Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bacterial Cellulose—A Sustainable Alternative Material for Footwear and Leather Products

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Leather and Footwear Sustainability

Part of the book series: Textile Science and Clothing Technology ((TSCT))

Abstract

Issues related to sustainability are an inevitable factor which always associated with leather products as the raw material is associated with animal slaughtering. At the same time, research agencies predicted that the footwear industry is expected to grow 371.8 billion USD in 2020 with a CAGR of 5.5%. Out of different raw materials used in the industry, leather products are occupying a significant market share as premium goods. The major pollution by the footwear and other leather products not only comes from the disposal but also from the manufacturing stages like machine usage, energy confirmations, chemicals, etc. It is estimated that approximately 50.2 m2 of land and 25,000 L of water required to develop leather boots. On average, the production of single boot emits 30 lb of carbon-di-oxide to the environment. The existing leather alternative materials like polyurethane, synthetic textiles, and rubber will take roughly 50 years to decompose totally. Material selection is one of the important solutions for sustainability-related issues and to reduce the negative environmental impacts. Bacterial cellulose is one such material that attracted the footwear industry due to its special properties like unique structure, biodegradability, mechanical strength, and high crystallinity. The chapter discusses various research works performed on leather alternative materials and specifically details the potential nature of bacterial cellulose. The production method, factors influencing the production, material properties, and application scopes will be analyzed with specific concern on the leather and footwear industry. The chapter also details the advantages of bacterial cellulose over other alternative material in terms of wearer comfort, durability, disposability, biodegradability, and cost factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kanagaraj J, Velappan KC, Babu NK, Sadulla S (2006) Solid wastes generation in the leather industry and its utilization for cleaner environment. Chem Inform 37(49). https://doi.org/10.1002/chin.200649273

  2. Doble M, Kumar A (2005) Tannery effluent. In: Biotreatment of industrial effluents, pp 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-075067838-4/50013-0

  3. Thanikaivelan P, Rao JR, Nair BU (2000) Development of a leather processing method in narrow pH profile: part 1. Standardisation of dehairing process. J Soc Leather Technol Chem 84(6):276–284

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dixit S, Yadav A, Dwivedi PD, Das M (2015) Toxic hazards of leather industry and technologies to combat threat: a review. J Clean Prod 87:39–49

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sivaram NM, Barik D (2019) Toxic waste from leather industries. In: Energy from toxic organic waste for heat and power generation, pp 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-102528-4.00005-5

  6. EU (2003) Directive 2003/53/EC of the European Parliament & of the Council of 18 June 2003 amending for the 26th time council directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing & use of certain dangerous substances & preparations (nonyl phenol, nonyl phenol ethoxylate & cement)

    Google Scholar 

  7. OEHHA (2001) Chemical listed effective June 15, 2001 as known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity: N-methylpyrrolidone. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency

    Google Scholar 

  8. Khanna SK, Das M (1991) Toxicity, carcinogenic and clinico-epidemiological studies on dyes and dye-intermediates. J Sci Ind Res 50, 965–974

    Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor MM, Cabeza LF, Dimaio GL, Brown EM, Marmer WN, Carrio R, Celma PJ, Cot J (1998) Processing of leather waste: pilot scale studies on chrome shavings. Part I. Isolation and characterization of protein products and separation of chrome cake. JAL CA 93(3), 61

    Google Scholar 

  10. Verheijen LAHM, Wiersema D, Hulshoff Pol LW (1996) Management of waste from animal product processing. In: Tanneries J, De Wit (eds) International Agriculture Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands. http://www.fao.org/3/X6114E/x6114e05.htm. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  11. Fibre Briefing: Leather (2018) https://www.commonobjective.co/article/fibre-briefing-leather. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  12. Human Rights Watch (2012) Toxic tanneries: the health repercussions of Bangladesh’s Hazaribagh leather

    Google Scholar 

  13. History of Leather (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.mooreandgiles.com/leather/resources/history/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  14. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (2019) Animals used for clothing/leather industry. Retrieved from https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-clothing/leather-industry/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  15. Medical Design Briefs (2015) PVC vs. polyurethane: a tubing comparison. Retrieved from https://www.medicaldesignbriefs.com/component/content/article/mdb/features/articles/21705. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  16. Nunez FU, Santiago EV, Lopez SH (2008) Structural, thermal and morphological characterization of UV-graft polymerization of acrylated-epoxidized soybean oil onto goat leather. Chem Chem Technol 2:191–197

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nam C, Lee Y-A (2019) Multilayered cellulosic material as a leather alternative in the footwear industry. Cloth Text Res J 37(1):20–34

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cao H, Wool R, Sidoriak E, Dan Q (2013) Evaluating mechanical properties of environmentally friendly leather substitute (eco-leather). In: Proceedings of the international textile and apparel association (ITAA) annual conference proceedings, New Orleans, 15–18 Oct 2013

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cao H, Wool RRP, Bonanno P, Dan Q, Kramer J, Lipschitz S (2014) Development and evaluation of apparel and footwear made from renewable bio-based materials. Int J Fash Des Technol Educ 7:21–30

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pinatex (2017) https://www.ananas-anam.com/about-us/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  21. Mylo (2017) https://boltthreads.com/technology/mylo/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  22. Flinn A (2019) BRB, I need these chic French sneakers that are made from corn. https://www.wellandgood.com/good-looks/veja-campo-vegan-sneaker/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  23. Transforming the Material World (2018) http://www.modernmeadow.com/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  24. Li J, Wei X, Wang Q, Chen J, Chang G, Kong L, Liu Y (2012) Homogeneous isolation of nanocellulose from sugarcane bagasse by high pressure homogenization. Carbohydr Polym 90(4):1609–1613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kaewnopparat S, Sansernluk K, Faroongsarng D (2008) Behavior of freezable bound water in the bacterial cellulose produced by Acetobacter xylinum: an approach using thermoporosimetry. Am Assoc Pharm Sci 9:701–707

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Schramm M, Hestrin S (1954) Factors affecting production of cellulose at the air, liquid interface of a culture of Acetobacter xylinum. J Gen Microbiol 11:123–129

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chan CK, Shin J, Jiang SXK (2018) Development of tailor-shaped bacterial cellulose textile cultivation techniques for zero-waste design. Cloth Text Res J 36:33–44

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gayathrya G, Gopalaswamy G (2014) Production and characterisation of microbial cellulosic fibre from Acetobacter xylinum. J Fibre Text Res 39(1):93–96

    Google Scholar 

  29. Yim SM, Song JE, Kim HR (2017) Production and characterization of bacterial cellulose fabrics by nitrogen sources of tea and carbon sources of sugar. Process Biochem 59:26–36

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Keshk SM (2014) Vitamin C enhances bacterial cellulose production in Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Carbohydr Polym 99:98–100

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Matsuoka M, Tsuchida T, Matsushita K et al (1996) A synthetic medium for bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum subsp. sucrofermentans. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 60:575–579

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Khattak WA, Khan T, Ul-Islam M, Ullah MW, Khan S, Wahid F, Park JK (2015) Production, characterization and biological features of bacterial cellulose from scum obtained during preparation of sugarcane jaggery (gur). J Food Sci Technol 52:8343–8349

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Kiziltas EE, Kiziltas A, Gardner DJ (2015) Synthesis of bacterial cellulose using hot water extracted wood sugars. Carbohydr Polym 124:131–138

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bae SO, Shoda M (2005) Production of bacterial cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum BPR2001 using molasses medium in a jar fermentor. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 67:45–51

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Premjet S, Premjet D, Ohtani Y (2007) The effect of ingredients of sugar cane molasses on bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum ATCC 10245. Sen’iGakkaishi 63:193–199

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Cerrutti P, Roldan P, Garcia RM, Galvagno MA, Vazquez A, Foresti ML (2016) Production of bacterial nanocellulose from wine industry residues: importance of fermentation time on pellicle characteristics. J Appl Polym Sci 133:43109

    Google Scholar 

  37. Khattak WA, Khan T, Ul-Islam M, Wahid F, Park JK (2015) Production, characterization and physico-mechanical properties of bacterial cellulose from industrial wastes. J Polym Environ 23:45–53

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Vazquez A, Foresti ML, Cerrutti P, Galvagno M (2013) Bacterial cellulose from simple and low cost production media by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. J Polym Environ 21:545–554

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Chen L, Hong F, Yang XX, Han SF (2013) Biotransformation of wheat straw to bacterial cellulose and its mechanism. Bioresour Technol 135:464–468

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lotfiman S, Biak A, Radiah D, Ti TB, Kamarudin S, Nikbin S (2016) Influence of date syrup as a carbon source on bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum 0416. Adv Polym Technol 37:21759. https://doi.org/10.1002/adv.21759

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kuo CH, Huang CY, Shieh CJ, Wang HMD, Tseng CY (2017) Hydrolysis of orange peel with cellulase and pectinase to produce bacterial cellulose using Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Waste Biomass Valorization 10:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  42. Faridah F, Diana S, Helmi H, Sami M, Mudliana M (2013) Effect of sugar concentrations on bacterial cellulose production as cellulose membrane in mixture liquid medium and material properties analysis

    Google Scholar 

  43. Usha Rani M, Udayasankar K, Anu Appaiah KA (2011) Properties of bacterial cellulose produced in grape medium by native isolate Gluconacetobacter Sp. J Appl Polym Sci 120(5):2497–3117

    Google Scholar 

  44. Goelzer FDE, Faria Tische PCS, Vitorino JC, Maria Sierakowski R, Tischer CA (2009) Production and characterization of nanospheres of bacterial cellulose from Acetobacter xylinum from processed rice bark. J Mater Sci Eng 29(2):546–551

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Casarica A, Campeanu G, Moscovici M, Ghiorghita A, Manea V (2013) Improvement of bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum dsmz-2004 on poor quality horticultural substrates using the Taguchi method for media optimization. Part 1. Cell Chem Prod Technol 47:61–68

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Luo MT, Zhao C, Huang C, Chen XF, Huang QL, Qi GX, Chen XD (2017) Efficient using durian shell hydrolysate as low-cost substrate for bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Indian J Med Microbiol 57:393–399

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wu JM, Liu RH (2013) Cost-effective production of bacterial cellulose in static cultures using distillery wastewater. J Biosci Bioeng 115:284–290

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hyun JY, Mahanty B, Kim CG (2014) Utilization of makgeolli sludge filtrate (MSF) as low-cost substrate for bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 172:3748–3760

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Cavka A, Guo X, Tang SJ, Winestrand S, Jönsson LJ, Hong F (2013) Production of bacterial cellulose and enzyme from waste fiber sludge. Biotechnol Biofuels 6:25

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Uraki Y, Morito M, Kishimoto T, Sano Y (2002) Bacterial cellulose production using monosaccharides derived from hemicelluloses in water-soluble fraction of waste liquor from atmospheric acetic acid pulping. Holzforschung 56:341–347

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Bilgi E, Bayir E, Sendemir-Urkmez A, Hames EE (2016) Optimization of bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus using carob and haricot bean. Int J Biol Macromol 90:2–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Luo MT, Huang C, Chen XF, Huang QL, Qi GX, Tian LL, Chen XD (2017) Efficient bioconversion from acid hydrolysate of waste oleaginous yeast biomass after microbial oil extraction to bacterial cellulose by Komagataeibacter xylinus. Prep Biochem Biotechnol 47:1025–1031

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Zhao H, Xia J, Wang J, Yan X, Wang C, Lei T, Zhang H (2018) Production of bacterial cellulose using polysaccharide fermentation wastewater as inexpensive nutrient sources. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 32:350–356

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Huang C, Guo HJ, Xiong L, Wang B, Shi SL, Chen XF, Chen XD (2016) Using wastewater after lipid fermentation as substrate for bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Carbohydr Polym 136:198–202

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Moon SH, Park JM, Chun HY, Kim SJ (2006) Comparisons of physical properties of bacterial celluloses produced in different culture conditions using saccharified food wastes. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 11:26

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Guo X, Chen L, Tang J, Jönsson LJ, Hong FF (2016) Production of bacterial nanocellulose and enzyme from [AMIM] Cl-pretreated waste cotton fabrics: effects of dyes on enzymatic saccharification and nanocellulose production. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 91:1413–1421

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Adnan A, Nair GR, Lay MC, Swan JE, Umar R (2015) Glycerol as a cheaper carbon source in bacterial cellulose (BC) production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus dsm46604 in batch fermentation system. Malays J Anal Sci 19:1131–1136

    Google Scholar 

  58. Rohaeti E, Laksono EW, Rakhmawati A (2017) Characterization and the activity of bacterial cellulose prepared from rice waste water by addition with glycerol and chitosan. J Agric Biol Sci 12(8)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Narh C, Frimpong C, Mensah A, Wei Q (2018) Rice bran—an alternative nitrogen source for Acetobacter xylinum bacterial cellulose synthesis

    Google Scholar 

  60. Hornung M, Ludwig M, Schmauder HP (2007) Optimizing the production of bacterial cellulose in surface culture: a novel aerosol bioreactor working on a fed batch principle (part 3). Eng Life Sci 7(1):35–41

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Yoshino T, Asakura T, Toda K (1996) Cellulose production by Acetobacter pasteurianus on silicon membrane. J Ferment Bioeng 81(1):32–36

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Cheng K-C, Catchmark JM, Demirci A (2009) Enhanced production of bacterial cellulose by using a biofilm reactor and its material property analysis. J Biol Eng 3:12

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Shah N, Ha JH, Park JK (2010) Effect of reactor surface on production of bacterial cellulose and water soluble oligosaccharides by Gluconacetobacter hansenii PJK. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 15, 110–118

    Google Scholar 

  64. Onodera M, Harashima I, Toda K, Asakura T (2002) Silicone rubber membrane bioreactors for bacterial cellulose production. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 7, Article number 289

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wu S-C, Li M-H (2015) Production of bacterial cellulose membranes in a modified airlift bioreactor by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. J Biosci Bioeng 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  66. Hartmann AM, Burleson LE, Holmes AK, Geist CR (2000) Effects of chronic kombucha ingestion on open-field behaviors, longevity, appetitive behaviors, and organs in C57-BL/6 mice: a pilot study. Nutrition 16:755–761

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Chen C, Liu BY (2000) Changes in major components of tea fungus metabolites during prolonged fermentation. J Appl Microbiol 89:834–839

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Reiss J (1994) Influence of different sugars on the metabolism of the tea fungus. Z Lebensm Unters Forsch 198:258–261

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Masaoka S, Ohe T, Sakota N (1993) Production of cellulose from glucose by Acetobacter xylinum. J Ferment Bioeng 75(1):18–22

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Tonouchi N, Tsuchida T, Yoshinaga F, Beppu T, Horinouchi S (1996) Characterization of the biosynthetic pathway of cellulose from glucose and fructose in Acetobacter xylinum. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 60(8):1377–1379. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb.60.1377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Han NS, Robyt JF (1998) The mechanism of Acetobacter xylinum cellulose biosynthesis: direction of chain elongation and the role of lipid pyrophosphate intermediates in the cell membrane. Carbohydr Res 313, 125–133

    Google Scholar 

  72. Hussain Z, Sajjad W, Khan T, Wahid F (2019) Production of bacterial cellulose from industrial wastes: a review. Cellulose. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02307-1

  73. Lee KY, Buldum G, Mantalaris A, Bismarck A (2014) More than meets the eye in bacterial cellulose: biosynthesis, bio-processing, and applications in advanced fiber composites. Macromol Biosci 14:10–32

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Rognoli V, Bianchini M, Maffei S, Karana E (2015) DIY materials. Mater Des 86:692–702

    Google Scholar 

  75. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_Lee. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  76. Ng FMC, Wang PW (2016) Natural self-grown fashion from bacterial cellulose: a paradigm shift design approach in fashion creation. Des J 19, 837–855

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ng MCF, Wang W (2015) A study of the receptivity to bacterial cellulosic pellicle for fashion. Res J Text Appar 19:65–69

    Google Scholar 

  78. Lee S (2018) My green goodie hero. https://www.mygreengoodiebag.com/blog/2018/6/18/suzanne-lee. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  79. Fernandes M, Gama M, Dourado F, Souto AP (2019) Development of novel bacterial cellulose composites for the textile and shoe industry. Microb Biotechnol 12:650–661

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Ghalachyan A (2018) Evaluation of consumer perceptions and acceptance of sustainable fashion products made of bacterial cellulose. Graduate theses and dissertations. 16583. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/16583

  81. Ghalachyan A (2017) Made from scratch. A sustainable handbag made of bacterial cellulose grown in fermenting tea. In: International textile and apparel association (ITAA) annual conference proceedings, p 65. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/itaa_proceedings/2017/design/65

  82. Mizuno D, Kawasaki K (2017) Bio fashion design: a study on design strategy for sustainable production line through DIY bio experiment

    Google Scholar 

  83. Solatorio N, Chong Liao C (2019) Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum: a comparison vegan leather to animal and imitation leather. Honors thesis, University of Wyoming

    Google Scholar 

  84. Garcia C, Prieto MA (2018) Bacterial cellulose as a potential bioleather substitute for the footwear industry. Microb Biotechnol 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13306

  85. Nam C, Lee Y-A (2016) RETHINK II: kombucha shoes for Scarlett and Rhett. In: International textile and apparel association (ITAA) annual conference proceedings, p 68. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/itaa_proceedings/2016/design/68

  86. Freeman C, Gillon F, James M, French T, Ward J (2016) Production of microbial leather from culled sweet potato sugars via kombucha culture. In: International textile and apparel association (ITAA) annual conference proceedings, p 109. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/itaa_proceedings/2016/presentations/109

  87. http://www.sohealthyproject.eu/results/main-results-library/publications/50-strategic-research-agenda. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  88. Hu W, Chen S, Yang J, Li Z, Wang H (2014) Functionalized bacterial cellulose derivatives and nanocomposites. Carbohydr Polym 101:1043–1060

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Song JE, Silva C, Cavaco-Paulo AM, Kim HR (2019) Functionalization of bacterial cellulose nonwoven by poly(fluorophenol) to improve its hydrophobicity and durability. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 7:332. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00332

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. da Silva FM, Gouveia IC (2015) The role of technology towards a new bacterial-cellulose-based material for fashion design. J Ind Intell Inf 3(2)

    Google Scholar 

  91. The Making of Nata de Coco Shoes (2011) Available online: https://avrotor.blogspot.com/search?q=nata+de+coco. Accessed on 23 June 2020

  92. Malai (2019) http://made-from-malai.com/1792-2/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  93. Rethinking Foot Wear for Better Future (2018) http://www.patent-shoes.com/. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  94. Payne A (2016) Will we soon be growing our own vegan leather at home? https://www.dailybulletin.com.au/the-conversation/24701-will-we-soon-be-growing-our-own-vegan-leather-at-home. Accessed on 27 Feb 2020

  95. Regine (2013) Artists in laboratories, episode 43: Suzanne Lee (Biocouture). https://we-make-money-not-art.com/ail_artists_in_laboratories_ep_32/. Accessed on 23 June 2020

  96. Liu H, Gao S-W, Cai J-S, He C-L, Mao J-J, Zhu T-X et al (2016) Recent progress in fabrication and applications of superhydrophobic coating on cellulose based substrates. Materials 9:124

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Fashion Technology, PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, 641004, India

    R. Rathinamoorthy & T. Kiruba

Authors
  1. R. Rathinamoorthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Kiruba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Rathinamoorthy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. SgT Group & API, Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rathinamoorthy, R., Kiruba, T. (2020). Bacterial Cellulose—A Sustainable Alternative Material for Footwear and Leather Products. In: Muthu, S. (eds) Leather and Footwear Sustainability. Textile Science and Clothing Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6296-9_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation