Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles

Transcription

1 Trial report Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles Report of a trial to assess the value of washing and drying textiles which are highly contaminated, sourced from comingled kerbside collections (Trial 1) Project code: MPD Research date: January to April 2012 Date: June 2012

2 WRAP s vision is a world without waste, where resources are used sustainably. We work with businesses, individuals and communities to help them reap the benefits of reducing waste, developing sustainable products and using resources in an efficient way. Find out more at Written by: Hannah Burke, Jane Gardner, Liz Morrish and Beth Ripper Front cover: Kannegiesser laundry equipment used at Professional Linen Services While we have tried to make sure this report is accurate, we cannot accept responsibility or be held legally responsible for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. This material is copyrighted. You can copy it free of charge as long as the material is accurate and not used in a misleading context. You must identify the source of the material and acknowledge our copyright. You must not use material to endorse or suggest we have endorsed a commercial product or service. For more details please see our terms and conditions on our website at

3 Executive summary WRAP commissioned Axion Consulting to investigate and assess the economic benefits and likely carbon and water impacts associated with washing and drying contaminated textiles for sale to reuse and recycling markets. The project research was delivered through a series of demonstration trials, assessing textiles that had been collected from a specific domestic source with varying levels of contamination, as shown below. Table 1 Summary of washing and drying trials Trial 1 Medium to high contamination - visible stains or wet with high odour 2 Low contamination - low odour, cleaned using a steam cleaner 3 Damp and contaminated clothing 4 Drying only wet textiles, no odour Subtrial 1a 1b Details Not applicable. 3a 3b Washing and drying the mixed, contaminated material without any pre-sorting. Pre-sorting the mixed, contaminated material by colour and by weight as well as into delicates 1 ; then washing and drying the material. Washing and drying the mixed, contaminated material without any pre-sorting. Pre-sorting the mixed, contaminated material by colour and by weight as well as into delicates ; then washing and drying the material. Trial partners Axion, I&G Cohen and PLS Axion and I&G Cohen Axion, I&G Cohen and PLS 4a Drying the mixed, wet material without any pre-sorting. Axion, I&G Cohen and Pre-sorting the mixed, wet material to separate items by 4b PLS weight into heavyweight and lightweight clothing. An individual report was produced for each of the trials as well as an overall summary report, comparing the results from each of the trials and investigating the commercial and environmental impacts associated with each option. This report details the methodology and findings from Trial 1. Trial 1 aimed to assess the viability of washing and drying textiles of medium to high contamination, with visible stains and high odour. The textiles were sourced from Shanks Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in Glasgow and originated from comingled kerbside collections in North Lanarkshire. Before the washing and drying trials, all of the material collected would have been categorised as waste, with no resale value. The trial was divided into two sub-trials to investigate whether separating coloured clothing prior to washing adds value to the washed and dried textiles. A 1,500kg sample was obtained for the trial and sorted by I&G Cohen staff at their facility in Salford, Greater Manchester. This pre-sort aimed to separate intact clothing suitable for washing and drying from damaged textiles. Approximately 50% of the material in the sample, 758kg, was judged to be suitable for the washing and drying trial due to the high 1 A delicate item can be described as an item that is made out of silk, chiffon, lace or another type of fine material. It may also have embellishments attached or embroidered decoration. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 3

4 proportion of severely damaged or heavily contaminated items. The majority of damaged items had been cut by wire used during the baling process implemented at the MRF. This sample was divided into the following sub-samples: 365kg of textiles of mixed weight and colour for Trial 1a; and 393kg of textiles separated by weight and colour for Trial 1b. The textiles were washed and dried in 40kg batches at PLS, using a Kannegiesser Continuous Batch Washer PT 50-9 (CBW) at 71⁰ C for 27 minutes per batch. Following washing, batches identified as lightweight textiles were dried for 14 minutes and heavyweight items were dried for 16 minutes. Both drying programmes included a 2 minute cool down period so that the textiles were cool enough for operatives to handle. Once the material was washed and dried it was returned to I&G Cohen for grading and valuation experienced sorting staff (see Table 6 for details of material grading used). Table 2 below summarises results of the grading process after the washing and drying trials. Table 2 Grading of material following washing and drying trial Trial Trial 1a: Mixed, contaminated material Trial 1b: Contaminated material, pre-sorted by colour and by weight as well as into delicates for separate washing and drying Grade Sample weight (kg) Composition (%) Sample weight (kg) Composition (%) Premier grade % % Vintage/retro grade % % Lightweight clothing % % Heavyweight clothing % % Lightweight recycling % % Heavyweight recycling % % Waste % % Total % % The key conclusions from this washing and drying trial are: Approximately 50% of the bulk sample of textiles from comingled collections provided intact clothing suitable for washing and drying. The remaining fraction was unsuitable and destined for landfill; After being washed in batches of mixed colour and weight (Trial 1a), 99.6% of the sample was upgraded to either a reuse or recycling grade; After being washed separated by weight and into colours/whites (Trial 1b), 99.9% of the sample was upgraded to either a reuse or recycling grade; The trials demonstrated that there was no added value in separating the material into colours/whites or by weight prior to washing and drying compared to washing and drying the clothing in mixed batches; Should more complex grading systems be used, such as systems including cream grades, this may impact the categorisation of processed textiles and resulting valuation; The potential for maximising value from this textiles stream is heavily impacted by the initial yield. Only 50% of feed material collected for this trial was considered suitable for Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 4

5 processing. If this yield could be increased, the quantity of reusable and recyclable textiles could also be increased; and The proportion of material suitable for processing could be maximised though a range of supply chain improvements, such as educating MRF operators to undertake simple presorting at source, working with MRF operators to change procedures that could negatively impact the value of the textiles stream (such as baling) and improving material storage and handling to reduce damage through damp and mould. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 5

6 Contents 1.0 Background Trial information Objective of trial Trial hosts and roles Trial equipment Feedstock for the trial Trial methodology Sample preparation Washing and drying the textiles Material grading Results and discussion Trial 1a: Composition of sample after washing and drying Trial 1b: Composition of sample after washing and drying Comparison of Trial 1a and Trial 1 b Conclusions List of Figures Figure 1 Stock images of Kannegiesser equipment as set up at PLS... 9 Figure 2 Bulk sample of the material used for Trials 1a and 1b Figure 3 Example of ripped and torn clothing found in the source material Figure 4 Preparation of sample material Figure 5 Contaminated textiles on loading conveyor prior to washing Figure 6 Washed and dried material ready for packing Figure 7 Composition of washed and dried textiles in Trial 1a Figure 8 Lightweight clothing prior to washing and drying Figure 9 Lightweight clothing following washing and drying Figure 10 Heavyweight clothing classed as waste prior to washing and drying Figure 11 Heavyweight clothing after washing, suitable for sale in Eastern Europe and Asia Figure 12 Jeans and shirts classed as waste before being washed Figure 13 Clothing classed as Premier grade after being washed Figure 14 Clothing still stained after washing but suitable for sale as wiping cloths and rags Figure 15 Examples of knitwear damaged in the washing process Figure 16 Composition of washed and dried textiles in Trial 1b Figure 17 Trial 1a: Lightweight whites washed mixed with other colours, after processing Figure 18 Trial 1b: Lightweight whites separated prior to washing, after processing Figure 19 Comparison of sample composition by reuse and recycling grades after washing and drying List of Tables Table 1 Summary of washing and drying trials... 3 Table 2 Grading of material following washing and drying trial... 4 Table 3 Summary of washing and drying trials... 8 Table 4 Material requested by North Lanarkshire Council Table 5 Running order of batches in Trial Table 6 Textile material grading Table 7 Final sample composition for Trial 1a and Trial 1b Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 6

7 Acknowledgements Axion Consulting and WRAP would like to thank I&G Cohen and Profession Linen Services for their time and cooperation in delivering this trial. We would also like to thank Shanks for providing sample material for the trial. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 7

8 1.0 Background WRAP commissioned Axion Consulting to investigate and assess the economic benefits and likely carbon and water impacts associated with washing and drying contaminated textiles for sale to reuse and recycling markets. For the purpose of this project, textiles are defined as clothing, footwear and sheet products, such as towels, bed linen and blankets. All of these product items have a reuse or recycling market, enabling their value to be quantified. The project research was delivered through a series of demonstration trials, assessing textiles that had been collected from a specific domestic source with varying levels of contamination, as shown below. Table 3 Summary of washing and drying trials Trial 1 Medium to high contamination - visible stains or wet with high odour 2 Low contamination - low odour, cleaned using a steam cleaner 3 Damp and contaminated clothing 4 Drying only - wet textiles, no odour Subtrial 1a 1b Details Not applicable. 3a 3b Washing and drying the mixed, contaminated material without any pre-sorting. Pre-sorting the mixed, contaminated material by colour and by weight as well as into delicates 2 ; then washing and drying the material. Washing and drying the mixed, contaminated material without any pre-sorting. Pre-sorting the mixed, contaminated material by colour and by weight as well as into delicates ; then washing and drying the material. Trial partners Axion, I&G Cohen and PLS Axion and I&G Cohen Axion, I&G Cohen and PLS 4a Drying the mixed, wet material without any pre-sorting. Axion, I&G Cohen and Pre-sorting the mixed, wet material to separate items by 4b PLS weight into heavyweight and lightweight clothing. The demonstration trials investigated and assessed the economic and environmental impacts that washing and drying of contaminated textiles may have on the quality and subsequent value of those textiles for reuse and recycling markets. An individual report was produced for each of the trials as well as an overall summary report, comparing the results from each of the trials and investigating the commercial and environmental impacts associated with each option. This report summarises findings from Trial 1. Trial 1 aimed to assess the viability of washing and drying textiles of medium to high contamination, with visible stains and high odour. The textiles were sourced from the Shanks Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in Glasgow and originated from comingled kerbside collections in North Lanarkshire. The trial was divided into two sub-trials to investigate whether separating coloured clothing prior to washing adds value to the washed and dried textiles. 2 A delicate item can be described as an item that is made out of silk, chiffon, lace or another type of fine material. It may also have embellishments attached or embroidered decoration. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 8

9 2.0 Trial information 2.1 Objective of trial The key objectives of the trial were to: Establish the impact of washing and drying contaminated textiles on the quality and subsequent value of those textiles within reuse and recycling markets; and Determine the commercial viability of laundering heavily contaminated textiles which would otherwise be landfilled. 2.2 Trial hosts and roles The trial was managed by Axion Consulting and delivered in partnership with I&G Cohen and PLS. I&G Cohen is one of the UK s leading textile recyclers based in Salford, Greater Manchester. They collect textiles from a variety of sources including textile banks, door to door charity donations and school donations. Textiles are sorted and bulked for sale to markets within the UK, Eastern Europe, East and West Africa and the Middle East. PLS is a commercial laundry, based in Bonnyrigg, Edinburgh, specialising in laundering towels, bed and table linen for hotels and hospitals, along with simple items of clothing such as hospital scrubs and chef uniforms. Sample material was prepared and packed by I&G Cohen at their Salford facility in Greater Manchester on 13 th February Washing and drying of textiles was undertaken at the PLS facility in Edinburgh on 15 th February Material was returned to I&G Cohen for final grading and valuation on 28 th February Trial equipment The following equipment was used for the trial: Kannegiesser 4 stage incline conveyor; Kannegiesser Powertrans Continuous Batch Washer PT 50-9 (50 kg batch 9 compartments); Kannegiesser Power Press; Kannegiesser Lift Shuttle; and 3 Kannegiesser D120 GWU 100 kg (2 x 50 kg batch) dryers each with InfraTouch and Energy Air Control (EAC). Figure 1 Stock images of Kannegiesser equipment as set up at PLS Left to right: (1) Incline conveyor, (2) Powertrans Continuous Batch Washer PT 50-9, (3) Power Press, (4) Lift Shuttle and (5) D120 GWU 100kg dryer. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 9

10 2.4 Feedstock for the trial The textiles were sourced from the Shanks MRF in Glasgow and originated from fortnightly comingled kerbside collections in North Lanarkshire. In North Lanarkshire, textiles are placed in bins by householders comingled with other materials such as newsprint and magazines, food and drinks cans, cartons, plastic bottles, plastic pots and tubs, as well as plastic food trays. Table 4 shows the materials that are collected by North Lanarkshire Council as part of their blue bin collection service. Residents are asked not to use plastic bags for material placed into blue bins. Table 4 Material requested by North Lanarkshire Council 3 Material Newsprint, magazines, junk mail, telephone directories Clean cardboard (all types) Clean food and drinks cans Aerosol cans Drinks cartons (Tetra Pak type material) Clean plastic bottles Clean plastic pots and tubs Clean plastic food trays Textiles (clothes, towels etc.) Action required Please flatten (if possible) Please rinse out Need to be empty Please rinse out and flatten (if possible) Please rinse out and flatten (if possible) Please rinse out and flatten (if possible) Please rinse out The comingled material is then collected in a compactor vehicle and transported to the Shanks MRF in Glasgow. At the MRF, the mixed materials are passed through a trommel, before textiles are handpicked from the picking line and baled for onward transport. The clothing obtained from this source was very badly stained and many items were damp with high odour. 3 NLC (2010), Improvements to Kerbside Recycling Service, Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 10

11 Figure 2 shows the feedstock used for this trial. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 11

12 Figure 2 Bulk sample of the material used for Trials 1a and 1b A large of proportion of the material was badly damaged, ripped and torn as shown in Figure 3 below. Figure 3 Example of ripped and torn clothing found in the source material Normally, all of this material would be classed as waste, with no resale value. The material could not be used for low grade recycling, such as wiping cloths or rags, as it was too heavily soiled. Instead, this material would be sent for landfill disposal, representing a significant cost to the MRF operator. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 12

13 2.5 Trial methodology Sample preparation Five bales of textiles, each weighing approximately 400kg were obtained for the trial, providing a 2,000kg bulk sample. The bales were broken open and samples of material obtained from each of the bales for inclusion within the trial, to ensure a representative mix. The mixed sample of approximately 1,500kg was then pre-sorted by I&G Cohen staff at their facility in Salford, Greater Manchester. This pre-sort aimed to find intact clothing suitable for washing and drying. Only 50% of the material, 758kg, was judged to be suitable for the washing and drying trial due to the high proportion of severely damaged or heavily contaminated items. The majority of damaged items had been cut during the baling process implemented at the MRF. Suitable material was divided into the following sub-samples: Trial 1a: 365kg - all the contaminated material to be washed and dried mixed together; Trial 1b: 393kg - material separated into the following categories prior to washing: Lightweight clothing - whites; Heavyweight clothing - whites; Lightweight clothing - colours; and Heavyweight clothing - colours. To comply with manual handling procedures at PLS, the material was weighed and placed into sacks containing approximately 20kg each. Once filled, each sack was clearly labelled with the trial number and description of contents, as shown in Figure 4. Each sack was also given a number that corresponded with the order in which the material would be processed through the PLS laundry system. After labelling, the sacks were loaded onto a lorry for transportation to PLS in Scotland. Figure 4 Preparation of sample material Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 13

14 2.5.2 Washing and drying the textiles The washing and drying stage of the trial was carried out during at PLS between 15:00 and 23:00 on 15 th February The washing and drying process was supervised by two PLS staff members. To meet the washer capacity, material was washed in 40kg batches at 71⁰C for 27 minutes per batch. Following washing, batches identified as lightweight textiles were dried for 14 minutes and heavyweight items were dried for 16 minutes. Both drying programmes included a 2 minute cool down period so that the textiles were cool enough for operatives to handle. As it was important to wash and dry the samples for Trial 1a and Trial 1b in separate batches, some of the batches were only 20kg. The quality of water in the Kannegiesser Powertrans Continuous Batch Washer (CBW) is regularly monitored by experienced operatives via visual inspection; water is recirculated back into the washing process until it is considered too dirty to be used for further washing. Material for Trial 1a and 1b was processed along with material from Trial 3a and 3b (see separate trial report), to ensure that white textiles were washed at the beginning of the process when the water was cleaner. Table 5 shows the running order, description and weight of each batch processed. Table 5 Running order of batches in Trial 1 Batch number Trial code Description Weight of batch (kg) 3 1b Lightweight Whites b Lightweight Whites b Heavyweight Whites b Heavyweight Whites b Lightweight Darks b Lightweight Darks b Lightweight Darks b Lightweight Darks b Heavyweight Darks b Heavyweight Darks b Heavyweight Darks a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed a Mixed 40 Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 14

15 The washing and drying procedure was as follows: A batch of textiles was placed into the loading conveyer which moved it towards the nine chamber CBW, as shown in Figure 5; The material was dropped into chamber 1 of the CBW. Water and the following detergents were added: Ecolab Silex 3000 (6ml/kg) Ecolab Elpa Soft (6ml/kg) Ecolab Setin (2ml/kg) Hydrogen Peroxide (3ml/kg); Chamber 1 oscillated from side to side for 3 minutes. After 3 minutes the chamber rotated fully, dropping the wet material and the water from chamber 1 into chamber 2. This was a continuous process and once a batch entered chamber 2 a fresh batch was dropped into chamber 1; This process continued along the CBW until chamber 9 where after 3 minutes the material in that chamber was rotated and was dropped out into a press; The press used high pressure to squeeze excess water out of the material. For the purpose of this trial the pressure was decreased to reduce damage to buttons, zips and other closures. The press was set at 30 bar for 30 seconds for the heavyweight batches and 25 bar for 20 seconds for the lightweight batches. From the press the clothes were moved by shuttle lift to one of three dryers; Heavyweight and mixed weight batches were dried for 16 minutes and lightweight batches were dried for 14 minutes, after which the textiles were dropped onto a conveyer and moved towards a final hopper for packing, as show in Figure 6; and The processed material was packed into clean 20kg sacks to meet manual handling procedures and labelled clearly with the trial number and a description of the contents ready for onward transport and material grading. Figure 5 Contaminated textiles on loading conveyor prior to washing Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 15

16 Figure 6 Washed and dried material ready for packing Material grading Once washed and dried, the material was transported back to I&G Cohen s facility in Salford, Greater Manchester for valuation. The textiles were hand sorted into the material categories listed in Table 6. Each grade was determined by the likely end market for the material. Material sorting was conducted by experienced I&G Cohen staff, able to determine the value of the material taking into account issues such as levels of contamination and odour. Table 6 Textile material grading Grade Sorting criteria Premier grade Best modern clothing suitable for sale in shops in the UK and abroad, fitting with current fashion trends, designer labels, etc. High quality items with no contamination or odour. Reuse grades Vintage/retro grade Best quality pre-1990s clothing suitable for sale in shops in the UK and abroad. Items may have a musty odour, but no rips/tears. Items may still be categorised as vintage with small areas of very light staining, potentially washable. Mixed lightweight clothing Heavyweight clothing Clothing suitable for sale in West and East Africa. Clothing suitable for sale in Eastern Europe and Asia. These items may have very light contamination, such as light food stains that were potentially washable. Items may have light odours, such as perfume or smoke, which may be removed through washing. No strong odours or heavy contamination. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 16

17 Grade Recycling grades Waste Other Lightweight recycling Heavyweight recycling Wet/dirty material and waste Branded items Plastic bags Shoes Bags Belts Other Accessories Toys Books Other Body Armour Sorting criteria Material suitable for rags and wiping clothes Material suitable for re-pulling and flocking Heavily contaminated or damaged material, odd socks, tights, etc. Branded items to be shredded Waste plastic bags These items may have heavier odours or contamination, such as dark food stains, mud, or some animal hairs. Items contaminated with minimal paint stains may be acceptable in this category. No heavy staining from paints or oils. Items with high odour and/or irremovable contamination, such as heavy paint/oil staining, large numbers of ingrained animal hairs. No reuse or resale value. Items with large, irremovable corporate branding. Other items with potential reuse/recycling value. Items with minor damage may be accepted within this category. Single shoes still accepted as they may be paired with similar shoes or the component parts recycled. Each item was carefully inspected for rips, tears, small marks and labels to determine the grade and value. The total weight of items in each grade was recorded and supporting photographs taken. The value of the material was then determined based on the total weight and current market price for each grade of material. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 17

18 3.0 Results and discussion 3.1 Trial 1a: Composition of sample after washing and drying Prior to washing and drying, all of the sample material from Trial 1a was graded as waste and would have been destined for landfill disposal. Figure 7 shows the composition of the mixed weight and colour sample after being washed and dried. Figure 7 Composition of washed and dried textiles in Trial 1a In Trial 1a, only 0.4% of washed and dried material was categorised as waste after processing. 60.0% of sample material was considered suitable for reuse, categorised as premier grade, lightweight clothing or heavyweight clothing. The remaining 39.6% was considered suitable for recycling, including lightweight and heavyweight grades. Examples of the different items within each grade before and after washing are given below. Figure 8 shows lightweight clothing classified as waste before being washed and dried. Figure 8 Lightweight clothing prior to washing and drying Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 18

19 Figure 9 shows lightweight clothing suitable for sale in East and West Africa after being washed and dried. This grade included items such as lightweight trousers, t-shirts and shirts. Figure 9 Lightweight clothing following washing and drying Figure 10 shows heavyweight clothing classed as waste before being washed and dried and Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 19

20 Figure 11 shows heavyweight clothing suitable for sale in Eastern Europe and Asia after being washed and dried. This grade made up 24.6% of the total sample and included items such as coats, jumpers and skirts in good condition. Figure 10 Heavyweight clothing classed as waste prior to washing and drying Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 20

21 Figure 11 Heavyweight clothing after washing, suitable for sale in Eastern Europe and Asia Figure 12 shows jeans and shirts classed as waste before being washed and dried. Figure 13 shows jeans and shirts classed as premier grade clothing after being washed and dried. Premier grade clothing fits with current fashion trends and can be sold in shops in the UK and Eastern Europe. Items found in this sample included modern blouses, shirts and fashionable children s clothes. Figure 12 Jeans and shirts classed as waste before being washed Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 21

22 Figure 13 Clothing classed as Premier grade after being washed Immediately after washing and drying, the textiles still had a faint musty odour. However this smell was no longer present a few days later when the clothes were graded by I&G Cohen staff at their facility in Salford, Greater Manchester. After washing and drying, the clothing was noticeably cleaner. Staining such as paint, deepset food stains and rust from baling wire did remain on some items. However, this material could still be upgraded from waste to a recycling grade. Figure 14 shows several items which remained stained after washing but are suitable for sale as wiping cloths (lightweight recycling). It also shows a football shirt with a logo which had been melted in the drying process. Figure 14 Clothing still stained after washing but suitable for sale as wiping cloths and rags Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 22

23 The nature of the washing and drying process meant that in some cases, items were damaged. For example, some embellishments, such and sequins and beads, became detached during processing and fixings, such as zips and buttons, were damaged. Many knitwear items felted or stretched during the washing and drying process, as shown in Figure 15. Figure 15 Examples of knitwear damaged in the washing process 3.2 Trial 1b: Composition of sample after washing and drying For Trial 1b a total of 393kg was prepared for washing and drying. A 362kg sample was graded and valued after processing, indicating that 31kg were lost during the washing and drying process. This variation could be attributed to a range of factors, including moisture and contaminant losses from the dirty textiles, losses of embellishments, buttons and zips during the washing and drying process and item losses during transport. Different weighing scales were also used at each of the sites, with accuracies of +/- 2%, introducing a minor source of error. Assessments have been made based on the final recorded weights following processing. Before washing and drying, all of the sample material for Trial 1b was graded as waste and would have been destined for landfill disposal. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 23

24 Figure 16 shows the composition of the sample after being washed and dried. The sample had been sorted by weight and by colour prior to washing and drying. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 24

25 Figure 16 Composition of washed and dried textiles in Trial 1b In Trial 1b, only 0.1% of washed and dried material was categorised as waste after processing. 52.3% of sample material was considered suitable for reuse, categorised as premier grade, lightweight clothing or heavyweight clothing. The remaining 47.6% was considered suitable for recycling, including lightweight and heavyweight grades. 3.3 Comparison of Trial 1a and Trial 1 b The purpose of sub-dividing the trial was to investigate whether separating colours and heavyweight clothing prior to washing further retains value to the washed and dried textiles. In Trial 1a, material was mixed, whereas in Trial 1b, material had been separated by colour and by weight prior to washing and drying. In Trial 1a, light coloured clothing that had been washed in mixed batches with coloured items had a greyish tint to them after washing and drying. In Trial 1b, where textiles had been pre-sorted by colour and weight, the resulting white clothes appeared whiter in comparison; however, this did not have a substantial effect on how materials were graded and subsequently valued. Figure 17 and Figure 18 show whites that were washed and dried during Trials 1a and 1b. Figure 17 Trial 1a: Lightweight whites washed mixed with other colours, after processing Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 25

26 Figure 18 Trial 1b: Lightweight whites separated prior to washing, after processing Table 7 provides a full breakdown of final sample weights and gradings. Table 7 Final sample composition for Trial 1a and Trial 1b Trial Trial 1a: Mixed, contaminated material Trial 1b: Contaminated material, presorted by colour and by weight as well as into delicates for separate washing and drying Grade Sample weight (kg) Composition (%) Sample weight (kg) Composition (%) Premier grade % % Vintage/retro grade % % Lightweight clothing % % Heavyweight clothing % % Lightweight recycling % % Heavyweight recycling % % Wet % % Waste % % Total % % Both samples contained a relatively high proportion of lightweight clothing. This may be due to the timing of the trials, which were conducted in February. No vintage clothing was found in either sample. In both samples, a very small proportion of material was categorised as waste following the washing and drying process. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 26

27 Figure 19 compares the proportion of clothing in the sample that was considered suitable for reuse or recycling after the washing and drying process for Trial 1a and Trial 1b. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 27

28 Figure 19 Comparison of sample composition by reuse and recycling grades after washing and drying After the washing and drying process in Trial 1a, where the mixed material was processed without any prior sorting, 60.0% of the material was considered suitable for reuse, with 39.6% suitable for recycling and 0.4% classed as waste. In Trial 1b, in which the material was pre-sorted into colours and by weight prior to washing and drying, 52.3 % was considered suitable for reuse, with 47.6% suitable for recycling and 0.1% classed as waste. The difference in composition between the two samples was not significant and it is likely that the differences can be attributed predominantly to inherent variation in the sample composition rather than being a consequence of the pre-sorting that took place before washing and drying in Trial 1b. This indicates that there was unlikely to be any major benefit in pre-sorting the textiles prior to washing. Washing white colours separately from dark colours did lead to whiter whites, but did not have a substantial effect on how the material was graded and subsequently valued. Should more complex grading systems be used, such as systems including cream grades, this factor may impact the categorisation of processed textiles and resulting valuation. The trial results demonstrated that following washing and drying, virtually all of the selected fraction could be upgraded to either a reuse or recycling grade. It must be acknowledged, however, that the potential for maximising value from this textiles stream is heavily impacted by the initial yield. Only 50% of feed material collected for this trial was considered suitable for processing. If this yield could be increased, the quantity of reusable and recyclable textiles and resulting revenues could also be increased. The proportion of material suitable for processing could be maximised though a range of supply chain improvements: Working with MRF operators to change operating procedures that reduce the value of the textiles. For example, many high quality items that could have been classed as premier or clothing grade were damaged by the baling process used at the MRF. Opting to transport the material in bulk or using a lighter baling pressure may help to reduce damage to the clothing and improve the yield. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 28

29 An element of pre-sorting could occur at the MRF to improve the quality of material collected, by training MRF operators not to select severely damaged items for processing. However, detailed sorting into textile grades should be undertaken by experienced textiles recyclers and the demands placed on MRF operators to sort textiles should be minimised. Improving material storage and handling; for example, some quality material may become damp and mouldy in storage, reducing the resulting material quality and value. More efficient transfer of the textiles to the textiles recycler could reduce the volume of material that is unsuitable for processing. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 29

30 4.0 Conclusions The key conclusions from this washing and drying trial are: Approximately 50% of the bulk sample of textiles from comingled collections provided intact clothing suitable for washing and drying. The remaining fraction was unsuitable and destined for landfill; Before the washing and drying, all of the sample material was categorised as waste and was destined for disposal to landfill; After being washed in batches of mixed colour and weight (Trial 1a), 99.6% of the sample was upgraded to either a reuse or recycling grade; After being washed separated by weight and into colours/whites (Trial 1b), 99.9% of the sample was upgraded to either a reuse or recycling grade; The trials demonstrated that there was no added value in separating the material into colours/whites or by weight prior to washing and drying compared to washing and drying the clothing in mixed batches unless more complex grading systems are used by textiles recycler, including cream grades ; The potential for maximising value from this textiles stream is heavily impacted by the initial yield. Only 50% of feed material collected for this trial was considered suitable for processing. If this yield could be increased, the quantity of reusable and recyclable textiles could also be increased; and The proportion of material suitable for processing could be maximised though a range of supply chain improvements, such as educating MRF operators to undertake simple presorting at source, working with MRF operators to change procedures that could negatively impact the value of the textiles stream (such as baling) and improving material storage and handling to reduce damage through damp and mould. Demonstration trials for washing and drying contaminated textiles 30

31