Liverpool, Manchester United, Man City and Real Madrid have all incorporated recycled plastic into their kits but more needs to be done for sustainability.
Football kits have morphed from humble cotton shirts into technological, fashion-driven apparel packed with synthetic fibres.
But beneath the slick designs and vibrant club badges lies a hidden environmental cost.
Most kits are made from polyester, a plastic derived from fossil fuels that is notorious for its carbon footprint, microplastic shedding and waste generation. Major brands such as Adidas, Nike and Puma have unveiled sustainability initiatives. Yet questions remain about whether these efforts meaningfully change the game or simply greenwash it.
From microplastic pollution to soaring carbon emissions and textile waste, the synthetic nature of modern football kits is problematic. Washing polyester garments releases tiny plastic particles into waterways, entering the food chain.
It is estimated that only about nine per cent of all plastic is ever recycled. Most persists in the environment for centuries, as microplastics break down into smaller and smaller particles. Recycling and reuse may not be an adequate solution.
“Recycling is the mop,” Jacqueline Savitz of Oceana, a non-profit organisation dedicated to protecting and restoring the world’s oceans, told PBS. “We need to first turn off the faucet.”
The carbon cost of virgin polyester is also high. Producing new polyester consumes significant energy, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, while the fast turnaround of kit releases – driven by fan demand, marketing and trends – adds to the mountain of textile waste. Simply recycling used kits doesn’t address this systemic overproduction.
Brand initiatives tackle some of these issues. Adidas, for example, launched the Primeblue and Primegreen programmes in collaboration with Parley for the Oceans, using recycled ocean plastic in their performance fabrics. Primeblue contains Parley Ocean Plastic, while Primegreen contains no virgin plastic. These fabrics were designed to help Adidas meet their commitment to eliminate virgin polyester use by the end of last year and reduce their carbon footprint by 30 per cent by 2030.
In 2024, Adidas reported that 99 per cent of all polyester used in their products was recycled, painting a picture of early achievement of their goals.
Nike’s sustainability push is centred on their “Move to Zero” campaign, which aims to reduce carbon, waste and reliance on virgin materials. Nike has produced kits composed of recycled polyester made from plastic bottles, diverting vast amounts of waste from landfill. These garments featured prominently in Liverpool’s recent kits before their switch to Adidas, aligning brand efforts with the club’s own sustainability objectives.
Similarly, Puma have introduced their RE:FIBRE initiative, which recycles textile waste into new performance garments and pledges to reach 75 per cent recycled polyester use by 2025 across their products, including football kits.
These efforts have influenced club policies. As well as Liverpool’s Nike kit including recycled polyester derived from plastic bottles, Manchester City’s Puma kits use materials from the RE:FIBRE program, reflecting a circular-economy approach driven by their sponsor’s sustainability targets. These partnerships are seen as aligning manufacturers’ material choices with club branding and green credentials.
MORE ON SUSTAINABILITY IN FOOTBALL
👉 Fan climate activism on the rise from Dortmund to Brentford and beyond
👉 Youth academies stand ready to be football’s unsung eco-heroes
👉 How non-league clubs are putting the Premier League to shame with eco charge
Fan sentiment and market forces are playing their part, too. According to a study by Sport Positive Leagues, clubs that adopted kits made from recycled materials saw a significant uptick in positive feedback, indicating growing consumer demand for eco-friendly products.
But the path forward is thorny. Using recycled polyester still means reliance on plastic. While Adidas and Puma reduce dependency on virgin polyester, the end-product is still synthetic fabric. Critics note that recycled polyester may not match the performance properties of virgin polymers precisely, though most advances in fabric engineering now close that gap. Brands may also overstate sustainability claims, with limited third-party certification or product lifecycle transparency.
Industry observers stress that while recycled polyester reduces waste and carbon emissions compared to virgin polyester, it perpetuates a plastic-dependent model unless broader systemic change occurs. Performance trade-offs also remain a concern at the elite level – especially in high-wicking, breathable kits designed for extreme physical exertion. Fabric rebirth may necessitate compromises.
Transparency is another hurdle. Brands release sustainability milestones, but independent verification is less common. Adidas’ claim of 96 per cent recycled polyester is laudable, yet independent auditors and lifecycle assessments are limited in public view. Consumers may not know how ocean plastic was collected, where recycling processes occurred or what happens at end-of-life for the garments themselves.
Ultimately, sustainability in football fashion is caught at the intersection of ecology, economics and consumer culture. Big brands have undeniably propelled recycled materials into flagship football kits, driving clubs to align with sustainability narratives.
Adidas’ Parley initiative brought recycled ocean plastic into jerseys worn by Manchester United and Real Madrid, signalling symbolic and practical change. Nike’s Move to Zero and Puma’s RE:FIBRE similarly reflect an industry-wide shift towards circularity.
But critics like Savitz remind us that greenwashing is a real danger without meaningful reduction in plastic production.
To truly reach sustainable fashion, football apparel must embrace more than recycled synthetics. The industry needs to rethink supply chains, invest in biodegradable fibres, reduce the frequency of kit releases and provide clear transparency – from raw materials to end-of-life disposal.
Clubs can leverage sponsor influence to push for real change such as longer kit cycles, reuse initiatives, buy-back programmes and circular design. Consumer education is essential, too. Fans should understand that buying a recycled kit is better than virgin plastic, but it is not a solution in itself.
Until then, sustainability remains a work in progress. Brands and clubs can score goals in raising awareness and shifting materials, but the environment’s full victory depends on ending plastic dependency – not merely recycling it.
To learn more about Pledgeball and how you can pledge to help your club shoot up the sustainability standings, visit Pledgeball.org