Synthetics Anonymous 2.0

The report finds that the fashion industry remains heavily dependent on synthetic fibres, with 25% of analyzed brands increasing their use over the last five years. It highlights a systemic lack of supply chain transparency, an over-reliance on recycled polyester from PET bottles as a 'false solution', and a failure to set absolute Scope 3 emissions targets. While many brands express support for the EU Textile Strategy's regulatory measures, the report argues there is a significant gap between these public stances and actual corporate action.

• The fashion industry's reliance on synthetic fibres is persistent and growing, with 14 of 55 analyzed brands (25%) increasing their use of synthetics in terms of both total volume and percentage of total fibre mix over the last five years.
• There is a critical lack of transparency regarding synthetic supply chains; 87% of the 31 brands that responded to the questionnaire provided insufficient details on their synthetic suppliers.
• Brands are heavily dependent on recycled polyester derived from PET bottles, which the report characterizes as a 'false solution' that does not address the overall volume of synthetics used.
• Investment in genuine fibre-to-fibre recycling is minimal compared to overall profits; for example, H&M Group's 2021 investment of €3.7 million in such technologies represents only 0.04% of its gross profit.
• Microfibre release remains a significant blind spot, with 45% of brands having no public information on microfibre policies and many relying on membership in the Microfibre Consortium (TMC) without implementing concrete mitigation actions.
• There is a notable contradiction between brand claims and sourcing practices, as several companies committed to phasing out coal still source from the Chinese Hengli Group, which is investing $20 billion in coal-to-polyester production.
• While brands show high levels of support for the EU Textile Strategy—particularly regarding the reduction of false green claims (94%) and Extended Producer Responsibility (81%)—this support often conflicts with their current opaque practices.

APA

Trunk, U., Harding-Rolls, G., Banegas, X., Urbancic, N., & Nguyen, A. (2022). Synthetics Anonymous 2.0. Changing Markets Foundation. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Synthetics-Anonymous-2-online-reports-layout.pdf

Chicago

Trunk, Urska, George Harding-Rolls, Ximena Banegas, Nusa Urbancic, and Amy Nguyen. Synthetics Anonymous 2.0. Changing Markets Foundation, 2022. https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Synthetics-Anonymous-2-online-reports-layout.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Trunk |first1=Urska |last2=Harding-Rolls |first2=George |last3=Banegas |first3=Ximena |last4=Urbancic |first4=Nusa |last5=Nguyen |first5=Amy |title=Synthetics Anonymous 2.0 |publisher=Changing Markets Foundation |date=December 2022 |url=https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Synthetics-Anonymous-2-online-reports-layout.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{trunk2022synthetics, author = {Trunk, Urska and Harding-Rolls, George and Banegas, Ximena and Urbancic, Nusa and Nguyen, Amy}, title = {{Synthetics Anonymous 2.0}}, institution = {Changing Markets Foundation}, year = {2022}, month = dec, url = {https://changingmarkets.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Synthetics-Anonymous-2-online-reports-layout.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }