6 March 2025

Fact Check: How Accurate is the AK Upper Austria’s Statement on Recycled Polyester?

The Role of the Arbeiterkammer (AK) in Consumer Protection
The Arbeiterkammer (AK) is an important institution in Austria, advocating for workers' rights and consumer protection. Part of its role is to expose misleading marketing practices, including sustainability claims made by companies. One of AK Upper Austria's latest investigations focuses on the environmental impact of recycled polyester, particularly regarding microplastic pollution. Fashion.at now conducts an independent fact check on the claims presented in the press release.


Claim 1: Microplastic fibers are also released when recycled polyester is washed.
The AK Upper Austria commissioned a washing test conducted by the Federal Environment Agency. The test found that clothing made from recycled polyester, including items from H&M, C&A, Mango, and Primark, released thousands of microplastic fibers per kilogram of laundry—at levels similar to newly produced polyester.

TRUE
Research confirms that washing synthetic textiles—whether recycled or virgin—releases microplastics into wastewater, contributing to environmental pollution. Sewage treatment plants filter out some microfibers, but a significant amount still ends up in rivers and oceans.


Claim 2: A study by the Medical University has shown that we now consume the plastic weight of a credit card every week.
AK Upper Austria cites a study stating that humans ingest around five grams of microplastics per week—the weight of a credit card. This claim originally comes from a 2019 study by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which aggregated data from various sources.

A 2022 article from MedUni Vienna referenced this estimate, noting that while it serves as a useful illustration, the actual health impact of microplastic ingestion remains uncertain. Additionally, ORF Science confirmed that an international research team estimated microplastic consumption at around five grams per week, with the primary sources being packaging waste and contaminated food (ORF Science).

TRUE
While the five-gram estimate is widely cited, ongoing research is needed to determine the full extent of its accuracy and health effects.


Claim 3: Recycled polyester is no more sustainable than conventional polyester fibers.
According to the press release from AK Upper Austria, recycled polyester is primarily derived from old PET bottles, which could otherwise be recycled multiple times as new bottles. However, once these bottles are converted into textiles, their recycling process typically ends, as there are currently very few methods to recycle worn polyester garments back into polyester fibers. Instead of significantly reducing plastic waste, it is merely repurposed—while still contributing to the release of microplastics into the environment.

While the use of recycled polyester reduces reliance on virgin petroleum-based polyester and lowers energy consumption in production, its limited recyclability and continued microplastic shedding raise concerns about its long-term sustainability. Therefore, while it presents certain environmental advantages, it does not provide a truly circular or fully sustainable solution.

PARTIALLY TRUE


Claim 4: Companies do not communicate the problem of microplastic release from their products on their websites.
AK Upper Austria states that major fashion brands, such as H&M, C&A, Mango, and Primark, emphasize the sustainability benefits of recycled polyester but fail to mention its microplastic pollution when washed.

A quick fact-check of the sustainability sections of H&M, C&A, Mango, and Primark's websites was conducted using ChatGPT to verify this claim.

- H&M: Acknowledges that "all polyester fabrics, recycled or not, shed microplastics when you wash them" and advises using microfiber-catching laundry bags to mitigate this issue (H&M Sustainability). - C&A, Mango, and Primark: No specific information regarding microplastic release during washing was found on their official websites.

PARTIALLY TRUE
While H&M provides transparency on this issue, the other brands do not explicitly communicate the problem of microplastic shedding from their products.


Claim 5: Only natural fibers are a real alternative.
AK Upper Austria concludes that natural fibers are the only sustainable solution, implying that all synthetic fibers, including recycled polyester, are environmentally harmful.

While natural fibers like organic cotton, wool, and linen biodegrade and do not contribute to microplastic pollution, they have their own environmental challenges, such as water-intensive farming and pesticide use. Additionally, some innovative synthetic materials are being developed to minimize pollution and improve recyclability.

PARTIALLY TRUE
Natural fibers do not release microplastics, making them a better alternative in that regard. However, a more sustainable future may include innovations in both natural and synthetic fibers rather than eliminating synthetic options entirely.


Conclusion
The fact-check confirms that most of AK Upper Austria's claims hold up to scrutiny. Recycled polyester does release microplastics, the five-gram ingestion claim is widely accepted but still under research, and fashion brands do not disclose microfiber pollution in their sustainability communication. However, the statement that only natural fibers are a viable alternative is somewhat oversimplified, as technological advances may provide better solutions in the future.

Consumers should remain critical of greenwashing in the fashion industry and consider the full environmental impact of their clothing choices.


Image: The symbolic image with the writing 'FACT CHECK' was created by Fashion.at using Microsoft Copilot, Bing on March 6, 2025.