- 1Dyeing: 25% of the impact, transport 1 to 3%, washing sometimes more than manufacturing.
- 2Five counterintuitive LCA findings: organic cotton, recycled polyester, wool, physical durability and washing.
- 3Labelling, Ecobalyse, ESPR, DPP: four schemes fed by a single LCA database.
- 4First LCA: €8,000 to €15,000, Bpifrance Diag Éco-conception: €5,400 to €7,200 excl. VAT payable.
The textile industry accounts for around 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions and consumes 79 billion cubic metres of water per year (source: UNEP, 2024). But the real problem is not the global figure - it is that most brands have no idea how their impact is distributed. Transport? 1 to 3%. Dyeing? 25%. Consumer washing? Sometimes more than garment manufacturing. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is the tool that puts figures on each stage, from fibre to bin. This guide explains what it measures, what it reveals and how to use it in practice.
1What a textile LCA is (and how it differs from a carbon footprint assessment)
A textile LCA is a life cycle assessment applied to a textile product - a T-shirt, a pair of jeans, a jacket. It quantifies the product's environmental impacts throughout its life, from raw material extraction to end of life.
Textile LCA vs Bilan Carbone®
Two tools, two scopes, two uses - but complementary
Textile LCA focuses on a product and measures several impact categories (16 under PEF). A carbon footprint assessment focuses on the organisation and measures only GHG. The two are complementary.
The first distinction: a textile LCA is not a Bilan Carbone®. Bilan Carbone® measures an organisation's GHG emissions over one year (scopes 1, 2, 3) - a single indicator. LCA measures 16 impact categories for a product throughout its life cycle. The European PEF (Product Environmental Footprint) method defines these indicators. Through the Ecobalyse methodology, France adds two textile-specific criteria: plastic microfibres released during washing and textile waste exports outside Europe.
- Climate change - GHG emissions across the full cycle
- Water consumption - critical for cotton and dyeing
- Eutrophication - aquatic pollution from effluents
- Human toxicity - dyeing and finishing chemicals
- Fossil resource depletion - polyester, nylon, elastane
- Microfibre release - a French-specific criterion penalising synthetics
In practice, when modelling a cotton T-shirt, we do not simply ask "how many kg of CO₂". We also measure the 2,700 litres of water consumed to produce the cotton for a T-shirt, chemicals discharged by dyeing, microfibres released with each wash and the consumer's drying energy. This view across multiple criteria is LCA's strength - and produces counterintuitive results. To position LCA against a company carbon footprint assessment, see our detailed comparison.
2A garment's impact, from fibre to final wash
A garment's life cycle has seven stages. Most brands control only two or three of them - precisely why LCA is surprising.
Where does a T-shirt's impact come from?
Click a stage to see what matters and the associated lever. Conventional cotton, illustrative percentages.
Irrigation water, chemical inputs, low yield per hectare.
Rain-fed organic cotton or French linen −25 to −40%
Raw material (30 to 50% of the impact)
The largest source of impact. Each fibre has its own profile. Cotton consumes enormous amounts of water (2,700 litres for a single T-shirt, particularly when it comes from water-stressed regions). Polyester, made from petroleum, has a moderate carbon impact but generates plastic microfibres with every wash. Linen performs excellently in Europe, but its spinning is often relocated to Asia - complicating the footprint. There is no miracle fibre; there are quantifiable trade-offs.
Spinning and weaving (5 to 15%)
Turning fibre into yarn, then yarn into fabric: an energy-intensive stage whose impact depends essentially on the country's energy mix. Fabric spun in France (largely decarbonised electricity) has a different profile from fabric spun in Bangladesh (electricity mainly generated from fossil gas, supplemented by coal and fuel oil). The location of this stage influences the score much more than the location of garment manufacturing.
Dyeing and finishing (15 to 30%)
The most underestimated source of impact. Conventional dyeing consumes 50 to 150 litres of water per kilogram of fabric, with effluents containing heavy metals and organic compounds. Up to 36% of the textile industry's chemical discharges come from this stage (UNEP). Its eutrophication impact is often the LCA's first problematic indicator. Alternatives exist (dry dyeing, natural pigments, closed-loop systems), but their additional cost slows adoption. LCA specifically helps quantify the gain and build a business case.
Garment manufacturing (5 to 15%)
Sewing, assembly, packaging: counterintuitively, this is rarely the largest source of impact. A garment workshop consumes relatively little energy per item. The problem with garment manufacturing in certain regions of the world is essentially social (working conditions, pay), rather than environmental in LCA terms.
Transport (1 to 5%)
The great absentee from debates. Sea transport is so efficient per unit transported (a container of 20,000 T-shirts crosses the ocean for a few tens of kg of CO₂) that the last kilometre by van in Paris often costs more carbon than the intercontinental journey. "Producing in France" does not automatically mean "better for the environment" - it depends on the energy mix rather than distance.
Use phase (25 to 38%)
A T-shirt washed 50 times at 40°C and tumble-dried can have a use-phase footprint approaching its manufacturing footprint. Hot water, detergent, the dryer and wear shortening its lifespan: up to 38% of the total impact (JRC, 2024). With every wash of a synthetic textile, 100,000 to 700,000 plastic microfibres are released into the water. The IUCN estimates that washing synthetic textiles accounts for 35% of primary microplastics discharged into the oceans.
End of life
Worldwide, 87% of fibres used for clothing end up incinerated or in landfill (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017). Fibre-to-fibre recycling remains marginal (less than 1%). LCA incorporates this end-of-life scenario - and it is one of the criteria for which France added a specific indicator in Ecobalyse to penalise waste exports.
On average, transport accounts for less than 5% and dyeing around 25%. Textile LCA reverses almost every intuition - which is why it is essential.
3Five findings no one anticipates
We have modelled dozens of textile products. The results are surprising almost every time.
Intuition vs reality: what LCA reveals
5 received ideas challenged by data
LCA challenges received ideas. The largest impacts are rarely where we expect them - and neither are the first eco-design levers.
Organic cotton is not always better
Organic cotton performs better than conventional cotton on climate change and toxicity. But it consumes more water (lower yields per hectare) and requires more agricultural land. On the "land use" indicator, organic cotton can have twice the impact. Choosing organic or conventional cotton is a trade-off across multiple criteria, rather than a reflex.
Recycled polyester beats virgin cotton on climate change
A recycled polyester T-shirt has a lower carbon footprint than a virgin cotton T-shirt (around 3.5 kg CO₂e versus 4.3 kg). But recycled polyester releases as many microfibres during washing as virgin polyester. LCA across multiple criteria prevents stopping at a single figure - exactly what a carbon footprint assessment alone cannot do.
Wool is a silent environmental disaster
Wool performs catastrophically on almost every indicator: sheep's enteric methane, considerable grazing areas, chemical fleece treatments. A virgin wool jumper can have a PEF score 3 to 5 times higher than a cotton jumper. Wool is perceived as "natural", therefore "ecological". LCA says otherwise.
Physical durability is the first eco-design lever
A conventional cotton T-shirt lasting 5 years has a better score than an organic cotton T-shirt losing its shape after 2 years. Impact is related to the number of use cycles. Doubling lifespan means dividing impact per use in an LCA; the official environmental cost, however, does not yet account for physical durability. Physical durability is the most powerful and most underused eco-design lever in the textile industry.
Washing matters more than we think
For some frequently washed products, the use phase represents up to 38% of the total impact, more than garment manufacturing or transport. The manufacturer does not directly control this source of impact, but influences it through product quality (100 washes instead of 50 divides impact per cycle) and care instructions. Designing a garment that can be cold-washed and air-dried is also eco-design.
4The regulatory wall: labelling, Ecobalyse, ESPR, DPP
Textile LCA is no longer a marginal exercise. Several schemes converge on the same point: every brand benefits from knowing and publishing its products' environmental impact.
1 textile LCA = 4 uses covered
A single investment, four uses
Data collected for LCA serve labelling, DPP, scope 3 and eco-design. A single investment, four uses.
Textile environmental labelling
In France, the framework has been set since the decree of 6 September 2025. Since October 2025, brands can voluntarily display their products' scores. Since 1 October 2026, any third party (NGO, competitor, comparison platform) can publish this score without your agreement, using available or estimated data. We detailed the entire mechanism in our textile environmental labelling guide.
Ecobalyse and the PEF method
Ecobalyse is the official French tool calculating a garment's environmental score. Free, online and open source. It takes life-cycle data as inputs (material, countries of spinning, dyeing and garment manufacturing, weight) and produces an impact-point score using a French method derived from European PEF, adjusted by a durability coefficient (0.67 to 1.45). The pitfall: for several optional parameters (spinning country, number of product references, air freight share), Ecobalyse applies conservative default values. A brand leaving these unspecified often obtains a score higher than its actual impact.
ESPR and the digital product passport
At European level, the ESPR Regulation provides for textile eco-design requirements (delegated act expected in 2027, applicable at least 18 months later). The DPP will follow: each garment sold in Europe must carry a digital identity record with its environmental data. Some LCA data should feed the textile DPP, whose content will be set by delegated act.
Scope 3 and the CSRD
Purchasing organisations subject to the CSRD must report their scope 3 emissions - including the textile products they buy. Even brands not directly subject to it receive LCA data requests from their retail customers. Product data become a commercial prerequisite, rather than merely a regulatory one.
The common point: these three issues all rely on the same database, that of the LCA. Undertaking a textile LCA today covers three fronts at once!
- Environmental labelling - voluntary score since October 2025, publishable by third parties without the brand's agreement from October 2026
- Digital product passport (DPP) - some LCA data should feed the European textile DPP
- Retailers' scope 3 requests - customers subject to the CSRD already require these data
5How much a textile LCA costs, and where to start
A complete textile LCA for a first product costs €8,000 to €15,000 and takes 6 to 10 weeks. Subsequent products cost significantly less (€3,000 to €5,000) because the calculation model and supplier collection are already in place. By comparison, that is the price of two or three well-targeted Instagram adverts - except that the advert disappears in 48 hours and the LCA structures your data for the next 5 years. For a complete view of costs and formats, see our detailed LCA cost guide.
Textile LCA costs
Three levels according to need + Bpifrance funding
Fixed package of 18 days (€18,000 excl. VAT) over 6 to 8 months, including LCA, for companies with fewer than 250 employees. Can be combined with Diag Décarbon'Action.
The first product is the most expensive. Subsequent products cost €3k to €5k because the methodology and supplier data are already in place.
The sequence we recommend after supporting dozens of brands:
Choosing the right pilot product
Start with a single product: your bestseller, the product most exposed to regulation, or one whose scope 3 data a retail customer requests. A pilot product's LCA provides the data structure, supplier contacts and calculation model. Each subsequent product costs less and progresses faster.
Starting supplier collection early
The most time-consuming stage. Contact your 5 key suppliers (spinner, weaver, dyer, garment manufacturer, carrier) to obtain: exact composition, raw material country of origin, energy mix and dyeing processes. Allow 2 to 3 months for usable responses.
Screening or complete LCA
Without a short-term regulatory obligation: screening (€5,000 to €12,000, 4 to 8 weeks) is sufficient to identify hotspots and prioritise eco-design actions. Where publication is at stake (environmental labelling, forthcoming DPP, scope 3 request): move straight to a complete ISO LCA for publishable, defensible results.
Acting on the results
LCA is not a report to file in a drawer. Results must inform design decisions: changing dyeing supplier, switching to a recycled fibre, extending lifespan through better fabric weight, changing care instructions. Results must also inform your communication: environmental labelling makes these scores public, so you might as well publish them first!
A single investment covering three uses. Brands structuring their LCA data now will do the work only once.
6Key takeaways
Textile LCA reverses priorities. Transport accounts for almost nothing. Dyeing and washing matter more than anyone would imagine. A garment's physical durability is a major eco-design lever, even though the official calculation does not yet measure it. Ecobalyse's conservative default values often increase the score of brands that do not know their value chain.
The good news is that everything converges. Environmental labelling, digital product passport, retailers' scope 3 requests: everything relies on the same LCA data. Undertaking a first textile LCA today structures your product data for the next five years. Brands starting now will have a choice of providers, comfortable deadlines and a score published using their own data. Since 1 October 2026, those that have published nothing can discover their score published by a third party, calculated from estimated data. So you might as well get ahead!
