrated that for
every kilogram of virgin cotton displaced by second-hand clothing approximately 65 kWh is saved, and for every kilogram of
polyester about 90 kWh is saved. University of Cambridge, Institute for Manufacturing evaluated cotton, viscose and nylon bers
with polypropylene and latex-foam backing with LCA methodology. Results of the study indicated that the key environmental
impacts of the sector resulted from use of energy and toxic chemicals (Allwood et al., 2006). Chalmers University of Technology in
Sweden conducted an LCA for three fabrics types for a sofa made of
conventional cotton, Trevira CS (a ame retardant polyester) and
wool/polyamide. The study concluded that Trevira CS was preferable in terms of minimizing environmental impact when choosing
between the three fabric types and the cotton sofa cover was a less
favorable choice. The results of the project indicated that the most
signicant impacts were from cultivation and wet treatment of the
fabric (Dahllf, 2004). Kalliala and Nousianinen (1999) compared
and evaluated different hotel textiles: cotton and cottonpolyester
sheets and concluded that cottonpolyester sheets in hotel use
have fewer environmental impacts than cotton sheets. The reason was the higher durability as well as lower laundering energy
requirements of cottonpolyester sheets.
LCA is also widely applied by the private sector to evaluate the
impacts of not only technical and factory settings but also policy
changes and user behavior and habits on the environmental performance of textile products. Marks & Spencer conducted LCA to assess
the energy requirements for life cycle of a pair of pleated polyester
trousers and a pack of mens cotton briefs. According to ndings,
consumer use corresponds to 76% and 80% of the life cycle energy
needs, respectively (Collins and Aumnier, 2002). Design Mobel
conducted a full LCA of products from raw material inputs, through
manufacturing, to the use of waste by-products and design briefs.
They sourced wood from sustainable forestry operations and used
natural materials including bamboo, cotton, 100% natural latex and
wool in natural manufacturing processes (SBN, 2008).
An integrated and holistic approach is necessary when assessing the sustainability of textile products since actions in one phase
of products life cycle can have direct and indirect effects in other
phases and the overall environmental performance. An LCA study
on bed-sheets conducted by Saxce et al. (2012) demonstrated that
textile product quality parameters, such as lifetime of a product
and ease of care that are determined in the manufacturing phase,

can have signicant inuence throughout products life cycle;

removing the need for ironing and increased lifetime lead to
overall decrease in environmental impacts, although the effect of
prolonged lifetime are much prominent than that of other product
parameters.
The goal of this study was to identify and compare the environmental impacts of conventional cotton T-shirt and three different
variants of Eco cotton T-shirt that supply the same functional specication. Potential environmental impacts are assessed considering
cultivation and harvesting, raw material supply, ginning, spinning,
knitting followed by fabric wet processing and nishing for manufacturing, service/use and disposal stages of the selected cotton
T-shirts. The products were compared by taking into account sustainable cultivation methods and eco-efcient dyeing recipes.
2. Methodology and selected scenarios
The functional unit of the LCA model was determined as 1000
items of knitted and dyed cotton T-shirt with a total weight of
200 kg and all results in the manuscript are expressed in terms of
this common unit. The service life time of T-shirts was chosen as
three years that covers 50 washing cycles at 60 C temperature. Life
cycle processes included in the analysis and system boundaries are
illustrated in Fig. 1.
Organic cotton growth, organic farming productivity considerations and chemical substitution and reduction of dye-house
applications constitute the main focus points in the analysis. Secondary products such as cotton-seed and fabric scraps are not taken
into account in terms of neither on-site recycling nor industrial
symbiosis due to lack of reliable data. Four different life cycle analyses were carried out for T-shirts. Developed scenarios were grouped
into three key themes representing major changes in cotton T-shirt
chain: changes in raw material selection, agricultural productivity
and means of fabric wet processing (Table 1). The consequences of
these differences are explored and measured for each scenario in
accordance with life cycle perspective.
GaBi 5 LCA modeling software complemented with comprehensive, up-to-date inventory databases and impact assessment
methods was used to conduct LCA for the selected products in
this study. Internationally recognized impact assessment method,
The Environmental Development of Industrial Products (EDIP)
2003 developed by the Institute for Product Development (IPU)
at the Technical University of Denmark was implemented in the
evaluation phase.
EDIP 2003 methodology is a problem-oriented approach, where
the environmental impacts are modelled in the cause-effect chain.
The methodology provides spatial differentiated characterization
factors but, can be used both in a site-generic and in a sitedependent fashion (Hauschild and Wenzel, 2000). In this LCA
study, site-generic characterization factors are applied to calculate environmental impact potentials of investigated cycles. The
characterization factors for the global warming potential (GWP) are
based on the IPCC recommendations. Organic substances and carbon monoxide from fossil fuels are included with the assumption
that they will end up as carbon dioxide eventually. In calculating
the acidication potential (AP), Regional Acidication Information
and Simulation (RAINS) computer model is used to assess the fate
of emissions and the exposure quantities to ecosystem. The same
model is used in calculation of terrestrial eutrophication potential (TEP). Cause effect Relation Model to support Environmental
Negotiations (CARMEN) model is used to assess the fate of nutrient
emissions to water in calculating the aquatic eutrophication. The
transport of nutrients from agricultural supply and atmospheric
deposition through groundwater drainage and surface runoff or
topsoil erosion to surface water is considered within the model.
Photochemical ozone formation potential (POFP) resulting from

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

215

Fig. 1. Life cycle system boundaries of the selected cotton T-shirts.

VOC and NOx emissions is considered within EDIP methodology

and exposures to both human and plant life are assessed again
with RAINS model. Separate characterization factors are available
for individual emissions but VOCs are expressed via common factor
(Danish Ministry of Environment, 2005).

3. Life cycle of a conventional and Eco T-shirts

The life cycle stages of conventional and Eco T-shirt variants are
similar, as indicated in Fig. 1. The differences lay in cotton cultivation and fabric wet processing applications.

216

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Table 1
Life cycle scenarios for conventional and Eco T-shirts.

Table 2
Major insecticides used in cotton cultivation (Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b).

Scenario

Product

Conventional
T-shirt
0.2
1000
25.93

Eco T-shirt

Eco T-shirt

Eco T-shirt

0.2
1000
25.93

0.2
1000
25.93

0.2
1000
25.93

Conventional
cotton
100

Organic
cotton
100

Organic
cotton
75

Organic
cotton
50

Weight (kg)
Pieces
Total mass loss
(%)
Raw material
Cultivation
productivity
(%)
Wet processing

Conventional
bleaching

Green
dyeing
recipe

Green
dyeing
recipe

Green
dyeing
recipe

3.1. Cotton cultivation and harvesting

Although cotton is native to tropical and subtropical regions, it
is grown in a very broad range of climates and soils using diverse
agricultural practices (Cherrett et al., 2005). The key elements for
successful cotton growing are temperature, sunlight, soil, supplemental nutrients, crop protection, rainfall and irrigation. Although
cotton plants tolerance to temperature varies from species to
species, it is primarily grown at temperatures between 11 C and
25 C (UNCTAD, 2002a,b). Cotton plant is grown on a wide range
of soils but medium and heavy textured, deep soils with good
water holding capacity are preferred for productive cultivation
(Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b). Cotton is a very waterintensive crop; it is estimated that cotton growing results in 16%
of the worlds total freshwater withdrawal. In order to produce
1 kg of cotton lint, 10,00017,000 L water is required (Kooistra and
Termorshuizen, 2006a,b). Innovative irrigation techniques like drip
irrigation, can lower the water demand for cotton production down
to 7000 L/kg-lint (Soth et al., 1999).
Nutrient uptake efciency of cotton plant is rather poor and
thus requires soil management practices and application of fertilizers. Common synthetic fertilizers used in fertility management are
typically combinations of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) (Silvertooth, 2002). Nutrient requirements of cotton under
irrigation are 100180 kg/ha N, 2060 kg/ha P and 5080 kg/ha K
(Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b). Crop rotation is an alternative practice to fertilizer application for achieving soil fertility
(Guerena and Sullivan, 2003).
In order to protect the cotton plant from potentially yield lowering insects and weeds, large quantities of acutely toxic chemical
pesticides and herbicides are used in cultivation. Effectiveness of a
particular insecticide can vary greatly from eld to eld, depending
on previous insecticide use, pest species, and levels of resistance
(Catchot, 2007). The predominant class of pesticides used in cotton cultivation are listed in Table 2 (Kooistra and Termorshuizen,
2006a,b). Herbicides are widely used in cotton cultivation for weed
control along with traditional hand hoeing and mechanical tillage.
The most important herbicide types used in cotton cultivation are
listed in Table 3 (Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b).
3.1.1. Conventional cotton cultivation
Conventional cotton farming systems represent nearly 80%
of the worlds cotton production and includes wide range of
farms sizes, agrochemical inputs and outputs, energy and production efciencies and related environmental impacts (Kooistra and
Termorshuizen, 2006a,b). The input/output values and decision
criteria in the study were dened according to selected reference area; the Antalya region in the South of Turkey. In 2004,
the average crop yield in Antalya was determined as 3100 kg

Designation of
the substance

Chemical group
of the
substance

Toxicity
class
(WHO)

Share (%) in the

global cotton
insecticide
market

Deltamethrine
LamdaCyalothrine
Monoctrotophos
AlphaCypermethrine
Chlorpyriphos
Esfenvalerate
Methamidophos
Dimethoate

Pyrethroid
Pyrethroid

II
III

12
9

Organophosphorus
Pyrethroid

Ib
II

9
8

Organophosphorus
Pyrethroid
Organophosphorus
Organophosphorus

II
II
Ib
II

7
7
6
5

Ib: highly hazardous; II: moderately hazardous.

Table 3
Major herbicides used for cotton cultivation (Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b).
Designation of
the substance

Chemical group
of the
substance

Toxicity class
(WHO)

Applied
area (%)

Triuralin
Msma
Fluometuron

Dinitroanilin
Organoarsenic
Substituted
urea
Dinitroanilin
Substituted
urea
Substituted
triazine
Substituted
triazine

U
n.l.
U

55
29
44

III
U

28
12

19

lb

18

Pendimethalin
Diuron
Prometryn
Cyanazine

Ib = highly hazardous; III = slightly hazardous; U = Unlikely to be hazardous; n.l. = not

listed.

seed-cotton/ha (approximately 1100 kg-lint/ha), although this

yield also depends on whether or not modern agriculture practices
are applied (Canakci et al., 2005; Ylmaz et al., 2005).
Studies performed in Antalya point to excessive nitrogen fertilizer consumption in the region (Canakci et al., 2005; Ylmaz
et al., 2005). Emissions resulting from N and P fertilizer application
are taken into account and quantied using methods for estimating on-eld nitrogen and phosphorus emissions (Brentrup et al.,
2000). Since, there is a wide variety of pesticides, insecticides and
fungicides in use, a representative chemical was selected for each
category of agrochemicals in the study, namely, diuron as a herbicide, parathion-ethyl as an insecticide and maneb as a fungicide.
Application of growth enhancers and defoliation agents is not a
common practice in Turkey (Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b).
The total dose of chemicals vary between 1.85 kg/ha and 10.5 kg/ha
in the selected region (Canakci et al., 2005; Ylmaz et al., 2005).
Harvesting is removal of opened and matured bolls (raw seedcotton) from the cotton plant and can be done either mechanically
or manually. The cotton is picked by hand in Turkey (Chaudhry,
1997; Ylmaz et al., 2005).
3.1.2. Organic cotton cultivation
Organic cotton production is a system of growing cotton without synthetic chemical fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides, growth
regulators, growth stimulators, boll openers or defoliants (Ingram,
2002). In order to be certied as organic, cotton has to be grown
without the prohibited chemicals for a period of three years. The
yield can be reduced by up to 50% in the rst few years after switching to organic practices but, the studies show that production yields
go back to its original level and in few cases even higher after three

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

years (Kooistra and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b; OE, 2007; Lakhal et al.,

2008).
Turkey contributed to 32.76% and 39.76% of the global organic
cotton production in 2005/06 and 2006/07 growing seasons,
respectively (OE, 2007, 2006). However, obtaining the exact cultivation and consumption gures in Turkey is challenging due to
discrepancies between the declared and real volumes of traded
organic ber (Ton, 2007; OE, 2008a). Detailed information about
organic cropping systems in Turkey is not yet available (Kooistra
and Termorshuizen, 2006a,b; OE, 2007, 2006). Thus, three different yield productivity scenarios for organic cotton cultivation were
developed; for transition period it is assumed that production rate
is half of the original year (550 kg/lint-ha), after transition it is equal
to 750 kg/lint-ha and nally average crop yield for organic cotton cultivation is same with conventional cotton production rate
(1100 kg/lint-ha).
Since organic cotton growing requires an upgraded system of
farming where soil management is one of the highest priorities, it
is assumed that natural fertilizers are used to maintain soil fertility.
In order to provide efcient N, P and K, composting, rock phosphate and muriate of potash are used in place of synthetic fertilizers
(UNCTAD, 2002a,b; Laursen et al., 1997; OE, 2008b).
Certication requirements prohibit use of toxic pesticides
against insects, weeds and diseases (ICAC, 1994). It is assumed in
the study that no agro chemicals or their alternatives are used
in the production of organic cotton and pest, weed and disease
management is achieved through crop rotation. Irrigation water
consumption for organic cultivation is assumed to be same with
conventional cotton water requirement.
3.2. Ginning, yarn manufacture and knitting
Cotton ginning separates lint ber from cotton-seed while
removing the trash from seed cotton and lint ber and acts as a
bridge between agricultural cotton production and textile manufacturing (Proto et al., 2000). Electric power requirement among
gins usually range from 40 to 60 kWh/bale (Anthony and Mayeld,
1994).
Yarn production from staple bers involves opening, cleaning,
blending, carding, combing, drawing, roving and spinning (Bralla,
2007). According to a recent study performed in Turkey, process energy consumption changes between 11.62 and 13.53 MJ/kg
(Koc and Kaplan, 2007). The energy consumption in this study is
assumed as 12.85 MJ/kg yarn and mass loss quantities are 5% for
preparation and 5% for spinning.
Knitting is a purely mechanical method of fabric formation
and includes knotting yarn together with a series of needles (EC,
2001a,b, U.S.EPA, 1997). The energy consumption for this process
is about 5 MJ/kg and material loss is 3% on average.
3.3. Fabric wet processing
Fabric wet processing improves the appearance, durability and
serviceability of fabrics by converting undyed and unnished goods
into nished consumers goods. It involves three main stages: fabric
preparation (pre-treatment), coloring, and nishing and many subprocesses. Pre-treatment removes natural sizing materials such
as water-insoluble starches, non-cellulosic impurities and foreign
matter like waxes, proteins, ashes and unwanted natural coloring
(U.S.EPA, 1997, Aly et al., 2004).
Dyeing is performed to give a uniform and permanent color to
fabric. Dyeing processes constitute the main difference between
conventional and Eco T-shirt products in this study, along with
alternative cotton cultivation practices. The inventory data for wet
fabric processing was provided by the selected textile plant located
in Hadimkey, Istanbul where Cleaner Production (CP) options were

217

developed and applied. The study served a dual purpose of determining and reducing the chemical, water and energy consumption
from wet fabric processing at the plant and providing data for the
LCA comparison of conventional and Eco T-shirt products. The general results are specied and expressed by using specic chemical
consumption (kg/kg textile), specic water consumption (L/kg textile) and specic energy consumption (MJ/kg textile).
Water used in dye-house is extracted from wells and softened by
an ion exchanger. The softened water is distributed to the processes
and used in dyeing baths and for cleaning purposes in the facility.
Dye-house wastewater is treated on-site and discharged into sewer
line. Natural gas and electricity are two major sources of energy in
the plant. Part of natural gas is used for steam production in boilers. Wet processing of knitted cotton fabric in dye-house is carried
out in jet dyeing machine. The sub-process of wet processing for
both conventional and Eco T-shirts are bleaching, dyeing, washing,
softening and drying.
Conventional and green dyeing recipes presented in the study
differ in bleaching and washing processes. CP audit has shown that
bleaching is one of the highest water consuming unit operations
in wet processing and increases the pollutant load of wastewater
treatment plant. Bleaching process implemented in conventional
T-shirt production consists of ve cycles of water lling-draining
that represents nearly 50% of total process time and one third of the
total water consumption. Washing represents 55% of total water
consumption and accounts for half of the generated wastewater.
Shortening of process cycles in Eco T-shirt production reduced the
specic water consumption and corresponding energy spending.
Reduction affects not only the consumption of water but also the
consumption of steam for heating up (up to 95 C) the process
baths.
Hydrogen peroxide (H2 O2 ) bleaching in conventional T-shirt
production is both water and energy intensive. Reducing agent,
sodium thiosulfate (Na2 S2 O3 ), is consumed to rinse off H2 O2 prior
to dyeing. Moreover, H2 O2 bleaching requires strongly alkaline conditions which is achieved by addition of caustic soda. Additionally,
wetting agent is used to give homogeneous hydrophility to the fabric and anti-pilling agent is added to degrade starch size on cotton
fabric. Elimination of H2 O2 in the bleaching of Eco T-shirt fabric has
resulted in 60% water and 61.5% energy saving without compromising the fastness properties of nal product. Acetic acid, wetting
agent and anti-pilling agent are applied in a series of two processes
for Eco T-shirt fabric while oil-removing agent is omitted.
Acetic acid and soap are used in washing stage in both conventional and Eco T-shirt fabric processing. Washing stage necessitates
a number of rising cycles to remove unreacted and hydrolyzed
dyestuff from the fabric after dyeing. Washing stage applied
in conventional T-shirt production consists of eight-cycle water
lling-draining. Soap substitution in washing eliminates three
water lling-draining cycles resulting in 37.5% water and 38%
energy saving. Apart from bleaching and washing processes, dyeing, softening and drying operations are similar in both recipes.
Chemical, energy and water consumption values of conventional
and Eco T-shirt production are as summarized in Table 4 and
the exact values for each chemical are provided in Table 5.
Total specic water consumption is reduced from 150 to 90 L/kg
and 39.5% energy saving is achieved through above-mentioned
modications.
3.4. T-shirt making up, use and disposal
The T-shirt making up processes do not involve environmental concerns beyond the use of electricity by machinery and fabric
remnants produced during the cutting-to-size processes. Hence,
only energy consumption and input/output of fabric mass values have been taken into account in evaluation. Average energy

218

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Table 4
Energy, water and chemical consumption values of conventional and Eco T-shirt production.
Process

Preparation
Coloration
Finishing

Sub-process

Bleaching
Dyeing
Washing
Softening
Drying

Total

Chemical consumption (kg/kg textile)

Energy consumption (MJ/kg textile)

Water consumption (L/kg textile)

II

II

II

0.118
0.95
0.02
0.04

1.128

0.023
0.95
0.02
0.04

1.033

8.34
1.86
12.63
0.57
1.80
25.20

3.21
1.86
7.84
0.57
1.80
15.28

50
10
80
10

150

20
10
50
10

90

I: Conventional T-shirt, II: Eco T-shirt.

Table 5
Inventory data for wet processing of conventional and Eco T-shirt per functional unit.
Inputs/Outputs

Inputs
Electric power
Steam
Water
Wetting agent
Desizing enzyme
Acedic acid
Sequestering agent
Salt
Soda ash
Dyestuff
Soap
Cationic softener
Silicon
Anticrease agent
Caustic soda
Hydrogen peroxide
Oil removing agent
Stabilizer
Sodyum thiosulphate
Outputs
Dyed fabric
Fabric remnant
Wastewater
COD

Unit

Conventional T-shirt

Eco T-shirt

Scenario A

Scenario B

Scenario C

Scenario D

MJ
MJ
l
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg
kg

608.135
5348.848
35,460.000
2.364
0.709
9.456
4.728
165.480
47.280
9.766
2.364
4.728
2.364
2.364
5.910
5.910
1.182
1.182
2.364

447.995
3164.468
21,276.000
2.364
0.709
7.092
2.364
165.480
47.280
9.766
2.364
4.728
2.364

447.995
3164.468
21,276.000
2.364
0.709
7.092
2.364
165.480
47.280
9.766
2.364
4.728
2.364

447.995
3164.468
21,276.000
2.364
0.709
7.092
2.364
165.480
47.280
9.766
2.364
4.728
2.364

kg
kg
l
kg

222.220
14.180
35,171.000
46.06

222.220
14.180
20,987.000
38.74

222.220
14.180
20,987.000
38.74

222.220
14.180
20,987.000
38.74

consumption of 2 MJ/kg textile is assumed with a fabric loss of 10%

based on available literature (Laursen et al., 1997; BTTG, 1999).
Only wearing and washing of T-shirts is included in the use
phase while softening, drying and ironing are excluded. Energy,
water and detergent consumption over the lifetime of one T-shirt
that corresponds to 50 washes before disposal is considered in
the study with the following assumptions; 60 C wash in an automatic washing machine, no prewash, 6 kg laundry mass load, 225 g
detergent, 49 L tap water and 1.14 kWh energy consumption per
wash. All calculations are adjusted to 1000 items. Incineration is
the method of choice for disposal of T-shirts that completed their
useful lifetime.
3.5. Transport
Transport processes involved in the life cycle of T-shirts include
seed-cotton transport, yarn transport, nished product transport
and transport of used T-shirts to incineration plant. The inventory
data for seed-cotton transportation is calculated based on average
distance of 100 km traveled by diesel engine equipped truck with
12.4 t capacity. The average distance between yarn mill and knitting house is considered 750 km with the assumption that fabric
production is performed in Istanbul. Fuel consumption and related
emissions for transportation of 243.70 kg yarn are based on a diesel
engine equipped truck process with 22 t capacity traveling from
Antalya to Istanbul.

4. Impact assessment results of conventional and Eco

T-shirts
Conventional T-shirt and Eco T-shirt scenarios have been evaluated and compared in terms of their impacts to global warming,
acidication, terrestrial and aquatic eutrophication and photochemical ozone formation potentials. Characterization results
distributed by life cycle stages of the products are summarized
in Figs. 26. Use, cultivation and harvesting, wet processing and
yarn manufacturing processes have the highest impact potentials
across all environmental categories evaluated in the study while
impacts from transport processes, ginning, knitting, T-shirt makeup and disposal are less signicant. The impacts from agricultural
activities, wet processing and use phase originate from diverse
effects of chemicals and energy sources used in the processes while
impacts of yarn production are mainly associated with electric
power consumption. The most dramatic decrease in impact potential when switching from conventional to Eco T-shirts was observed
for aquatic eutrophication potential (AEP) which is due to elimination of nitrogen and phosphorus containing chemical fertilizers
in cotton cultivation stage (up to 97% reduction). The differences
in environmental impact potentials between Scenarios B, C and D,
which vary in cultivation productivity, originate from the amount
of fuel consumed by agricultural machinery operating in the eld.
The use stage has the highest GWP of 4140.4 kg CO2 -eq that
results mainly from wastewater treatment, generation of electricity

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Fig. 2. Stage-by-stage GWP of conventional and Eco T-shirts.

Fig. 3. Stage-by-stage AP of conventional and Eco T-shirts.

Fig. 4. Stage-by-stage AEP of conventional and Eco T-shirts.

219

220

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Fig. 5. Stage-by-stage TEP of conventional and Eco T-shirts.

Fig. 6. Stage-by-stage POFP of conventional and Eco T-shirts.

for washing and detergent production. GWP associated with cotton

cultivation and harvesting stage come from fertilizer and pesticide
production (57%), N2 O emissions from the application of N fertilizer
to land (22%) and agricultural machinery operations (19%) in the
conventional cotton cultivation stage. Among all chemical inputs,
N fertilizer production accounts for a signicant portion (50.8%) of
the impact. Elimination of chemical fertilizers and pesticides from
cultivation process reduces GWP of Eco T-shirts. Positive performance of organic cultivation with a productivity rate of 100% is due
to smaller cultivation land area and correspondingly less amount of
diesel consumption by the agricultural machinery operations in the
eld. CP applications in wet processing led to decrease in GWP from
2420.7 to 1872.2 kg CO2 -eq (22%) in Eco T-shirts due to CO2 reduction through energy saving, chemical saving and direct emissions
from breakdown of organic content during wastewater treatment.
In terms of AP, use stage is an effective contributor to acidication with potential of 159.5 m2 UES across all scenarios.
Wastewater treatment is the main contributor (51%) followed by
soap production (25.3%) and electricity consumption (22.4%), while
tap water usage has minimal effect. Shifting from conventional cotton cultivation to organic cultivation reduces AP by 74.7 m2 UES,
59.8 m2 UES and 44.9 m2 UES for scenarios B, C and D, respectively.
Ammonia emission is the main source of the impact in conventional

cultivation resulting from supply and consumption of N fertilizer.

N fertilizer consumption represents 75.56% of this value resulting
from volatilization during and after application of urea, whereas
N fertilizer production only accounts for 23.1% of total ammonia
emissions. 17.0 m2 UES reduction in AP is observed when green
dyeing recipe is implemented for scenarios of B, C and D, mainly
from wastewater treatment process (70%). Steam used for heating and electricity used for mechanical work use are the two other
signicant contributors in this stage. AP for ginning (1.4 m2 UES),
yarn manufacturing (16.4 m2 UES), knitting (6.24 m2 UES) and Tshirt making-up (2.1 m2 UES) stages are connected with electricity
generation for processing.
Cotton cultivation is the most signicant cause of aquatic
eutrophication in conventional T-shirts caused by nutrient enrichment from waterborne emissions of nitrate and phosphate
originating from use of agrochemicals. AEP is reduced sharply from
43.561 to 1.460, 2.190 and 2.921 kg NO3 -eq when switching from
conventional to organic cultivation methods used in scenarios B,
C and D, respectively by replacing chemical fertilizers with natural alternatives. Nutrient enrichment is predominantly caused by
NOx emissions deposited to marine areas in organic cultivation
scenarios and by direct emissions to waster in conventional cultivation scenario. AEP from use stage (8.953 kg NO3 -eq) results from

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

221

Fig. 7. Normalized impact potentials of conventional and Eco T-shirt scenarios.

nitrogen oxide and nitrate emissions originating from detergent

production (4.194 kg NO3 -eq) and wastewater treatment (4.163 kg
NO3 -eq), with power generation constituting only 6% of the impact
from this stage.
When conventional bleaching and dyeing recipe is compared
with green dyeing recipe in the fabric wet processing stages, a
reduction in AEP by 0.721 NO3 -eq (21.3%) is observed.
TEP for conventional cotton cultivation stage is measured as
304.2 m2 UES in scenario A and reduced by 73%, 60% and 46% in Scenarios B, C and D, respectively. The reduction is achieved through
complete elimination of ammonia emission and reduction in nitrogen oxides. Since, signicant portion of nitrogen oxides originate
from fuel consumption in agricultural machinery, the TEP from
cultivation stage increases as agricultural productivity is reduced.
20% of decrease in TEP is observed when conventional bleaching
dyeing recipe is replaced with green dyeing recipe since few chemicals are used in the process and process temperature is decreased
while several baths are avoided. Use stage has the highest potential
(247.1 m2 UES), resulting from wastewater treatment, soap production and power generation.
Most of the POFP in conventional cotton cultivation comes from
N fertilizer production and diesel combustion. Organic cultivation
leads to a decline in the potential by 36.5% and 4.6% in scenarios B and C. However, contrary to other impact categories, a 27%
increase is observed in Scenario D, due to inefcient utilization of
agricultural land, which leads to increased consumption of diesel
in farm machinery per processed area. 20.1% decrease (1926.4 m2
UES ppm hours) in POFP is observed when conventional bleaching
dyeing recipe is replaced with green dyeing recipe, mainly due to
reduction in wastewater treatment, steam consumption, saving in
chemical consumption and nally power generation.
Normalization scores given in Fig. 7 indicate that GWP is by far
the largest environmental impact for both conventional and Eco Tshirt products. AEP, TEP and POFP have roughly similar impacts and
constitute less than one third of GWP except in Scenario A where
the effect of AEP is large due to chemical fertilizer use. AP has the
lowest value among impact categories.

5. Interpretation of the results in terms of raw material

substitution and centralized data availability
The results presented in the study cannot be evaluated and accurately interpreted on a stand-alone basis without addressing the

issues of reliable data availability, supplier-end considerations and

socio-economic aspects of the issue.
Processes taking place at the supplier end of products life cycle
in many cases may constitute the main portion of the products
overall environmental footprint. Elimination of certain chemicals
in wet processing has resulted in signicant reduction across all
impact categories. However, not all chemicals can be eliminated
from the process chain. Thus, alternative reagents have to be
tested and adopted for the currently used, high-impact chemicals
to reduce the environmental burdens from the production phase.
Improving the supplier-end performance of the product does not
necessitate replacement of every chemical input in the process
chain; some chemicals simply do not have currently available or
economically feasible, viable alternatives. In those cases, attentions
must be turned to manufacturers and suppliers of those materials
and the ones with best environmental record and CP applications
in place should be given a higher priority. This practice would not
only reduce the environmental footprint of the product in question but, it would also improve the suppliers products by actively
encouraging and pressuring them to manufacture their goods in a
sustainable fashion. The results of the study show that transport
has little impact in the overall life cycle of T-shirts and thus nding a better supplier, even ones from abroad must be pursued. The
same premise is applicable to agro-chemicals such as fertilizers and
pesticides used in cotton cultivation. While immediate transition
to organic cotton cultivation might be challenging, gradual elimination of chemical based fertilizers and pesticides, starting from
the ones with highest impact might be more feasible.
Despite Turkey being one of the leading producers of organic
cotton in the world, it was difcult to obtain reliable cultivation and
consumption data. Crop productivity, type and application rates of
fertilizers and pesticides vary signicantly from country to country,
from one region of a country to another and even from one eld of
a region to another, even for conventional cotton cultivation practices. Key parameters of cotton cultivation including average crop
yield and fertilizers types and application amounts were available
for the Antalya region in the South of Turkey. Pesticide, herbicide
and fungicide types however varied signicantly among different sources and thus representative chemicals for each of these
three main chemical categories were used in the analysis. While
overall results of the study indicate clear superiority of organic
cotton cultivation over traditional practices in terms of environmental performance, it is important to acknowledge that regional
differences such as soil fertility, climate and agricultural practice

222

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

traditions strongly affect the sustainability of the nal product. For

instance, POFP from cultivation and harvesting phase in Scenario
D where cultivation productivity is assumed to be 50% was highest
among all scenarios including conventional cultivation phase.
It is also important to realize that while process data for
agricultural activities was obtained from literature and national
reports and fabric processing data was provided by selected dye
house operating in Istanbul, these data represent multiple, isolated
sources thus, somewhat diminishing the general applicability of the
results. Availability of centralized, veried and periodically updated
national life cycle inventory database would greatly contribute to
reliability and generalizability of the results of similar studies.

6. Conclusions and future considerations

The results of the study point to importance of multi-directional
approach where incremental interventions at different life cycle
phases of a product lead to overall improvement of products
sustainability. LCA study described in the manuscript was not construed as a validation of any production strategy but rather as
a mechanism to evaluate different production and consumption
strategies with the intent of improving knowledge and efciency
in terms of environmental consequences of products. Besides the
obvious outcomes of chemical fertilizer elimination such as dramatic decrease in AEP, several aspects stand out; results show
that diesel fuel consumption by agricultural machinery in the
cultivation and harvesting phase, in addition to use of agrochemicals, is responsible for many environmental impacts from this
stage, particularly global warming and these impacts increase as
crop productivity decreases. Therefore, replacing diesel fuel with
biodiesel in the machinery, preferably produced in an on-site
facility from agricultural wastes and residues, would theoretically further improve sustainability of the nal product provided
that biodiesel itself is produced from sustainable feedstock. Electric power consumption is another prominent contributor to GWP
along with other environmental impact categories across all life
cycle stages of the products, most notably in use phase. Improving
energy efciency and increasing the share of renewable sources
in fabric production and processing facilities and economic use of
electricity in household would thus further increase the environmental performance of Eco T-shirts.
The success of improving sustainability of T-shirts and similar
textile apparel depends strongly on human factor across the entire
value chain. Convincing the farmers to switching organic agriculture is the initial and the most important task in this endeavor.
Unfamiliarity with the concept, concerns related to decreased crop
yield and nancial concerns that come along with it as well as
adherence to proven, traditional methods among farmers are the
main obstacles that need to be overcome. Although decrease in productivity is only temporary during the transition period to organic
agriculture as supported by the literature, it is still a discouraging element to farmers who would suffer yield loss for a few years.
Environmental issues associated with chemical fertilizer consumption can in many cases be of secondary concern for the farmers. It
is important to note that transition to organic agriculture require
collective and collaborative action by the farmers due to the very
nature and denition of organic agriculture; for instance, pesticides and herbicides applied in the neighboring eld could easily
transport to a eld where organic practices are applied, via wind
or water, thus disqualifying their cotton from being organic. Therefore, mere publication of the results of the study is not sufcient and
the main conclusions must be communicated on various platforms
and disseminated to relevant stakeholders by proper governmental
agencies, farmer unions and NGOs. The large impact from consumer
use phase of the products in all environmental impact categories

also calls for campaigns for informing the public on the consequences and outcomes of their actions on the environment based
on the results obtained in the study.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Sertan Gokpinar from BO Group A.S.
and all the staff from BO Group A.S. for their support throughout
the study.
References
Allwood, J.M., de Rodrguez, C.M., Laursen, S.E., Bocken, N.M.P., 2006. Well
Dressed? The Present and Future Sustainability of Clothing and Textiles in the
United Kingdom. University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing,
Cambridge, U.K.
Aly, A.S., Moustafa, A.B., Hebeish, A., 2004. Bio-technological treatment of
cellulosic textiles. J. Clean. Prod. 12, 697705.
Anthony, W.S., Mayeld, W.D., 1994. Cotton Ginners Handbook, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Center, Agricultural Handbook Number 503.
Government Printing Ofce, Washington, D.C.
Barber, A., Pellow, G., 2006. Life Cycle Assessment: The New Zealand Merino
IndustryMerino Wool Total Energy Use and Carbondioxide Emissions. The
AgriBusiness Group, Auckland, New Zealand.
Bralla, J.G., 2007. Handbook of Manufacturing ProcessesHow Products,
Components and Materials are Made, 1st ed. Industrial Press, U.S.A.
Brentrup, F., Kiisters, J., Lammel, J., Kuhlmann, H., 2000. Methods to estimate
on-eld nitrogen emissions from crop production as an input to LCA studies in
the agricultural sector. Int. J. LCA 6, 349357.
BTTG, 1999. Report 5: Waste Minimisation and Best Practice. British Textile
Technology Group, Manchester, U.K.
Canakci, M., Topakci, M., Akinci, I., Ozmerzi, A., 2005. Energy use pattern of some
eld crops and vegetable production: case study for Antalya region, Turkey.
Energy Convers. Manag. 46, 655666.
Catchot, A., 2007. Cotton Insect Control Guide. Extension Service of Mississippi
State University cooperating with U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S.A.
Chaudhry, M.R., 1997. Harvesting and Ginning of Cotton in the World.
International Cotton Advisory Committee, Washington, D.C.
Cherrett, N., Barrett, J., Clemett, A., Chadwick, M.J., 2005. Ecological Footprint and
Water Analysis of Cotton, Hemp and Polyester. BioRegional Development
Group and World Wide Fund for Nature, Switzerland (Cymru Report).
Collins, M., Aumnier, S., 2002. Streamlined Life Cycle Assessment of Two Marks &
Spencer plc Apparel Products. Environmental Resources Management,
England.
Dahllf, L., 2004. Methodological Issues in the LCA Procedure for the Textile
SectorA Case Study Concerning Fabric for a Sofa. Environmental Systems
Analysis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden.
Danish Ministry of Environment, 2005. Spatial Differentiation in Life Cycle Impact
AssessmentThe EDIP2003 Methodology. Environmental News No. 80,
Denmark.
EC, 2001a. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control. Reference Document on
Best Available Techniques for the Textiles Industry. European Commission,
Seville, Spain (February).
EC, 2001b. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control. Reference Document on
Best Available Techniques for the Textiles Industry. European Commission,
Seville, Spain (February).
FAO-ICAC, 2013. World Apparel Fiber Consumption Survey. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations and International Cotton Advisory
Committee, Washington, D.C., USA.
FAO-ICAC, 2015. Measuring Sustainability in Cotton Farming Systems. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and International Cotton
Advisory Committee, Rome, Italy.
Guerena, M., Sullivan, P., 2003. Organic Cotton Production. National Center for
Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas, U.S.A, http://www.
organicexchange.org (accessed 11.08).
Hauschild, M., Wenzel, H., 2000. Life Cycle AssessmentEnvironmental
Assessment of Products. CRC Press LLC, Denmark, pp. 155189.
ICAC, 1994. Organic Cotton Production II. International Cotton Advisory
Committee, Washington, D.C.
Ingram, M., 2002. Producing the natural ber naturally: technological change and
the US organic cotton industry. Agric. Hum. Values 19, 325336.
Kalliala, E.M., Nousianinen, P., 1999. Life Cycle Assessment Environmental Prole
of Cotton and Polyester-Cotton Fabrics. AUTEX Res. J. 1 (1), 820.
Koc, E., Kaplan, E., 2007. An investigation on energy consumption in yarn
production with special reference to ring spinning. Fibres Text. East. Eur. 15
(4), 63.
Kooistra, K., Termorshuizen, A., 2006a. The Sustainability of Cotton: Consequences
for Man and Environment. Science Shop Wageningen University & Research
Centre, The Netherlands (Report 223).
Kooistra, K., Termorshuizen, A., 2006b. The Sustainability of Cotton: Consequences
for Man and Environment. Science Shop Wageningen University & Research
Centre, The Netherlands (Report 223).

G. Baydar et al. / Resources, Conservation and Recycling 104 (2015) 213223

Lakhal, S.Y., Sidibe, H., HMida, S., 2008. Comparing conventional and certied
organic cotton supply chains: the case of Mali. Int. J. Agric. Res. Gov. Ecol. 7,
243255.
Laursen, S.E., Bagh, J., Bagh, J., Jensen, O.K., Werther, I., 1997. Environmental
Assessment of TextilesLife Cycle Screening of the Production of Textiles
Containing Cotton, Wool, Viscose, Polyester or Arcylic Fibres. Ministry of
Environment and Energy, Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Denmark
(Miljoproject no. 20).
Morley, N., Slater, S., Russell, S., Tipper, M., Ward, G.D., 2006. Recycling of Low
Grade Clothing Waste. Salvation Army Trading Company Ltd, Oakdene Hollins
Ltd., Nonwovens Innovation & Research Institute Ltd, Leeds, UK (WRT152,
September).
OE, 2006. Organic Cotton Fiber Report. Organic Exchange, http://textileexchange.
org.
OE, 2007. Organic Farm and Fiber Report. Organic Exchange, http://
textileexchange.org.
OE, 2008a. Organic Cotton Farm and Fiber Report. Organic Exchange, http://
textileexchange.org.
OE, 2008b. Soil Fertility Management, Discussion Draft. Organic Exchange, http://
textileexchange.org.
Proto, M., Supino, S., Malandrino, O., 2000. Cotton: a ow cycle to exploit. Ind.
Crops Prod. 11, 173178.
Saxce, M.D., Pesnel, C., Perwuelz, A., 2012. LCA of bed sheetssome relevant
parameters for lifetime assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 37, 221228.
SBN, 2008. Sustainable business network. http://sustainable.org.nz.
Silvertooth, J.C., 2002. Cotton. International Fertilizer Association, Paris, France,
www.fertilizer.org/ifa (accessed 07.09).
Soth, J., Grasser, C., Salerno, R., 1999. The Impact of Cotton on Fresh Water
Resources and Ecosystems: A Preliminary Analysis. World Wide Fund for
Nature, Gland, Switzerland.

223

Ton, P., 2007. Organic Cotton: An Opportunity for Trade. International Trade Centre
UNCTAD/WTO (ITC), Geneva, Switzerland (Technical Paper, Doc. No.
MDS-07.121.E).
TUIK, 2013. Turkeys Statistical Yearbook 2013, Istanbul, Turkey.
U.S.EPA, 1997. Prole of the Textile Industry, Sector Notebook Project. Ofce of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Washington, D.C
(EPA/310-R-97-009).
UNCTAD, 2002a. United Nations conference on trade and development.
http://r0.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/cotton/crop.htm (accessed 08.09).
UNCTAD, 2002b. United Nations conference on trade and development.
http://r0.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/cotton/crop.htm (accessed 08.09).
USDA, 2015. Cotton: World Markets and Trade. Unites States Department of
Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S.A.
Woolridg, A.C., Ward, G.D., Phillips, P.S., Collins, M., Gandy, S., 2006. Life cycle
assessment for reuse/recycling of donated waste textiles compared to use of
virgin material: an UK energy saving perspective. Res. Conserv. Recycl. 46,
94103.
Ylmaz, I., Akcaoz, H., Ozkan, B., 2005. An analysis of energy use and input costs for
cotton production in Turkey. Renew. Energy 30, 145155.

Further reading
Chapagain AK, Hoekstra AY, Savenije HHG, Gautam R. The water footprint of cotton
consumption: an assessment of the impact of worldwide consumption of
cotton products on the water resources in the cotton producing countries. Ecol
Econ 2006;60:186203.