Polyester fibre: Emissions
Coal power in spinning hubs adds to the carbon
What this tab covers The greenhouse-gas footprint per tonne, split by lifecycle phase (feedstock, production, movement, use, end of life), the global total, other environmental impacts, levers and low-carbon routes, India's position, and where the investment opportunity lies. Emission intensity 3.00 t CO2e per t range 2.5-4.1 · indicative (basis: 0.86 t PTA x 1.3 + 0.335 t MEG x 2.2 = about 1.86 t for polymer inputs, plus about 1.0 t for polymerisation, spinning and texturing on coal-heavy Asian grids, plus 0.1 t transport); Shen and Patel (2010) give 4.1 t CO2e/t and 96 GJ/t for PET fibre Global emissions per year 220 Mt CO2e per year 2024 · 68.7 Mt virgin x 3.0 + 9.3 Mt recycled x about 1.5 (indicative)Per t of virgin polyester fibre, cradle-to-gate. Intensity: derived from PTA and MEG tiles; Shen and Patel 2010 via Felgueiras et al. 2021 (Frontiers in Bioengineering). Global total: derived; Textile Exchange 2025 volumes.
Share of footprint by lifecycle phase
Feedstock 62% Production / process 35% Movement 3%Footprint by lifecycle phase
| Phase | Intensity | Share | Main sources of emissions | Notes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feedstock | about 1.86 t CO2e per t | 62% | PTA (via PX) and MEG; coal-based MEG in China is about twice as carbon-intensive | PTA and MEG tiles | |
| Production / process | about 1.0 t CO2e per t (indicative) | 35% | Polymerisation heat, spinning and texturing electricity, much of it from coal in China and India | Texturing and air-conditioning of spinning halls are large power users | indicative |
| Movement | about 0.1 t CO2e per t (indicative) | 3% | Container shipping and trucking | indicative | |
| Use | not counted in cradle-to-gate | – | Washing and drying of garments | Microfibre shedding releases plastic to waterways | n/a |
| End of life | about 2.3 t CO2 per t if incinerated | – | Most textiles are landfilled or burned; less than 1% of fibre comes from recycled textiles (Textile Exchange) | Polyester does not biodegrade | stoichiometry (62.5% carbon) |
Other environmental impacts
Microfibre pollution; antimony in fibre and wastewater; dyehouse effluent; polyester's low water use (about 125 m3/t versus 5,730 m3/t for cotton, Felgueiras et al. 2021) is a counterpoint.
Levers to cut emissions
- Recycled content (bottle-to-fibre now about 12%; textile-to-textile below 1%)
- Renewable power for spinning and texturing
- Electrified or biomass process heat for polymerisation
- Bio-MEG and lower-carbon PTA upstream
- Durability and design for recycling
India
India's polyester footprint is high because spinning and texturing run on coal-heavy power and captive plants. Its large bottle-collection system supports one of the bigger recycled PSF industries (indicative). No national fibre footprint is published.
Emission figures are indicative global averages from the life-cycle studies named; actual footprints vary widely by site, energy mix and method.Low-carbon routes
| Route | Intensity | Cost premium | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanically recycled PSF from bottles | about 1.0-1.5 t CO2e per t (indicative) | small to none, depending on flake prices (indicative) | 9.3 Mt in 2024 (Textile Exchange); large in India (Reliance, Ganesha Ecosphere) | Textile Exchange 2025; indicative |
| Textile-to-textile chemical recycling | not published | large (indicative) | pilot and first plants; below 1% of fibre | Textile Exchange 2025 |