Every time we wash our clothes, microfibres are released into the environment. Unsplash
Every time we wash our clothes, microfibres are released into the environment. Unsplash
Every time we wash our clothes, microfibres are released into the environment. Unsplash
Every time we wash our clothes, microfibres are released into the environment. Unsplash

Every time you wash your clothes, you are adding to a mountain of plastic fluff that is polluting the environment


Sophie Prideaux
  • English
  • Arabic

Over the past few years, there has been an increasing awareness on the impact microplastics have on oceans and the environment. But they are not the only tiny particles that are having a devastating environmental effect.

As we wash our clothes, tiny fibres from synthetic fabrics are released and leaked into the environment. And scientists have now revealed just how much of this ‘fluff’  has contaminated land, oceans and rivers around the world.

Since the popularisation of fabrics like nylon and polyester in the 1950s, around 5.6 million tonnes of fibres have been released into the environment, scientists in the US estimate – the equivalent of seven billion fleece jackets.

Around 2.9 million tonnes of these fibres – less than 5mm in length - have made their way into the world’s oceans.

However, the problem with this fluff is that it is having an increasing impact on land. According to the team at the University of California, Santa Barbara, which carried out the study, the number of fibres remaining on land has overtaken those being leaked into oceans thanks to advances in wastewater treatment works, which have made plants extremely good at catching the particles.

But once it has been captured, this fluff is being applied to cropland alongside biosolid sludge, or simply being buried in landfills.

Microfibres from synthetic fabrics are ending up in landfill. Unsplash
Microfibres from synthetic fabrics are ending up in landfill. Unsplash

The researchers say their findings, published in the journal Plos One, indicate yearly microfibre emissions to landfill and other terrestrial environments exceeding 167,000 metric tonnes each year.

The true numbers are, however, extremely difficult for researchers to calculate. The team at USCB looked at data on how plastic is made, consumed, and then shed around the world. They also needed to look at the impact of both machine and hand washing, and estimate the number of people who do each and at what frequency, as well as looking at the effect different detergents can have on the shedding of microfibres.

The results estimated that, between 1950 and 2016, 5.6 million tonnes of this fluff was released from clothes washed, with around half of these emissions occurring in the past 10 years. This is, in part, down to the rise in fast fashion and our growing collection of clothes. In 1990, researchers say the global average stock of garments per head was 8kg. By 2016, it was 26kg per capita.

With emissions growing by 12.9 per cent each year, researchers say more needs to be done to reduce plastic fibre pollution.

"Large-scale removal of microfibres from the environment is unlikely to be technically feasible or economically viable, so the focus needs to be on emission prevention," the study’s lead author Jenna Gavigan said.

"Since wastewater treatment plants don't necessarily reduce emissions to the environment, our focus needs to be on reducing emissions before they enter the wastewater stream."

What can you do?

Document everything immediately; including dates, times, locations and witnesses

Seek professional advice from a legal expert

You can report an incident to HR or an immediate supervisor

You can use the Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation’s dedicated hotline

In criminal cases, you can contact the police for additional support

Wicked: For Good

Director: Jon M Chu

Starring: Ariana Grande, Cynthia Erivo, Jonathan Bailey, Jeff Goldblum, Michelle Yeoh, Ethan Slater

Rating: 4/5

Electric scooters: some rules to remember
  • Riders must be 14-years-old or over
  • Wear a protective helmet
  • Park the electric scooter in designated parking lots (if any)
  • Do not leave electric scooter in locations that obstruct traffic or pedestrians
  • Solo riders only, no passengers allowed
  • Do not drive outside designated lanes
Islamophobia definition

A widely accepted definition was made by the All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims in 2019: “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.” It further defines it as “inciting hatred or violence against Muslims”.

SUZUME
%3Cp%3EDirector%3A%20Makoto%20Shinkai%3C%2Fp%3E%0A%3Cp%3EStars%3A%20Nanoka%20Hara%2C%20Hokuto%20Matsumura%2C%20Eri%20Fukatsu%3C%2Fp%3E%0A%3Cp%3ERating%3A%204%2F5%3C%2Fp%3E%0A
Itcan profile

Founders: Mansour Althani and Abdullah Althani

Based: Business Bay, with offices in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and India

Sector: Technology, digital marketing and e-commerce

Size: 70 employees 

Revenue: On track to make Dh100 million in revenue this year since its 2015 launch

Funding: Self-funded to date

 

Why it pays to compare

A comparison of sending Dh20,000 from the UAE using two different routes at the same time - the first direct from a UAE bank to a bank in Germany, and the second from the same UAE bank via an online platform to Germany - found key differences in cost and speed. The transfers were both initiated on January 30.

Route 1: bank transfer

The UAE bank charged Dh152.25 for the Dh20,000 transfer. On top of that, their exchange rate margin added a difference of around Dh415, compared with the mid-market rate.

Total cost: Dh567.25 - around 2.9 per cent of the total amount

Total received: €4,670.30 

Route 2: online platform

The UAE bank’s charge for sending Dh20,000 to a UK dirham-denominated account was Dh2.10. The exchange rate margin cost was Dh60, plus a Dh12 fee.

Total cost: Dh74.10, around 0.4 per cent of the transaction

Total received: €4,756

The UAE bank transfer was far quicker – around two to three working days, while the online platform took around four to five days, but was considerably cheaper. In the online platform transfer, the funds were also exposed to currency risk during the period it took for them to arrive.