Skip to content Skip to footer

Journal of Science and Engineering Papers

Doi: https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.24.1000001

ISSN: 3006-3191 (Online)

ISSN: 3079-8175 (Print)

Science and Engineering for the Comprehensive Futures                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Call for Article

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers

Volume: 03
Issue: 02
Views: 60
Review Article
Environmental chemistry
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers
Department of Environmental Science & Engineering, Bangladesh University of Textiles


Received: 8th June, 2026

Revised: 6th August, 2026

Accepted: 19th August, 2026

Year: 2026
Page: 207-215

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

Crossref logo

Downloads : 60

Abstract

The textile and apparel industry is one of the pollution intensive and resource consuming industries and responsible for putting a huge amount of negative environmental impact. For making this sector much more environmentally friendly, proper dataset and analysis is required. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can provide a widespread look of environmental impacts of each and every stage of a product’s life cycle. A cradle to gate system boundary was applied to acquire and analysis all the dataset with some key environmental indicators like Water usage, Chemical burden, Land consumption, Energy usage, GHG emission & different pollution factors. Major environmental hotspots can be identified from the whole study. The overall study shows each fibre has different environmental profile. Cotton is extremely dependent on climate. It requires high water, land and agrochemicals. Polyester has a different profile with high energy requirement and contributes to GHG emission. Regenerated cellulose stands in between natural and synthetic fibre but it requires high amount of toxic chemicals for manufacturing. A proper evaluation and analysis is done in this study by comparing different pollution factors, carbon footprinting and eco-cost concept. The study gives a widespread look to identify environmental trade-offs among fibres and helps to identify the sustainable fibre in particular context and which will eventually help to reduce the negative environmental impacts and lessen down the eco burdens.

References

  1. Manyata, R., Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Textiles and Clothing. 2025: Carbon Trail.
  2. Gonzalez, V., Lou, X., and Chi, T., (2023). Evaluating Environmental Impact of Natural and Synthetic Fibers: A Life Cycle Assessment Approach. Sustainability, 15(9): 7670.
  3. Khan, M. M. R. and Islam, M. M., (2015). Materials and manufacturing environmental sustainability evaluation of apparel product: knitted T-shirt case study. Textiles and Clothing Sustainability, 1(1): 8.
  4. Munasinghe, P., Druckman, A., and Dissanayake, D., (2021). A systematic review of the life cycle inventory of clothing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 320: 128852.
  5. John, J., Christoph, K., and Susan, M., LCA UPDATE OF COTTON FIBER AND FABRIC LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY. 2017: Cotton Incorporated.
  6. Gupta, A. The Water Footprint of Technical Textiles: A Comprehensive Analysis. 2025 [cited 2026 2026.08.17]; Available from: https://www.sarkengg.in/post/quantifying-water-footprints-in-technical-textile-manufacturing-from-raw-fiber-to-final-product.
  7. Max. The environmental impact of the textile sector. 2024 [cited 2026 2026.08.17]; Available from: https://www.hhc.earth/knowledge-base/articles/the-environmental-impact-of-the-textile-sector.
  8. Muthu, S. S., (2017). Sustainable fibres and textiles. Woodhead Publishing.
  9. Kassa, G., Sangha, K. K., Murphy, B. P., and Mazhar, M. S., (2026). Challenges and prospects of cotton farming in the tropics: lessons for northern Australia. Journal of Cotton Research, 9(1): 2.
  10. Laursen, S. E., Hansen, J., Knudsen, H. H., and Wenzel, H., EDIPTEX - Environmental assessment of textiles. 2007: Danish Environmental Protection Agency
  11. Tuners, T. Cellulosic fibres - Chemical Technology - Chemical engineering. 2026 [cited 2026 2026.08.17]; Available from: https://edurev.in/t/99717/Cellulosic-Fibres?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
  12. Kuchtová, G., Herink, P., Herink, T., Chýlková, J., Mikulášek, P., and Dušek, L., (2023). From lab-scale to pilot-scale treatment of real wastewater from the production of rayon fiber. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 171: 834-846.
  13. Björklund, C., Co-occurring substance use and criminal offending: Risk factors, patterns, trajectories and outcomes. 2025, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University.
  14. Shen, L. and Patel, M. K., (2010). Life Cycle Assessment of man-made cellulose fibres. Lenzinger Berichte, 88: 1-59.
  15. Kalliala, E. M. and Nousiainen, P., (1999). Life cycle assessment: environmental profile of cotton and polyester-cotton fabrics. AUTEX Research Journal, 1(1): 8-20.
  16. Moazzem, S., Crossin, E., Daver, F., and Wang, L., (2021). Assessing environmental impact reduction opportunities through life cycle assessment of apparel products. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28: 663-674.
  17. Moazzem, S., Crossin, E., Daver, F., and Wang, L., (2021). Life Cycle Assessment of Apparel Consumption in Australia. Environmental and Climate Technologies, 25(1): 71-111.
  18. Aytop, Y., (2023). Determination of Energy Consumption and Technical Efficiency of Cotton Farms in TĂĽrkiye. Sustainability, 15(14): 11194.
  19. Henriksen, M., Life Cycle Assessment : a comparison of fossil energy use and climate impact on small scale manufacturing and large scale conventional manufacturing of textile toys, in Dept. of Energy and Technology. 2024, Uppsala: Second cycle, A1E. Uppsala: SLU.
  20. Boschmeier, E., Ipsmiller, W., and Bartl, A., (2024). Market assessment to improve fibre recycling within the EU textile sector. Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy, 42(2): 135-145.
  21. Felgueiras, C., Azoia, N. G., Gonçalves, C., Gama, M., and Dourado, F., (2021). Trends on the Cellulose-Based Textiles: Raw Materials and Technologies. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 9: 608826.
  22. Gupta, R., Bhamra, A., Singh, S., Rao, N., Hari, K., and CP, A. K., NET ZERO IN AGRICULTURE: ROLE OF TECHNOLOGIES. 2023: Intellecap Advisory Services Private Limited.
  23. Bonou-zin, R. D. C., Allali, K., and Fadlaoui, A., (2019). Environmental Efficiency of Organic and Conventional Cotton in Benin. Sustainability, 11(11): 3044.
  24. Vitale, G. S., Iacuzzi, N., Zingale, S., Lombardo, S., Tuttolomondo, T., and Guarnaccia, P., (2025). Environmental sustainability of cotton: a systematic literature review of life cycle assessments. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 22: 102069.
  25. Pranay Raja, B., (2022). Biopesticides use on cotton and their harmful effects on human health & environment. International Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Biochemical Technology, 5(1): 005-008.
  26. Kahigi, N. S., Mkunda, J. J., Mwema, M. F., and Machunda, R., (2025). A comprehensive life cycle assessment of sisal yarn production: Unveiling sustainability and resource optimization hotspots. Environmental Challenges, 18: 101085.
  27. Sovbetov, I., (2025). Carbon Footprint Embodied in Global Fiber Trades. Journal of Natural Fibers, 22(1): 2503970.
  28. Himu, H. A., Dip, T. M., Fatema, U. K., Kabir, A. T., Islam, M.-U., Latifi, E. M., Hasan, T., Hasan, S. B., and Ahmed, N., (2026). Aquatic Microfibre Release from Different Textiles During Home Laundering. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 237(10): 567.
  29. Fibers, T. L., Sustainable sourcing and environmental excellence. 2023: Tencel.
  30. Zhu, J., Yang, Y., Li, Y., Xu, P., and Wang, L., (2020). Water footprint calculation and assessment of viscose textile. Industria Textila, 71: 33-40.
  31. La Rosa, A. D. and Grammatikos, S. A., (2019). Comparative life cycle assessment of cotton and other natural fibers for textile applications. Fibers, 7(12): 101.
  32. He, L., Hou, N., and Li, R., (2025). A comparative life cycle assessment of viscose fibers derived from cotton, wood, and bamboo pulp. Industrial Crops and Products, 237: 122267.
  33. Subramanian, K., Chopra, S. S., Cakin, E., Li, X., and Lin, C. S. K., (2020). Environmental life cycle assessment of textile bio-recycling – valorizing cotton-polyester textile waste to pet fiber and glucose syrup. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 161: 104989.
  34. Saadi, N. and Boulay, A. M., (2026). Microfibers in Life Cycle Assessment: Comparing the Physical Effects of Cellulosic and Synthetic Fibers via Characterization Factors Development. Integrated environmental assessment and management, 22(4): 986-996.
  35. Pires, S. T., Williams, A., Daystar, J., Sagues, W. J., Lan, K., and Venditti, R. A., (2024). Evaluating Cotton Apparel with Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment: The Climate Benefits of Temporary Biogenic Carbon Storage. BioResources, 19(3): 5074.
  36. Yu, Z. and Yang, Y., (2025). Carbon footprint of global cotton production. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 20: 100214.
  37. Almeida, M. L. R. d., Qureshi, T. I., Bhatnagar, A., Niinimäki, K., and Dessbesell, L., (2026). Sustainability indicators for accelerating the production of man-made cellulosic fibers. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 20: 100391.
  38. van der Velden, N. M., Patel, M. K., and Vogtländer, J. G., (2014). LCA benchmarking study on textiles made of cotton, polyester, nylon, acryl, or elastane. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19(2): 331-356.

How to Cite

I.H. 2024. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers. Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
August 20, 2026.
  Doi: 10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers.
  journal 2026, 20.
. (%metadata_field|year%). %post_title%. Journal of Science and Engineering Papers, %metadata_field|volume%(%metadata_field|issue%), %metadata_field|page%. https://doi.org/%metadata_field|doi%
20 (1).
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
I.H. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers. Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
2026.
2024." Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers." Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
20 (1).
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
I.H. 2024. " Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers." Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
20 (1).
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
, "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers". .Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
  journal Aug, 2026.
"Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers." Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
Aug, 2026.
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
"Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers." Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
(Aug 20, 2026).
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Supply Chain Optimization: Comparative LCA of Cotton, Polyester and Regenerated Cellulose Fibers. Journal of Science and Engineering Papers . 
  journal [ Internet ] 20 Aug, 2026.
  [ Cited 20 Aug, 2026 ]
20 (1).
  https://doi.org/10.62275/josep.26.1000030.

Keywords

LCA, sustainable, cradle-to-gate, GHG, carbon footprint, eco-cost

Journal Metrics

Acceptance rate

-

Submission to final decision

-

Acceptance to publication

-

CiteScore

-

Journal Citation Indicator

-

Impact Score

-

APC

$12.5