Wet processing — dyeing, washing, drying at 60–180 °C — is where textile carbon lives. The sector's stenter frames and dye jigs are notorious heat wasters, and most capacity sits in countries with no carbon price but heavy brand Scope-3 pressure.
| Year | Free allocation (EU) | Payable carbon cost | Annual bill (per 100,000 t fabric) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 97.5% | €0.80 / t fabric | €80,010 |
| 2030 | 51.5% | €15.52 / t fabric | €1,552,194 |
| 2034 | 0.0% | €32.00 / t fabric | €3,200,400 |
At EUA €80.01 (July 13, 2026) and ≈0.3–0.5 t CO2/t fabric (wet processing; dyeing-dominant). EU ETS industry schedule; exporters under CBAM follow the mirrored phase-in. Power sectors pay 100% from day one.
Indicative reduction potential of each measure against the relevant emissions share (sources: IEA industry roadmaps, sector associations — see each measure page). Measures stack but don't simply add.
Brand Scope-3 programmes (H&M, Inditex cascades) now demand supplier kg-CO2/kg-fabric — making efficiency a commercial qualification, not a cost line. Steam-side losses are the first thing an auditor sees; removable insulation gives the photo they want plus the savings you keep.
Method: ASTM C680 / ISO 12241 surface energy balance — the same engine as our public calculators. Typical removable-insulation effect across hot-process plants: 2–5% of fuel-related CO2, payback up to 2 years.
Direct-emission intensities, typical published values per industry page — units differ by product; see each page for sources.
