Will the clothes we buy ever be sustainable?

The short answer is yes. In the future, if we choose our garments carefully—with complete and transparent information from the side of manufacturers—we will likely be in the position to buy clothes that are (relatively) more sustainable. But the true parameter of reference shouldn’t be the sustainability per unit of clothing, rather the amount of clothes we buy. The real question we need to answer is: what amount of (new) clothes is sustainable? And, how can we make sure to settle on that level? One thing is clear: we are far from the target.

The fashion industry: galloping on an unsustainable path

In the past 15 years, global fashion production has more than doubled. This trend has been driven by a growing global middle-class population with higher disposable income, the advent of fast fashion and a consumer mindset always looking for new styles, resulting in the ability and willingness to purchase the ‘latest trends’ for cheap.

Coupled with a sharp decrease in the utilisation rate of clothes—that is, how much we actually use the clothes we buy—this trend has come with devastating environmental and social costs. While production has approximately doubled, in fact, clothing use has declined by almost 40%. In 2014, an average consumer bought 60% more clothing compared to that in 2000, but kept garments only half as long. And, adding to that, currently less than 1% of clothing is recycled into new clothing.

Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation

Currently, textile production is one of the most polluting industries, producing around 1.2 billion tons of CO2 per year, which account for around 10% of global carbon emissions. With the sector’s emissions expected to rise by more than 60% by 2030, if the fashion industry was to continue on its current trajectory, by 2050 it could use more than 26% of the carbon budget associated with a 2 degrees global warming limit.

But carbon emissions are far from being the only worrisome implication of a booming global fashion production. The whole footprint of the industry is immense. Every stage of the textile industry’s supply chain, in fact, is energy-intensive, from processing yarn, producing fabric and fabricating textiles, to transporting and selling clothes to consumers. Spinning and weaving processes are electricity-intensive, while wet-processes—such as dyeing, printing and finishing—are fuel-intensive.

The fashion industry is also the third largest user of water globally (after oil and paper). It’s estimated that the fashion industry currently uses around 79 billion cubic metres of water per year, which is 2% of all freshwater extraction globally, and represents more than 10% of the water used by all types of industry. The WWF calculated that it currently takes 3250 litres of water to produce the cotton needed for one t-shirt - the equivalent of almost three years worth of drinking water.

There are many other factors that could be taken into account here, such as the effects on the soil of chemical fertilisers and pesticides used for growing crops such as cotton, the extreme pollution dyeing processes create on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems worldwide, and the high social costs associated with cheap production located in countries where there are no safeguards for the health of workers and local communities.

The list could go on, but the main implication would stay the same: the fashion industry is already a global problem and it is likely to become a bigger one unless we systematically act to reverse the trend. We are in dire need of transformative change.

Is a more sustainable textiles production possible?

In one word: yes. Starting from the current highly damaging standards, it is certainly possible to design new production systems in the textile industry that result in lower environmental and social costs. If we consider that around 50% of the energy input to the textile industry is lost onsite (e.g. in boilers, motor systems, distribution, etc.), it’s self-evident that designing closed-loops systems has the potential to drastically reduce the resources we use to produce our textiles.

Innovative startups around the world are already showing the power of new technologies in achieving a more resource-efficient production process, from biotechnology to renewable feedstocks and new design systems. There are startups working on highly-efficient natural dyeing methods (see Colorifix), designing garments to be easily disassembled (see Resortecs), developing sustainable fabrics based on fruit waste (see Beyond Leather, Piñatex and Orange Fiber), and supplying systems that allow textile waste to turn into fresh new apparel (see Ambercycle). When these and complimentary/additional solutions will achieve the scale required and will be embraced by major brands, we will be—most likely—in the position to have a more resource-efficient and less polluting textiles production, consumption and post-consumption use.

This is great news. However, by doing a simple algebraic exercise, we can see how this will not suffice to make global fashion production and consumption sustainable in absolute terms. Take the example of a cotton t-shirt. Right now, for its production we need around 3000 litres of water. If we were able to achieve 50% savings in the amount of water used in the process, we could have a t-shirt ‘only’ using 1500 litres of water. However, if this resulted in an increase in the amount of t-shirts produced and bought, these gains will be offset. If instead of buying one t-shirt, a typical consumer was to buy two of them, they would end up still consuming 3000 litres of water for new t-shirt(s). Given global population increase and a rising middle-class worldwide, this outcome is far from being unrealistic.

This reasoning leads to one conclusion. With new technologies and design systems, we might increase the extremely low current recycling rates, make sure to have a production running on renewable energy and renewable resources, and employ regenerative agriculture to ensure that the crops grown for fibres production acted to regenerate the local ecosystem. That is, we might become more resource-efficient and less environmentally damaging per unit of production. This would lead to an increase in relative sustainability, but what about absolute levels of sustainability? Without taking care of the actual levels of consumption, we are not in a position to provide an answer to that. Technology is no panacea - to cure the ills of the fashion industry, we need transformation in the way we use our clothes.

The real game-changer: decreasing absolute consumption

There are a few ways to decrease our consumption of new clothes. The most immediate option is to buy less, and prefer second-hand clothes whenever possible. This can either be buying from second-hand shops, or exchanging with friends and family members whenever they don’t feel like using some of their clothes anymore. Despite the fact that buying second-hand is a growing trend, let’s face it: it is not the mainstream, yet. Moreover, there is no guarantee that buying second-hand will replace first-hand—it might well be that these two types of purchasing come to be seen by consumers as complementary.

Another area where we—as consumers—need to improve is how we take care of our garments, once we bought them. As we saw above, utilisation rates are declining drastically. To make our clothes last long, we need a joint effort between producers and consumers. Producers have the responsibility to produce garments with longevity as a priority, while consumers have to take care of them, repairing them and being creative in up-cycling garments that don’t serve their purpose anymore. Unfortunately, apart from some virtuous cases, this is something we are getting worse, not better at - especially in affluent economies.

The problem is that buying new stuff, including clothes, has come to have such a high symbolic and emotional value to us. We buy more to push our mood up, when we have a salary raise, when we want to enter a new social group, or when we want to show our affection towards our loved ones. With brands’ shops being the absolute rulers of city-centres, and the booming of e-commerce platform delivering on the promise of convenience, it has become almost impossible not to come in front of new clothes and latest trends, whether we are walking around our cities or lying comfortably on our couch.

Another action that could help discouraging new consumption is if the garments we buy were to reflect the true environmental and societal costs of materials and production processes in their price. If we recognised fair wages to workers and valued all the resources that go into production, including the externalities created, the price of clothes would undoubtedly be higher, potentially discouraging the act of buying more just for the sake of.

However, if this measure was to be strictly implemented—say through an (admittedly highly unlikely) global political consensus—it might well come with unintended social consequences. While those with high incomes would still be able to keep their consumption at the same level, low-income people might be out of the game and incapable to satisfy a basic human need: clothing. With all its implications in terms of social consideration and access to the labour market.

To end up with a simplistic note, the world we created looks a lot like a mess. Changing consumer behaviour is the best thing we can do, and this is a task where governments, brands and us as consumers have a massive role to play. Looking at current trends of consumerism and social institutions like the annual Black Friday, it looks like we have a long, long way to go. But, if we truly want to be sustainable in the way we satisfy this basic need, is there any other alternative out there?

December 2020

Emanuele Di Francesco (emanuele@circularconversations.com)