Looking At The Fashion Industry Through The Environmental Lens

The Fashion Charter, launched in 2018, has been signed by 130 companies and 41

supporting organisations, including the likes of Burberry, Chanel, Kering, Nike, Adidas, etc. and has been updated at COP 26 to halve the greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 (UNFCCC). Another step towards a sustainable fashion industry, but are these commitments enough to change the ground reality? Through the course of this article, we look at the environmental aspects of the industry.

Starting from scratch, raw materials like synthetic fibres are one of the bigger culprits. It is well known that synthetic materials like polyester are made of plastics and can take up to 200

years to degrade whereas materials like sequins and spandex are not degradable at all. Not only are these products harmful at the end of their lives, lying in landfills and releasing toxins, but they harm us every time we wear and wash them. Synthetic materials are less breathable, moreover, every time we wash them, they shed hundreds of thousands of microplastics that can later be found in our oceans, marine animals, and have also been found in the placenta recently. Around 700,000 microplastics are released after a cycle in the washing machine(unep.org). The fashion industry didn't have a major negative impact on the environment until the 20th century, as until then only natural fibers like wool, cotton, and hemp were used. Not only are these materials non-toxic and free of microplastics but are also bio-degradable and degrade within 5 months.

However, using even organic cotton doesn't solve all our problems. The cotton plant requires vast amounts of water, a lot of space to grow, various harmful chemicals, and is very labour intensive. While natural materials are far more eco-friendly than synthetic materials, they still contribute to waste that forms overflowing landfills in underdeveloped and developing countries. One might think of recycling as a solution, but the process comes with its own set of challenges. Recycling synthetics can be done mechanically or chemically-with different cons for each method. Using the mechanical method is cost-effective but reduces the quality of the fibres, whereas chemical recycling is expensive and resource intensive. Moreover, we can't get rid of the harmful toxins these materials continue to produce. Recycling natural fibres is easier on the environment but not a long-lasting solution as cotton produced by recycling is not of the highest quality and if it is to be used to make clothing it needs to be mixed with another synthetic fabric.

If it is a well-known fact that natural fibres are much better for the environment, then why do major fashion retail brands not use these materials? The major factor here is the cost. Natural fibres are significantly more expensive due to their process of production, for example 6,600 silkworms are killed to make just 1 kilogram of silk. Most "fast fashion" brands try to create knockoffs of designs from major fashion houses and to do this, retail brands need to use cheaper fabrics. Another factor is the design of clothes, many designs these days require materials to have a certain level of elasticity, durability, and compatibility that natural fabrics may not be able to provide. This is where "supernatural fabrics" like Lyocell come in. It's a fabric made from cellulose and is completely biodegradable while bringing in the functional properties of both synthetic and natural fibers-elasticity, temperature regulation, anti-bacterial and breathable. One drawback-it is expensive, which makes it very difficult to be used by fast fashion retailers.

More importantly, no matter which fabric we use, manufacturing clothes in factories has a

major environmental impact including a vast amount of water consumption, water pollution by factories letting effluents run into nearby rivers, consumption of large amounts of water, and toxic chemicals for textile dyeing. Lifecycle assessments show it takes 3,781 litres of water to make one pair of jeans (unep.org). Factories use large amounts of energy and emit a significant amount of greenhouse gases, more than the annual carbon emissions produced by international flights and maritime shipping combined as stated by the WEF. Companies could make a substantial difference by switching to green energy, but it would require a heavy investment. Sustainable fabrics require lesser energy and water, but still a significant amount.

Slow fashion, on the other hand, is a construct built around mitigating the negative impacts of fast fashion and while preferable it has its own set of drawbacks. Slow fashion is understandably expensive to the extent that it may even be unaffordable for a vast majority of the population, it can't keep up with the trends in the industry and it can't mass produce as it relies on craftsmanship instead of factories-a major drawback for the big retailers.

A circular model can help more people afford fashion and be trendy at the same time. Some customers may be unsure of the authenticity of second-hand products but there are technological advancements to help us verify that. EON has come up with the Circular Product Data Protocol. It is a global identification system for apparel products allowing resellers and recyclers to access, identify and share essential product and material information. However, third-party resellers may not be enough to shift the consumer sentiment, especially for luxury goods. Luxury goods are usually bought scarcely as compared to fast fashion products, and when consumers do buy these goods, they also expect a certain treatment and experience that comes with buying such a product, so much so that they may be willing to shell out more money for the first-hand version of the same product. Eliminating the third party and reselling and renting goods directly, can help retailers and fashion houses accelerate the shift towards a circular economy. Urban Outfitters

for example announced a clothing rental subscription in an effort to move towards a circular economy.

While we approach a sustainable future, it is important to accelerate our progress. We now not only need to reverse the negatives but also ensure a change in lifestyle to endure we never reach this point again. A McKinsey survey states that of surveyed consumers, 67 percent consider the use of sustainable materials to be an important purchasing factor, and 63 percent consider a brand’s promotion of sustainability in the same way, but is that enough? Buying secondhand is a positive step but we need to tackle the root cause-Consumption. One study states that if the number of times a garment is worn were doubled on average, greenhouse gas emissions would be 44 percent lower. Globally, customers miss out on up to $460 billion each year by throwing away clothes that they could continue to wear (Ellen MacArthur Foundation). As consumers, it is our responsibility to call upon businesses to produce responsibly, but it is also our responsibility to purchase only what we need and use the products till the end of their life.