# Microplastics from Laundry: 700,000 Fibres per Cycle

> A single polyester wash releases 700,000 microfibres into the water. Scientific data, aggravating factors, and 5 practical solutions to cut your impact.

**Published :** 2026-02-07 · **Updated :** 2026-05-17

---

**Résumé :** **In short:** A wash cycle of 6 kg of synthetic textiles releases
between 500,000 and 6,000,000 plastic microfibres (10-100 µm). Acrylic emits 5
times more than polyester. Cold water (20-30 °C) reduces release by 30-40%.
Microfibre filters retain 80-90% of particles. France's AGEC law (2020) and
European ecodesign work are paving the way for mandatory filtration on new
machines.

## What Is a Plastic Microfibre?

**These are synthetic fragments smaller than 5 mm, typically around 10-100 µm, torn from textiles by friction and agitation in the machine.**

A plastic microfibre is a fragment of synthetic fibre measuring less than 5 mm long — most are between 10 and 100 µm (micrometres), thinner than a human hair. These particles come from the mechanical fragmentation of synthetic textiles during washing: friction between garments, drum agitation, and water action dislodge tiny pieces of fibre.

The main materials involved:

- **Polyester**: 60% of global textile production. Found in most sportswear, fleece, linings.
- **Nylon (polyamide)**: swimwear, tights, technical clothing.
- **Acrylic**: jumpers, scarves, beanies, cheap throws.

Cotton, wool, and linen also release fibres during washing, but these natural fibres biodegrade within a few weeks to months. Synthetic fibres, on the other hand, persist in the environment for decades or even centuries.

## How Many Microfibres Does One Wash Release?

**According to published protocols, a cycle of 6 kg of synthetics typically releases from several hundred thousand to several million microfibres.**

Quantification studies produce figures that vary by protocol, but the order of magnitude is consistent:

The summary table below brings together the main published measurements of microfibres released per cycle.

| Study                                                                       | Textile tested         | Microfibres per cycle | Conditions                  |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | --------------------- | --------------------------- |
| [Napper & Thompson (2016)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.025) | Polyester              | approx. 500,000       | 6 kg, 30 °C                 |
| [Napper & Thompson (2016)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.025) | Acrylic                | approx. 730,000       | 6 kg, 30 °C                 |
| [De Falco et al. (2018)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.057)      | Polyester              | approx. 700,000       | 6 kg, 40 °C                 |
| [Browne et al. (2011)](https://doi.org/10.1021/es201811s)                   | Polyester (fleece)     | approx. 1,900,000     | Per garment, standard cycle |
| [De Falco et al. (2018)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.057)      | Polyester/cotton blend | approx. 140,000       | 6 kg, 40 °C                 |

Acrylic is the highest-emitting textile: it releases up to **5 times more microfibres than polyester** under equivalent conditions. Fleece garments are also very high emitters due to their long, loosely-bound fibre structure.

## Factors That Increase Release

sac de lavage anti-microfibres —  **The most damaging parameters are heat (40-60 °C), intensive cycles, and new or worn acrylic textiles.**

Several parameters influence the amount of microfibres released with each wash:

The table below ranks the most significant factors for reducing microplastic emissions.

| Factor                | Impact | Detail                                                                                   |
| --------------------- | ------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Water temperature** | ++     | Washing at 40-60 °C releases 30-40% more fibres than at 20 °C (Napper & Thompson, 2016)  |
| **Cycle intensity**   | +++    | An intensive cotton programme releases more than a delicate cycle with reduced spin      |
| **Textile age**       | ++     | New garments release more during the first washes; after 5-10 cycles, release stabilises |
| **Load size**         | +      | Incomplete loads increase relative friction between textiles                             |
| **Detergent type**    | +      | Powder detergents are slightly more abrasive than liquids                                |
| **Fibre condition**   | ++     | Pilled or worn fabrics release more fragments                                            |

The worst-case combination: a new acrylic garment, washed at 60 °C on an intensive cycle with a small load. The best-case combination: a broken-in polyester garment, washed cold on a delicate cycle with a full load.

## Solutions to Reduce Microplastics in the Wash

**The most immediate reduction combines cold washing, delicate cycles, optimised loads, and a microfibre capture device.**

No single solution eliminates microplastics entirely. But several combined actions significantly reduce release:

### Adjust Washing Conditions

- **Wash cold** (20-30 °C): -30 to 40% microfibres. See our [washing temperature guide](/en/blog/washing-temperatures/index.md) and our [cold wash guide](/en/blog/cold-wash-temperature/index.md) to learn which textiles tolerate it.
- **Delicate cycle** with reduced spin: less mechanical friction.
- **Full load**: garments rub against each other less when the drum is well filled. Our [laundry weight guide](/en/blog/laundry-weight-guide/index.md) helps you optimise loading.

### Use Filtration Devices

- **Wash bags** (Guppyfriend type): retain 50-80% of microfibres in a fine-mesh bag
- **External filters** (Lint LUV-R, PlanetCare type): attach to the drain hose and capture 80-90% of fibres
- **Capture balls** (Cora Ball type): microfibres cling to the ball's stalks during the cycle

### Choose More Responsible Textiles

- Favour natural fibres (cotton, linen, wool) when the use case allows
- Avoid cheap fleece and acrylic garments (maximum release)
- Cotton/polyester blends release significantly less than 100% synthetic

To learn more about the environmental impact of laundry, see our [guide to eco-friendly laundromat technologies](/en/blog/eco-laundromat-technologies/index.md). You can also discover how to [wash cold](/en/blog/cold-wash-temperature/index.md) to reduce your impact.

## The Role of Professional Machines

**At the laundromat, better-filled loads and optimised cycles limit mechanical abrasion — and therefore microfibre release.**

The phenomenon is inherent to synthetic textiles themselves. However, laundromat machines offer several features that indirectly limit release:

- **Optimised loads**: at the laundromat, users generally fill machines well (9 or 18 kg), which reduces relative friction between textiles
- **Shorter cycles**: professional programmes are optimised for duration, reducing mechanical agitation time
- **Filtration infrastructure**: industrial drainage systems can be fitted with higher-performance microparticle filters than domestic installations

That said, the more thorough rinsing of professional machines is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage for microplastics: it dilutes the fibres but does not reduce their total number.

## European Regulation

**The regulatory trajectory is moving toward mandatory filtration on new machines, but final requirements still depend on implementing legislation.**

The regulatory framework is evolving rapidly, but three levels must be distinguished: restriction of intentionally added microplastics, ecodesign requirements for machines, and national obligations.

| Date | Legislation | What it changes in practice |
|---|---|---|
| 2020 | AGEC Law (France) | Establishes the principle of microfibre filtration equipment on new washing machines, with implementation via secondary legislation (Law No. 2020-105). |
| 2023 | Regulation (EU) 2023/2055 (REACH) | Reduces intentionally added microplastics and notes that laundry microfibres are a major source of unintentional release (OJEU L 238, 27/09/2023). |
| 2024-2025 | Ecodesign / ESPR work | The European Commission is preparing harmonised technical requirements for appliances, including reduction of microfibre release (ecodesign roadmaps). |
| Transitional phase | Industrial deployment | Manufacturers and operators are progressively deploying water-outlet filtration solutions while awaiting final harmonised obligations. |

In practice: it is reasonable to anticipate widespread adoption of filters, but the exact date and minimum performance level still depend on implementing legislation.

## Filtration Device Comparison (Published Data)

**External filters are generally the most effective (often 80-90%), provided the cartridges are rigorously maintained. Bags and balls are less effective but easier to use.**

| Device | Type | Stated effectiveness | Indicative price | Source / limits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guppyfriend | Wash bag | 50-80% (reduction of fibres released, manufacturer) | \~$30 | Max 40 °C; not tumble-dryer safe; only acts on garments placed inside the bag. Independent third-party studies still limited. |
| PlanetCare | External drain filter | 70-90% manufacturer-claimed; highly sensitive to flow rate and maintenance | \~$95 + cartridge subscription | Installation 10-30 min; cartridges to replace; risk of clogging with cotton/pet hair. |
| Filtrol | External drain filter | 80-90% under controlled conditions (consistent with De Falco et al. 2019\) | \~$160 | Filtration bag to empty/clean regularly. |
| Cora Ball | In-drum microfibre-catcher ball | 26-31% per studies cited by manufacturer | \~$35 | Modest effectiveness vs external filters; risk of snagging on lace, fringes, large knits. |
| New machines with built-in filter (France's AGEC law) | Factory-built internal filter | Variable performance by manufacturer; mandatory in France since 2025 | Included in machine price | Simplest long-term solution; technical performance not yet standardized model by model. |

Key point: external filters are generally more effective than bags, but require strict maintenance (cartridge cleaning, disposal of filtered sludge as residual waste — never down the drain).

## Impact by Textile Type

**Acrylic remains the highest-emitting fibre, ahead of polyester and nylon, under comparable washing parameters.**

| Fibre type | Relative emission level | What the studies show |
|---|---|---|
| Acrylic | Very high | Can exceed approx. 700,000 fibres per 6 kg cycle; often the highest-emitting fibre under comparable parameters (Napper & Thompson, *Marine Pollution Bulletin*, 2016). |
| Polyester | High | In the range of 500,000+ fibres/cycle depending on textile construction and temperature; high variability depending on yarn twist and garment condition (Napper & Thompson, 2016; De Falco et al., 2018\). |
| Nylon (polyamide) | Medium to high | Release generally lower than acrylic but significant for technical textiles and intensive cycles; sensitive to mechanical abrasion (De Falco et al., 2018). |

## What You Can Do Right Now

**Operational priority: 20-30 °C, drum at 80-90%, liquid detergent, and a filtration barrier for every synthetic load.**

Without waiting for regulation, here are the most effective steps:

- 1
- **Wash cold (20-30 °C)** — reduces polymer weakening and lowers fibre release (Napper & Thompson, 2016).
- 2
- **Fill the drum well (80-90%)** — less fabric-on-fabric impact, therefore less abrasion.
- 3
- **Liquid detergent** — generally less abrasive than powders on synthetic textiles.
- 4
- **Microfibre bag or filter** — an immediate physical barrier while awaiting widespread regulation.



**Guppyfriend Wash Bag**

Retains 50-80% of synthetic microfibres during washing. A simple, immediate solution while awaiting European regulation.

The problem of textile microplastics is real and well-documented. It will not be solved by a single action, but the combination of good washing practices, filtration, and textile choices can significantly reduce our individual contribution. To learn more about responsible care for your [delicate textiles](/en/blog/delicate-fabrics-guide/index.md).



*Cet article contient des liens affiliés. Les prix et la disponibilité peuvent varier.*

## Methodology and Sources

- The quantitative data on microfibre release comes from studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals (*Marine Pollution Bulletin*, *Scientific Reports*, *Environmental Science & Technology*).
- The figures presented are orders of magnitude from controlled experimental conditions. Actual results vary depending on machine type, programme, load, and textile condition.
- Regulatory information (European Union) is based on official texts published in the Official Journal of the EU.

## Sources and References

- Napper, I.E. & Thompson, R.C. (2016). Release of synthetic microplastic plastic fibres from domestic washing machines: Effects of fabric type and washing conditions. *Marine Pollution Bulletin*, 112(1-2), 39-45.
- De Falco, F. et al. (2018). Microfiber Release to Water, Via Laundering, and to Air, via Everyday Use: A Comparison between Polyester Clothing with Differing Textile Parameters. *Scientific Reports*, 8, 14591.
- De Falco, F. et al. (2019). The contribution of washing processes of synthetic clothes to microplastic pollution. *Scientific Reports*, 9, 6633.
- Browne, M.A. et al. (2011). Accumulation of Microplastic on Shorelines Worldwide: Sources and Sinks. *Environmental Science & Technology*, 45(21), 9175-9179.
- AISE — International Association for Soaps, Detergents and Maintenance Products: [www.aise.eu](https://www.aise.eu/)
- Regulation (EU) 2023/2055 of the European Parliament on microplastics