Como hay polvo, usamos el paño sin pelusa.

Because como can be two different things:

• the 1st person singular of comer: yo como = I eat
• a conjunction meaning because / since when it appears at the beginning of a sentence

In Como hay polvo, usamos el paño sin pelusa, como introduces the reason for the action, so it means because.

A useful clue is the structure:

• Como + clause, main clause
• Como hay polvo, ... = Because there is dust, ...

If you said Yo como, then it would clearly mean I eat.

Yes, you could use porque, but the sentence structure changes slightly.

• Como hay polvo, usamos el paño sin pelusa.
• Usamos el paño sin pelusa porque hay polvo.

Both are correct. The main difference is:

• como is very commonly used for because when the reason comes first
• porque usually comes after the main clause

So in this sentence, como works naturally because the speaker starts with the reason.

Because the sentence begins with a subordinate clause:

• Como hay polvo = reason clause
• usamos el paño sin pelusa = main clause

In Spanish, when this kind of clause comes first, a comma is normally used before the main clause.

So:

• Como hay polvo, usamos... ✅

This is similar to English:

• Because there is dust, we use...

Because hay means there is / there are, and that is the idea needed here: dust exists or is present.

• hay polvo = there is dust

You would not say está polvo because polvo is a noun, not an adjective here.

You could say something like:

• Hay polvo en la mesa = There is dust on the table

Tiene polvo means it has dust and needs a subject:

• La mesa tiene polvo = The table has dust on it

So hay polvo is the natural way to say that dust is present.

Because polvo is being used in a general, uncountable sense, like dust in English.

• hay polvo = there is dust

Spanish often omits the article with uncountable nouns when speaking generally.

Compare:

• Hay polvo = There is dust
• Hay un polvo... would mean something very different and is not what you want here

So no article is the normal choice.

Usamos is the present indicative of usar for nosotros: we use.

That fits a straightforward statement of fact:

• usamos el paño sin pelusa = we use the lint-free cloth

Why not usemos?

• usemos is the present subjunctive
• it would usually appear in suggestions, commands, wishes, or dependent clauses
• for example: Es mejor que usemos... = It’s better that we use...

Why not utilizamos?

• You could say utilizamos; it also means we use
• usar is simply more common and everyday in many contexts

So usamos is the most natural plain statement here.

In form, usamos can mean two things:

• present: we use
• preterite: we used

The tense is understood from context.

In this sentence, the surrounding context sounds like a general present situation or current procedure:

• Como hay polvo, usamos... = Because there is dust, we use...

So here it is naturally understood as present, not past.

Because paño is a masculine noun:

• el paño
• un paño

It means a cloth or cleaning cloth in this context.

You need the masculine article el to agree with the noun.

Here, paño means a cloth, especially a cleaning cloth or soft cloth.

It is similar to trapo, but there can be a difference in tone:

• paño often sounds more neutral or suitable for cleaning/polishing surfaces
• trapo can sound more like a rag, sometimes older, rougher, or less specific

So in a sentence about using a lint-free cloth, paño is a good choice.

Sin means without, and pelusa means lint or fluff.

So:

• sin pelusa = without lint
• naturally in English: lint-free

This is a very common way Spanish forms descriptions:

• sin azúcar = sugar-free / without sugar
• sin sal = salt-free / without salt
• sin problemas = without problems

After sin, Spanish often uses a noun without an article when speaking in a general sense.

So:

• sin pelusa = without lint / lint-free

If you said sin la pelusa, that would refer to some specific lint already known in the conversation, which is not the idea here.

This sentence is describing a type or quality of cloth in general, so sin pelusa is the natural form.

Yes. That would be a very natural alternative.

• paño sin pelusa = lint-free cloth
• paño que no suelta pelusa = cloth that does not shed lint

The first is shorter and more label-like. The second is more explicit.

Both are correct, but paño sin pelusa is very concise and common for product-style descriptions.

It can suggest either, depending on context.

The present tense in Spanish can express:

• a general habit or usual procedure
  
  • When there is dust, we use the lint-free cloth
• what is happening now
  
  • Since there is dust, we’re using the lint-free cloth

Without more context, both are possible. Spanish present tense is often flexible in this way.

Yes. If the speaker wanted a more general or instructional tone, they might say:

• Como hay polvo, se usa el paño sin pelusa.

That means something like:

• Since there is dust, the lint-free cloth is used
• or more naturally: When there is dust, you use the lint-free cloth

The original usamos includes the speaker in we. The se usa version sounds more impersonal, more like a general instruction or rule.