By Michael Stanley-Jones and Claire Egehiza Obote
Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada / Trollhättan, Sweden, Jul 25 2025 – Plastic pollution has emerged as one of the most pressing environmental challenges of our time. Since the mid-20th century, over 8 billion metric tons of plastic have been produced globally (UNEP, 2021). Shockingly, more than 90% of this plastic waste has not been recycled. Instead, it has been incinerated, buried in landfills, or leaked into the environment where it can persist for hundreds of years, fragmenting into microplastics.

Among the most insidious threats within this overwhelming tide of waste are microplastics: plastic particles smaller than 5 millimeters. These tiny fragments often originate from the breakdown of larger plastic items or are directly released through industrial processes, personal care products, and increasingly, from textiles. Though they represent a smaller portion of total plastic waste by weight, their impact is disproportionately severe and persistent

Michael Stanley-Jones

Recent scientific findings have shown that micro- and nanoplastics are now entering human bodies. These particles have been detected in bloodstreams, lungs, feces, testes and placentas. While the full health implications are still being studied, early concerns suggest these particles may disrupt hormone regulation, immune response, and cellular function.

Each year, it is estimated that 9 to 14 million metric tons of plastic waste escape into aquatic ecosystems, including rivers, lakes, and oceans (Pew Charitable Trusts & SYSTEMIQ, 2020). Moreover, it is not just our oceans or bodies at risk; microplastics have been found in terrestrial soils, affecting agricultural productivity and soil health. They hinder the activities of key organisms like earthworms, which are vital for nutrient cycling. At every level, from soil to sea to self, microplastics are infiltrating our ecosystems.

The story does not end with pollution. Plastic’s contribution to climate change spans its entire life cycle from fossil fuel extraction and chemical manufacturing to transportation and disposal.

The Hidden Culprit: Synthetic Textiles

Amid this crisis, one significant contributor remains relatively overlooked: textiles. Textiles are estimated to account for 14 percent of global plastics production (Manshoven et al., 2022). Synthetic fibres like polyester, nylon and acrylic ubiquitous in fast fashion shed tiny plastic particles during production, daily use, and washing. These particles escape wastewater treatment systems and flow directly into natural water bodies.

Claire Egehiza Obote

In fact, microplastics from textile washing are estimated to make up 8% of primary microplastics in the oceans, making textiles the fourth-largest source globally. The implications are far-reaching, affecting marine life, food security and human health.

But it was not always this way.

In 1960, 95% of textile fibres were natural and biodegradable. Today, demand for textiles has skyrocketed by over 650%, while the share of synthetic fibres has ballooned from 3% to 68% (Carus & Partanen, 2025). Fast fashion’s dependence on cheap, fossil-fuel-based synthetics has turned the textile industry into one of the planet’s most polluting sectors.

This intertwined crisis of microplastic pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss and food insecurity calls for a comprehensive rethinking of how we produce and consume textiles. A critical part of that solution lies in rebuilding the natural fibre markets we once relied on.

Reviving Natural and Renewable Fibres

Research scientists Michael Carus and Dr. Asta Partanen of the German nova-Institute have called for a significant increase in renewable fibre production.

Bast fibres from flax, hemp, jute, kenaf and ramie are promising but remain expensive due to complex processing needs. Investments in their scalability could help them rival synthetics.

Man-made cellulosic fibres (MMCFs) such as viscose, lyocell and modal are biodegradable and scalable but rely on virgin wood and chemical-intensive processes, posing threats to forests and ecosystems. Recycled MMCFs make up only 0.5% of the market, but they could grow significantly with the right incentives.

Bio-based polymers (or “biosynthetics”) offer alternatives to fossil-based synthetics, yet adoption is still low. Marine biopolymers from seaweed for textiles may provide yet another source of natural fibre.

In the Global South, informal textile economies provide livelihoods for millions and often operate outside formal regulation. In addition to technological innovations, traditional knowledge systems and indigenous fibre cultivation practices such as the use of sisal, coir, or abacá can offer scalable, low-impact alternatives.

What Can Be Done?

Governments, industries and consumers all have roles to play in turning the tide:

Policy Action: Governments could implement Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes that require manufacturers to cover the full lifecycle costs of textile waste. The European Union has recently taken steps towards this by introducing harmonised EPR rules for textiles and incentivising producers to design products that promote sustainable design.

Market Incentives: Public and private investment should prioritize R&D into preferred cotton and bast fibres to reduce costs and improve competitiveness with synthetics. Supporting transitions to natural fibres in the Global South through microgrants, capacity building, and market access can help reduce plastic leakage at scale while enhancing socio-economic resilience.

Regulatory Levers: Boosting the proportion of sustainably sourced MMCFs is critical. Regulators should further encourage the shift to certified forestry and recycled content. 60 to 65% of MMCFs are now FSC and/or PEFC-certified, an upward trend since at least 2020 that should further be encouraged (Carus & Partanen, 2025).

Innovation in Waste Processing: Converting post-harvest waste from bast fibres like kenaf, flax, hemp, jute, and sorghum into textile-grade yarn could be a game-changer for local economies and sustainability.

Corporate Transparency: Mandatory disclosures under frameworks like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the International Sustainability Standard Board (ISSB) IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 can guide investors away from carbon-intensive fashion and toward more sustainable alternatives. Once risks from unsustainable production are baked into market valuations, investment flows into more sustainable production will inevitably follow.

Consumer Choices: Individuals can help shift demand by buying natural fibres, choosing durable apparel, and consuming less overall. Consumer pressure has historically influenced corporate behavior textile sustainability is no exception.

Community-led initiatives: Supporting community-led initiatives that revive local textile production not only reduces reliance on synthetics but also preserves cultural heritage and supports sustainable rural development. These models are often more circular and regenerative by design.

The Global Plastics Treaty: The ongoing negotiations for a global plastics agreement offer an opportunity to recognize and prioritize the shift toward biodegradable natural fibres as part of international plastic pollution solutions.

If governments, industries and consumers work in concert to rebuild natural fibre markets, the share of synthetics in clothing could decline to 50% from today’s 67%, according to nova-Institute’s analysis (Carus & Partanen, 2025).

Without such action, we risk a future defined by escalating microplastic contamination, irreversible biodiversity losses and a worsening climate crisis. The ongoing global plastics treaty negotiations also offer a timely opportunity to recognize natural fibre transitions as part of systemic plastic pollution solutions. But an alternative future, one that is more sustainable, biodiverse and resilient, is still within reach. We must act to reclaim natural fibres and reject a plastic-saturated future.

Michael Stanley-Jones, Environmental Policy and Governance Fellow United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health

Claire Egehiza Obote, Graduate Student in Sustainable Development University West, Sweden

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Jul 25 2025 – The growing opposition to the UN80 restructuring plan -– which has come under heavy fire from staff unions – has now reached the upper echelons of the world body.

A motion, adopted at an Extraordinary General Assembly meeting, held July 24, by the Staff Union Council in Geneva (UNOG), reads “The staff have no confidence in UN80, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and Under Secretary General Guy Ryder” (who is heading the UN restructuring process).

The meeting was attended by nearly 600 staff members (the quorum being 200), who expressed their concerns over the UN80 initiative. The motion was adopted without opposition.

Asked for his comments, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told IPS: “We remain committed, as we have been from the beginning of the UN80 Initiative, to consultation with staff representatives and engagement with them through the procedures in place for this purpose”.

“We hope that staff representatives will approach the issues before us in a similar spirit”.
Undoubtedly, he pointed out “we have difficult decisions ahead of us”.

“Management and staff need to work together to mitigate the negative impact of those decisions on our colleagues and to navigate the current challenges in the interests of assuring a stronger and more effective UN,” said Haq.

UN Under-Secretary-General Guy Ryder and Secretary-General Antonio Guterres

According to a memo to staffers from Laura Johnson, Executive Secretary and Ian Richards, President of the Staff Union in Geneva, the support for the motion was based on:

The lack of vision around UN 80 which has been done in a panic and with no evaluation of earlier reforms.

The decision to present budget proposals for 2026 with 20 percent fewer posts, without any evidence that this will address the current crisis, even as other organisations approve zero-growth budgets.

The reinforcement of the UN’s existing top-heavy structure. Most cuts are taking place at junior levels, no Under-Secretaries-Generals (USGs, the third highest ranking officials in the UN hierarchy) are being cut and an instruction to cut senior positions appears to have become optional.

The decision by the Secretary-General to extend USG contracts by 2 years, in some cases beyond his mandate, and promote his own staff, while restricting normal staff to extensions of one year with the intention of denying them termination indemnities in case of separation.

The refusal to consult with staff representatives on post cuts.

The proposal to multiply headquarters locations, which in time will increase costs.

The impression that staff are taking the blame for the challenges of the organization, which may in part stem from the organization’s lack of visibility in matters of peace and security.

A new Secretary-General with their own vision may undertake further reforms that contradict UN 80.

The UNOG Staff Union plans to transmit the adopted motion, along with the reasons behind it, based on the various concerns expressed by staff, to the Secretary-General and subsequently to Member States.

The memo to UN staffers also says: “We also encourage you to express your views by completing the survey being run by our staff federation CCISUA. You have until Sunday 27 July to fill it in here. Please note that, for the question “What is your organization?” there is a single response for UN Secretariat, which is the relevant option for all staff represented by the UNOG Staff Union.”

“In addition to completing the survey, please continue to write to us directly with your concerns and ideas.

Meanwhile, under the UN80 Initiative, according to Guterres, a dedicated internal Task Force led by Under-Secretary-General Guy Ryder will develop proposals in three key areas.

These include identifying efficiencies and improvements, reviewing the implementation of mandates from Member States, and a strategic review of deeper, more structural changes and programme realignment.

These efforts go “far beyond the technical,” Guterres said. “Budgets at the United Nations are not just numbers on a balance sheet – they are a matter of life and death for millions around the world.”

The key objectives, according to the UN, include:

• Increased Efficiency and Effectiveness:
The reforms aim to streamline operations, reduce costs, and improve the UN’s ability to deliver on its mandates.
• Mandate Review:
The task force is reviewing the implementation of mandates given to the UN by member states, many of which have increased significantly in recent years.
• Structural Reforms:
The initiative explores deeper, more structural changes within the UN system, potentially including the consolidation of departments and agencies.
• Strategic Review:
A strategic review of the UN’s programs and their alignment with current needs and priorities is also underway.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Edgardo Ayala
JAYAQUE, El Salvador, Jul 25 2025 – Still in its early stages and with few players, the poultry sector in El Salvador is taking small steps toward environmentally sustainable production by using its biological waste to generate biogas and, in turn, electricity –an equation that benefits the natural environment, communities, and the farms themselves.

El Granjero is the second-largest egg-producing company in the country, with over one million chickens distributed across its eight farms. After an investment of US$2.5 million, it created the subsidiary Renig to build a biogas plant in 2017.“I thought biodigesters were the most suitable because you solved the environmental problem right away, and the possibility of being profitable” –Bernhard Waase.

A year later, it began processing 200 000 tons of chicken manure and other organic waste annually.

This waste serves as the raw material for producing biogas, the fuel used to generate electricity, which the company then injects into the national power grid.

“Back around 2010 or 2012, we discussed what to do with all the chicken manure because the way it was being handled—by poultry farmers in the country and, I’d say, around the world—was that it was dumped in the open air,” Bernhard Waase, director of Renig, told IPS. The facility is located in La Labor, within the district of Jayaque, in the southwestern department of La Libertad.

At least five of El Granjero’s eight farms, which are dedicated exclusively to egg production, are situated in this rural settlement.

Bernhard Waase, director of Renig, a subsidiary of the Salvadoran company El Granjero, where chicken manure from eight farms is converted into biogas. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

An Environmentally Friendly Solution 

The environmental pollution caused by the poultry sector has been a source of tension for rural communities living near the farms that were established in their territories or expanded around them over time, as was the case with El Granjero, founded in 1968.

“When the company was established, there wasn’t a single house nearby; it was completely uninhabited,” Waase noted before showing IPS around the plant facilities. But the issue of environmental pollution remained.

“I thought biodigesters were the most suitable because they solved the environmental problem immediately, but there was also at least a possibility of being profitable,” said Waase, referring to the potential for generating electricity.

The country’s poultry sector produces approximately 1.2 billion eggs and 342 million pounds of chicken meat annually, according to data from the Salvadoran Poultry Association.

However, despite being crucial in food production for the country, its contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP) is low, at just 0.79%, though within the agricultural GDP, it accounts for 16%.

Few companies in the poultry sector have chosen to invest in environmentally friendly solutions for biological waste.

One of them is Grupo Campestre, one of the largest chicken producers, which invested seven million dollars to set up its biogas plant and process the 40,000 tons of biological waste generated annually by its farms, processing plant, and fried chicken restaurants owned by the consortium nationwide.

Laying hens at the San Jorge farm, one of eight owned by the egg producer El Granjero. The manure from these farms in southwestern El Salvador is used for biogas production. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

Biogas production in El Salvador is minimal compared to other renewable energy segments. In fact, its share is so small that it does not appear in the national energy matrix, which is dominated by hydropower (33.7%), geothermal (23%), and natural gas (16%).

Meanwhile, photovoltaics account for 8.5%, and wind power barely represents 2.1%.

In recent years, there has been notable interest in El Salvador, a country of six million people, in promoting clean, renewable energy production, which represents 70% of the country’s energy matrix, according to official figures.

The Renig executive stated that producing electricity from biogas is expensive and complex, as it not only requires investment in facilities and personnel but the process itself is extremely complicated.

“It’s costly because of the equipment and the operation of production. It’s not like solar—that’s child’s play: you have the land, you install the panels, you make the connections that any university student can do, and that’s it,” said Waase.

The complexity of biogas production also lies in dealing with bacteria, living organisms that can behave unpredictably and affect gas production, explained Melissa Ruiz, in charge of the digester and secondary processes.

Sometimes the bacteria get “sick,” she noted, and they must be carefully tended to.

“The digester works like our stomach, and the bacteria are very sensitive to the elements we provide them—just like us: if we suddenly eat too much meat or an unbalanced diet, our stomach reacts, and we feel sluggish or get sick. The same thing happens with the digester,” Ruiz told IPS.

The biogas produced by the Renig plant’s biodigester, using waste from a Salvadoran poultry company, powers two engines with a generation capacity of 425 kilowatts each. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

An Eco-Friendly Plant 

Once El Granjero decided to bet on biogas production through its subsidiary, it began working on the technical, operational, and financial details of what would become the Renig plant, where a biodigester measuring 92 meters long, 17 meters wide, and 5 meters deep—with a capacity of 5,300 cubic meters—would be built.

The biodigester is the centerpiece of any biogas plant. Inside, bacteria break down the biological waste from the farms—in El Granjero’s case, chicken manure.

This decomposition process generates gases, including methane, which become the fuel to power the plant’s two engines, each with a generation capacity of 425 kilowatts.

If not used for electricity production, these gases would rise into the atmosphere and contribute to global warming.

According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), methane is a potent greenhouse gas with a warming potential 80 times greater than carbon dioxide.

This gas is also the main contributor to ground-level ozone formation, a dangerous air pollutant whose exposure causes 1 million premature deaths worldwide each year.

The Renig plant’s biodigester began producing biogas in 2018, but it only started generating electricity in 2021, as that was the year it participated in a government tender for renewable energy production.

During the period when no electricity was generated, the biogas had to be “flared” to prevent the gases from escaping into the atmosphere, using a combustion torch the company had to purchase for US$40,000.

“This torch basically burned all the biogas, and I thought: I’m literally burning money. Since February 2021, this torch hasn’t been lit because I’ve been generating energy,” said Waase.

As part of its production processes, the Renig biogas plant also produces high-quality fertilizer, which it markets to the agricultural sector. Credit: Edgardo Ayala / IPS

The Business Moves Slowly but Surely 

Two years earlier, in 2019, Renig won the contract to inject 0.85 megawatts into the national grid—a modest amount but significant as a starting point.

For reference, the Nejapa biogas plant, built in 2011 and operated by AES El Salvador at a cost of US$58 million, has an installed capacity of six megawatts.

Waase stated that, environmentally, the plant has achieved its primary goal of preventing pollution, which is already a cause for celebration and pride, as few large companies in the poultry sector have taken this step. Specifically, in the egg industry, El Granjero is the only one that made this investment.

However, financially, expectations have not been fully met.

“From an environmental standpoint, it’s been a total success, but financially speaking, it’s much more complicated. We haven’t lost money in any year, but we’re nowhere near the return we had projected,” he said.