Innovative recycling or extended use? Comparing the global warming potential of different ownership and end-of-life scenarios for textiles

The implementation of circular economy (CE) thinking to reduce environmental impacts and resource use has led to the development of innovative recycling technologies and business models. The implications of these technologies and models, however, remain largely unclear. In many CE strategies, there is a high risk of rebound, meaning a situation in which activities aimed at environmental benefits are not realized because of external reasons. A similar risk relates to limited understanding about the behavioral changes required by extensive implementation of circular practices. Using life cycle assessment, we compare the global warming potential (GWP) of five ownership and end-of-life scenarios for creating and using a pair of jeans. The scenarios are as follows: (a) BASE, i.e. basic use with waste disposal; (b) REDUCE, i.e. extended use; (c) REUSE, i.e. re-selling; (d) RECYCLE, i.e. industrial processing into new raw materials; and (e) SHARE, i.e. a rental service. Our results show that the lowest global warming impacts are achieved in the REDUCE scenario, and the second lowest are achieved in the REUSE scenario. The RECYCLE scenario leads to relatively high overall emissions because the replaced emissions from cotton production are relatively low. The use of rental services is likely to increase customers’ mobility, and if that happens in a large scale, then the SHARE scenario has the highest GWP. It was found that many new CE innovations come with a high rebound risk, and existing practices carry similar, yet smaller risks.