• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • UNIFORM LA Japanese BDU Camo Cargo Pants Drop, going on right now.

    Uniform LA's Japanese BDU Camo Cargo Pants are now live. These cargos are based off vintage US Army BDU (Battle Dress Uniform) cargos. They're made of a premium 13.5-ounce Japanese twill that has been sulfur dyed for a vintage look. Every detail has been carried over from the inspiration and elevated. Available in two colorways, tundra and woodland. Please find them here

    Good luck!.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Discussions about the fashion industry thread

conceptual 4est

The Classic Gentleman is Back
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
5,167
Reaction score
33,621

“About two-thirds of brands, (fashion brands and retailers with revenue above $1 billion that are included in the Carbon Disclosure Project) according to a new McKinsey analysis, are behind on their own decarbonization schedules, and 40 percent have seen their emissions output increase since making their sustainability commitments.”

“Our research shows that most fashion brands could reduce their GHG emissions by more than 60 percent for less than 1 to 2 percent of their revenues. (This excludes levers related to reselling, renting, and repairing fashion, which would reduce a brand’s emissions intensity significantly but also be dependent on consumer behavior shifts.)”
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
57,739
Reaction score
36,631

“About two-thirds of brands, (fashion brands and retailers with revenue above $1 billion that are included in the Carbon Disclosure Project) according to a new McKinsey analysis, are behind on their own decarbonization schedules, and 40 percent have seen their emissions output increase since making their sustainability commitments.”

“Our research shows that most fashion brands could reduce their GHG emissions by more than 60 percent for less than 1 to 2 percent of their revenues. (This excludes levers related to reselling, renting, and repairing fashion, which would reduce a brand’s emissions intensity significantly but also be dependent on consumer behavior shifts.
The faster tne rate of production and consumption, the higher the consumption of energy, and the greater the greenhouse gas production, because, aside from nuclear, all of our energy comes from the sun, and so our use of energy always, always, disrupts natural cycles. When we were fewer and our technology crappier, we just had less of an effect overall. The idea that greater efficiency leads to lower energy use also seems to be a fallacy. If anything, we simply consume other resources faster. Look at the supercomputer in your hand. In a few years, it's destined for a landfill, and with it, rare earths, precious metals, and whatever else we need to build complicated computers but that are too expensive to recycle.

The only "realistic" solutions we could implement in the immediate and short term would result in not just greater inequality but greater actual poverty everywhere, so that's not acceptable either. So that leaves us doing what we can, which is making dire but realistic predictions on a forum. Have a great day everyone lol.
 

Fuuma

Franchouillard Modasse
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
26,952
Reaction score
14,545
The faster tne rate of production and consumption, the higher the consumption of energy, and the greater the greenhouse gas production, because, aside from nuclear, all of our energy comes from the sun, and so our use of energy always, always, disrupts natural cycles. When we were fewer and our technology crappier, we just had less of an effect overall. The idea that greater efficiency leads to lower energy use also seems to be a fallacy. If anything, we simply consume other resources faster. Look at the supercomputer in your hand. In a few years, it's destined for a landfill, and with it, rare earths, precious metals, and whatever else we need to build complicated computers but that are too expensive to recycle.

The only "realistic" solutions we could implement in the immediate and short term would result in not just greater inequality but greater actual poverty everywhere, so that's not acceptable either. So that leaves us doing what we can, which is making dire but realistic predictions on a forum. Have a great day everyone lol.
Well considering we're reached peak oil (putting aside hard of access resources like oil sands) quite a few yrs ago we're going to transition anyway, we either do it with some preparation or not...
Of course as you say we aren't so much using more renewables as using more of everything, expanding our energy and mineral use.
 

K. Nights

Distinguished Member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
1,854
Reaction score
1,762
Well considering we're reached peak oil (putting aside hard of access resources like oil sands) quite a few yrs ago we're going to transition anyway, we either do it with some preparation or not...
Of course as you say we aren't so much using more renewables as using more of everything, expanding our energy and mineral use.
Pretty sure we've not reached peak oil yet, either in demand or production.
 

Fuuma

Franchouillard Modasse
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
26,952
Reaction score
14,545
Pretty sure we've not reached peak oil yet, either in demand or production.
I haven't checked any sources so working from memory (and only for conventional!) but considering that national production tend to follow (with a delay) a peak in discoveries many of the big producers have passed the peak in discoveries quite a long time ago. Of course the real reserves are unknown for various reasons (secrecy, false declarations and of course undiscovered reserves). Ok found a pop explanation by someone I'd trust (to gather the info, he's not a a geologist). It is 10 yrs old btw and he doesn't focus enough on ease of extraction being a barrier but in the end you see interesting graphs separating the two. YMMV


As for demand well you know, thermo-industrial civilisation is fucked and if we go on, the Germans will produce better wines than France and Italy :'( (in additions to all the deaths)
 

double00

Stylish Dinosaur
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
17,215
Reaction score
17,762
if a commodity has not peaked in supply it has not peaked . coal , oil , etc .

perversely peak supply is also in all likelihood peak profit . make of that what you will .
 

Lofi_Moby

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2024
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
The faster tne rate of production and consumption, the higher the consumption of energy, and the greater the greenhouse gas production, because, aside from nuclear, all of our energy comes from the sun, and so our use of energy always, always, disrupts natural cycles. When we were fewer and our technology crappier, we just had less of an effect overall. The idea that greater efficiency leads to lower energy use also seems to be a fallacy. If anything, we simply consume other resources faster. Look at the supercomputer in your hand. In a few years, it's destined for a landfill, and with it, rare earths, precious metals, and whatever else we need to build complicated computers but that are too expensive to recycle.

The only "realistic" solutions we could implement in the immediate and short term would result in not just greater inequality but greater actual poverty everywhere, so that's not acceptable either. So that leaves us doing what we can, which is making dire but realistic predictions on a forum. Have a great day everyone lol.
I think the focus should be less on reducing energy consumption and more on the materials used. Synthetic fibers are causing a microplastic catastrophe. Scientist found microplastics in the tissue of penguins in antartica to give an idea of the scope of the problem. Organic material biodegrade. Yea they have their issues but still, they compost
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
57,739
Reaction score
36,631
I think the focus should be less on reducing energy consumption and more on the materials used. Synthetic fibers are causing a microplastic catastrophe. Scientist found microplastics in the tissue of penguins in antartica to give an idea of the scope of the problem. Organic material biodegrade. Yea they have their issues but still, they compost
It's part of the same overall issue, which is that our global economy is based on growth, and growth is always resource consuming, Having been in this space (environmental engineering and sciences, and to lesser extent, environmental ethics) since 1997, I can nearly say for certain that I have never seen increased efficiency resulting in fewer resources used. And it's not because we could not design things that way either.
 

conceptual 4est

The Classic Gentleman is Back
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
5,167
Reaction score
33,621

"The Japanese team went so far as to create a streetwear brand with its own website and custom-designed products. They called it Not So Ape, saying it was founded in Tokyo in 2017 and “inspired by the street style we see everyday.”

Not So Ape’s English-language site’s terms of service says it is operated by Big River and lists a Seattle contact address of “2300 7th Ave, Ste B100, Back Entrance”—a building adjacent to a main Amazon campus.
"

lol
 

sftiger

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2011
Messages
709
Reaction score
304

"The Japanese team went so far as to create a streetwear brand with its own website and custom-designed products. They called it Not So Ape, saying it was founded in Tokyo in 2017 and “inspired by the street style we see everyday.”

Not So Ape’s English-language site’s terms of service says it is operated by Big River and lists a Seattle contact address of “2300 7th Ave, Ste B100, Back Entrance”—a building adjacent to a main Amazon campus.
"

lol
The whole article is worth a read - fascinating.
 

Keyser_Söze

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2024
Messages
131
Reaction score
227
The faster tne rate of production and consumption, the higher the consumption of energy, and the greater the greenhouse gas production, because, aside from nuclear, all of our energy comes from the sun, and so our use of energy always, always, disrupts natural cycles. When we were fewer and our technology crappier, we just had less of an effect overall. The idea that greater efficiency leads to lower energy use also seems to be a fallacy. If anything, we simply consume other resources faster. Look at the supercomputer in your hand. In a few years, it's destined for a landfill, and with it, rare earths, precious metals, and whatever else we need to build complicated computers but that are too expensive to recycle.

The only "realistic" solutions we could implement in the immediate and short term would result in not just greater inequality but greater actual poverty everywhere, so that's not acceptable either. So that leaves us doing what we can, which is making dire but realistic predictions on a forum. Have a great day everyone lol.
Until western capitalism changes and a CEO doesn't have the fiduciary duty to squeeze every penny of profit for the board members and stock holders that 1-2% mentioned in the article isn't going to change.
 

Featured Sponsor

Do You Have a Signature Fragrance?

  • Yes, I have a signature fragrance I wear every day

  • Yes, I have a signature fragrance but I don't wear it daily

  • No, I have several fragrances and rotate through them

  • I don't wear fragrance


Results are only viewable after voting.

Forum statistics

Threads
508,688
Messages
10,604,088
Members
224,701
Latest member
latinphrases33
Top