Upcycling, Recycling, Downcycling: Definitions sorted, challenges remain

cycling recycling For most of us within the small professional circles of sustainable fashion, the terms ‘upcycling’, ‘recycling’, and ‘downcycling’ flow as easy over our lips as the somewhat more profane ‘good morning’.

However, while there are a few simple definitions of what these terms means – to follow hereafter – the concept demands a bit more attention when drilling down into material streams related to fibres, in particular.
Fabrics technologists know that recycled fibre (never mind the terminology here, as recycled fibre comes often from post-consumer garments, torn into fibre, made into thread and then fabrics – hence, upcycling, downcycling or recycling?) can pose a challenge to the resulting fabric if not processed properly. Equally, recycled PET, from PET bottles, should accurately be labelled as downcycled. Why? In the process of making the polyester into thread, the polymer changes type, from one of a higher quality to one of a lower quality. In fact, fabric made from recycled polyester yarn can pose a real challenge to give it yet another life.

Hence here the definitions:

Definition: Recycling Source: Merriam Webster Dictionary:

  1. to pass again through a series of changes or treatments: as
    • to process (as liquid body waste, glass, or cans) in order to regain material for human use
    • recover (= to save from loss and restore to usefulness)
    • to reuse or make (a substance) available for reuse for biological activities through natural processes of biochemical degradation or modification
  2. to adapt to a new use : alter
  3. to bring back : reuse
  4. to make ready for reuse

Definition: Upcycling Source: Worn again
“Upcycling (unlike recycling) is the practice of taking something that is disposable and transforming it into something of greater use and value, leading to a higher material and energy benefits.”

Definition: Downcycling Source: Wikipedia
Downcycling is the process of converting waste materials or useless products into new materials or products of lesser quality and reduced functionality.

Conventional vs. Upcycled production - the stats
Environmental impact compared: Conventional vs. Upcycled production ((c) Worn Again; click to enlarge)
On a global level, re- or upcycling makes sense for the huge energy savings involved – provided it doesn’t happen off, but on shore (i.e. within one’s own borders), as the illustration on the right shows.

While re- and upcycling is tough enough on a relatively coarse level – i.e. when, say, turning coats into bags – it gets ever more complex as we advance to more fine grained levels.
The ultimate level is that of chemical components such as polymers, where – in theory at least – everything should be recyclable, too. Be it as the raw material for a new batch of polyester fibres, or as (risk free) fertiliser for agriculutral lands.

Recycled fibre has – by way of concept – a much, much smaller environmental footprint than its virgin counter part. However – it’s product quality that it has to be balanced with: recycled cotton fibre is shorter than its long-staple virgin equivalent; the same is the case for wool; in the case of PET the material is normally effectively downcycled and can’t be used for antoher round of recycling anymore. “nd, 3rd and n-th rounds of recycling the same batch of fibre is not really possible in the actual meaning it. It can be done if the fibre loss along the way is replenished with virgin fibre.

Recycling in fact, at what ever level we’re talking of, whether at product level or polymer level, is a set of challenges where research – academic and otherwise – is still heavily contributing to make it truly happening.