Discussions about the fashion industry thread

[smittycl]

Interesting read in today’s Atlantic on recycling. We still assume our programs are more efficient and comprehensive than they really are.

How Useful Is Recycling, Really?

Among all possible climate actions, recycling ranks pretty low in its impact.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[breakaway01]

yup, I don't know how to address this market failure either, definitely feel like whacking a mole, a tax on every single type of public goods and pollution seems impossibly bureaucratic...

In addition to government, there is going to be a role for investor activism. BlackRock CEO is pushing companies to disclose their plans for sustainability.

BlackRock Chief Pushes a Big New Climate Goal for the Corporate World (Published 2021)

Larry Fink is using his firm’s huge influence to pressure companies to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

www.nytimes.com

 

[clee1982]

@breakaway01

I'm asking a different question though, my main theme is how you put dollar amount on each of the sustainability types.

If there are choice of 2 process
1. one produce more CO2 but consume less water
2. while the other process product less CO2 but consume more water.

How do you weight these apple and oranges in a combined cycle analysis. How do you say which is better when you have to make the choice (and real life choice is even more complicated)

edit: I mean it's a market failure hard to address because it's hard to put dollar amount on each of the process, and even if have all agree to tax it, I don't know how to do it without being overly bureaucratic (and also hard to determine, like why x dollar on co2 per tone while y dollar on water per liter etc.)

 

[breakaway01]

@breakaway01

I'm asking a different question though, my main theme is how you put dollar amount on each of the sustainability types.

If there are choice of 2 process
1. one produce more CO2 but consume less water
2. while the other process product less CO2 but consume more water.

How do you weight these apple and oranges in a combined cycle analysis. How do you say which is better when you have to make the choice (and real life choice is even more complicated)

edit: I mean it's a market failure hard to address because it's hard to put dollar amount on each of the process, and even if have all agree to tax it, I don't know how to do it without being overly bureaucratic (and also hard to determine, like why x dollar on co2 per tone while y dollar on water per liter etc.)

OK I see. Definitely not an expert in this but I can imagine that the tradeoffs are challenging. Still we do have to start somewhere.

I will say that while I believe most SF users do care about sustainability, there is a wide spectrum of behavior that likely just reflects the general population. Clearly there are many SF members who seem to be buying non-stop based on their own posts, and others who write about buying less and trying to create a minimal capsule wardrobe. The business model of SF does create a bit of a conflict of interest here, in that affiliate vendors of course benefit by people purchasing new goods. I haven't been here for that long compared to many of you, but I do think the ratio of threads devoted to buying stuff to threads devoted to how to better wear the stuff we already own has increased over time.

 

[clee1982]

I guess the question is what do you mean by better wear (like how to pair them?), other than shirts elbow blow out and jeans croutch blow out and pants hem 100% frayed nothing ever goes bad enough for me to "need" to replace.

 

[breakaway01]

I guess the question is what do you mean by better wear (like how to pair them?), other than shirts elbow blow out and jeans croutch blow out and pants hem 100% frayed nothing ever goes bad enough for me to "need" to replace.

yes, thinking about the classic guide to coherent dressing thread -- instead of buying the Nth sportcoat or outerwear piece or pair of jeans, how do we learn how to mix/match what we own. Most of the veterans here probably are already comfortable with this, but there are probably many people who aren't.

 

[clee1982]

yea I'm sure I can stick to 100% basic and would get a ton wear out of it, though it's clear I don't...

edit: I don't throw away stuff, I sell, but in the end of the day I buy a crap ton more than I need...

 

[smittycl]

yea I'm sure I can stick to 100% basic and would get a ton wear out of it, though it's clear I don't...

edit: I don't throw away stuff, I sell, but in the end of the day I buy a crap ton more than I need...

I’m sure I do as well. The hobby part of dressing I guess.

 

[zxcvbn]

https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2018/11/how-circular-is-the-circular-economy.html

for those interested in a deeper dive into recycling and the circular economy

A considerable segment of all resources – about a third of the total – are neither recycled, nor incinerated or dumped: they are accumulated in buildings, infrastructure, and consumer goods. In 2005, 62 Gt of resources were used globally. After subtracting energy sources (fossil fuels and biomass) and waste from the mining sector, the remaining 30 Gt were used to make material goods. Of these, 4 Gt was used to make products that last for less than one year (disposable products).

The other 26 Gt was accumulated in buildings, infrastructure, and consumer goods that last for more than a year. In the same year, 9 Gt of all surplus resources were disposed of, meaning that the “stocks” of material capital grew by 17 Gt in 2005. In comparison: the total waste that could be recycled in 2005 was only 13 Gt (4 Gt disposable products and 9 Gt surplus resources), of which only a third (4 Gt) can be effectively recycled.

Only 9 Gt is then put in a landfill, incinerated, or dumped – and it is this 9 Gt that the circular economy focuses on. But even if that was all recycled, and if the recycling processes were 100% efficient, the circle would still not be closed: 63 Gt in raw materials and 30 Gt in material products would still be needed.

As long as we keep accumulating raw materials, the closing of the material life cycle remains an illusion, even for materials that are, in principle, recyclable. For example, recycled metals can only supply 36% of the yearly demand for new metal, even if metal has relatively high recycling capacity, at about 70%. We still use more raw materials in the system than can be made available through recycling – and so there are simply not enough recyclable raw materials to put a stop to the continuously expanding extractive economy.

A more responsible use of resources is of course an excellent idea. But to achieve that, recycling and re-use alone aren’t enough. Since 71% of all resources cannot be recycled or re-used (44% of which are energy sources and 27% of which are added to existing stocks), you can only really get better numbers by reducing total use.

A circular economy would therefore demand that we use less fossil fuels (which isn’t the same as using more renewable energy), and that we accumulate less raw materials in commodities. Most importantly, we need to make less stuff: fewer cars, fewer microchips, fewer buildings. This would result in a double profit: we would need less resources, while the supply of discarded materials available for re-use and recycling would keep growing for many years to come.

 

[troika]

I will chime in here and attempt to answer @VinceCompost's inquiry by saying that the question of sustainability plays into my purchases but it is tertiary to whether or not I generally want to support the brand as a whole (echoing Greg's earlier point here about supporting smaller brands and designers, often through his store) and how much I like the individual item.


Here are the ways in which I think about sustainability when it comes to clothing:

I really enjoy buying items from brands like Patagonia that actively promote and support repair of their clothing and support community ecological activity as a company.

I really enjoy buying recycled materials, and search harder and pay more for them - for example Patagonia fleece or everybody.world trash tees.

I really enjoy buying items from smaller, more artisanal/boutique brands that put in more effort and care into natural sourcing and manufacturing, and produce smaller batches than many others.

I really enjoy buying from retailers that make sure sustainability (and other values) are at the forefront of their offerings.

I really enjoy that most of the things I buy are second-hand and they don't contribute to the creation of new materials as much as a new direct purchase.

I really enjoy clicking "shipping may take longer but use less packaging".



I readilly acknowledge that I consume more than I should, and I can be doing more "shopping in my own closet".

I readily acknowledge that having Clothing-as-a-hobby (CaaH) is in itself not a super sustainable act.

I readily acknowledge that consumer consumption reduction barely makes a dent into the overall system.

I readily acknowledge that I am not as scrupulous about this topic as I perhaps should be.


Some questions for you, Vince:
- how do you think about sustainability when it comes to your own clothing purchases?
- how does the ecological impact of an item rank among other considerations (like price, quality, fit, brand, etc)?
- how does sustainability impact your other life choices?
- what actions are you taking to enforce sustainability in clothing?
- what content would you like to see on this forum that will analyze the situation further?


Happy to keep the discussion going, as I think it's an important topic that deserves all the attention that it gets.

 

[Sartorium]

It's easy to be a smartass when you put absolutely nothing on the line.

Why are you assuming this is a smart-ass comment? I know lots of autistic people who, when they see someone exhibiting autistic behaviour, offer this up. It's a way of trying to help someone get resources that will support them moving about the world in a healthier, happier manner. It might or might not help you but you shouldn't take it as an insult.

 

[BandannAlmanac]

One way you can easily contribute to saving the environment is not having money to spend on clothing and spend it funneling money toward groups and causes aimed at saving the environment. I am pretty sure they know a lot more about the issues being discussed here than your favorite clothing brand.

 

[dieworkwear]

A lot of American politics has now basically devolved into people just donating to special groups, such as the Sierra Club or the NRA. People "outsource" their civic responsibilities, whereas civic engagement in the United States used to be much higher. People debated issues, were involved in local chapters. Robert Putnam, a sociologist at Harvard, has written about how such civic engagement also goes hand-in-hand with the decline of what he calls "social capital" in America (social capital is sort of like the glue between people, something like trust or reciprocity). The decline of social capital has led to lower civic engagement. And lower civic engagement further corrodes social capital.

Most people don't have enough time to do anything more than donate to a charity or association. But it's also one a growing problem in America where whatever civic engagement we have left, it's just done through donations. That leads to more special interest groups muscling into our politics; less serious engagement among the citizenry. People don't necessarily know the issues, they just donate money. And once they've donated money, they sort of brush their hands off and feel they've done their part.

Obama addressed this in his outgoing speech as President, where he encouraged people to get more engaged, as in community organizing. Maybe lofty politics. Again, I realize many people just don't have time.

 

[cb200]

Subscription running shoe (service?) made from beans... could make sense for people putting in miles and wearing out shoes. Not me anymore, sadly.

https://www.on-running.com/en-us/cyclon

 

[dieworkwear]

Subscription running shoe (service?) made from beans... could make sense for people putting in miles and wearing out shoes. Not me anymore, sadly.

https://www.on-running.com/en-us/cyclon

If someone runs by you in these sneakers, your neighborhood is about to get gentrified.