Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Fashion contributes to 10 percent of humanity's carbon emissions
Fast fashion has a devastating impact on the environment. Here's what you need to know before heading to Zara this holiday season.
- The fashion industry is responsible for an alarming 10 percent of all of humanity's carbon emissions.
- Eighty-five percent of all textiles are trashed each year, ending up in a landfill or incinerated.
- By wearing one item of clothing for 9 months longer a person can actually reduce his or her carbon footprint by 30 percent.
'Tis the season to be shopping. Across the country, Americans are flocking to malls, outlets, department stores, as well as online retail sites to get their loved one's gifts this holiday season.But this ritual of consumption has had a devastating effect on the planet, and particularly when it comes to fashion. The fashion industry is responsible for an alarming 10 percent of all of humanity's carbon emissions, thanks largely to the business model known as "fast fashion" that has come to dominate this century.
The Fast Fashion Model
Image source: live.staticflickr.com
Back in the 1980s, the average American only purchased about 12 new articles of clothing every year. But in 1993 the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) made it much easier to import clothing by abolishing a quota system that had limited the number of items that could enter the U.S. and giving rise to fast fashion. The aim of this model is to make trendy clothes off the runway quick, cheap, and disposable. Think retailers such as H&M and Zara. They make their money by squeezing the time between trends, frequently filling their stores with new collections of cheap clothing that breaks down quickly enough for shoppers to come in for the next collection. In 2016, The Atlantic reported that the average American buys 64 new articles of clothing per year.
Of course, fast fashion has democratized fashion by making clothing more affordable and giving rise to greater variety. But this comes at a grave environmental cost.
Making Fashion is an Environmental Disaster
Photo Credit: REUTERS / Mohamed Azakir
In 2015, textile production contributed to more CO2 emissions than all international flights and maritime shipping combined. For instance, making one pair of jeans produces as much greenhouse gases as driving a car more than 80 miles.
This has to do with the materials used in the production process.Take the water-intensive crop cotton for example. It takes 2,700 liters of water to make a single cotton shirt, enough for the average person to live on for two-and-a-half years. Worse yet are synthetic fabrics like polyester, spandex, and nylon, which use nearly 342 million barrels of oil. According to World Resources Institute, producing polyester — a kind of plastic found in around 60 percent of garments — emits two to three times more carbon than cotton. Furthermore, washing these clothing items sends as many as 500,000 tons of microplastics into the ocean each year. That's estimated to be about the equivalent of 50 billion plastic bottles. Overall, microplastics are estimated to compose up to 31 percent of plastic pollution in the ocean.
Another popular fabric used is viscose, a silky material that comes from fiber derived from wood pulp using extremely unsustainable and chemically intensive production methods. As much as 70 percent of the wood harvested is wasted while the other 30 percent ends up in the garments that we wear.Furthermore, making and dyeing textiles involves the use of toxic chemicals which often are discarded by being dumped into lakes, streams, rivers, and ditches poisoning local communities. Garment manufacturing is responsible for 20 percent of all industrial water pollution around the globe and ranks in as the world's second-largest polluter of water.
Where Fashion Goes
Finally, there's what happens to the clothes when we are done with them. Although we are buying more clothes than ever before, we are keeping them for half as long. Shockingly, 85 percent of all textiles are trashed each year, ultimately ending up in a landfill or incinerated. The average American throws away 80 pounds of clothes per year. That's about one garbage truck of clothes being burned or sent to landfills every second!Even if you donate your clothes, they still often get dumped. What charities can't sell or give away are sold by the ton to buyers in the developing world and still end up in landfills in those countries. Perhaps you've seen in-store recycling bins with retailers like H&M implying that the old clothes you bring in will be recycled to make new clothing. But less than one percent of their clothing is actually recycled to make new clothing. That's because the blend of fibers that make their clothes don't break down easily.
What Can Be Done
Maybe the most important thing we can do is to simply buy less stuff by wearing the clothes that we already have for longer. Incredibly, by wearing one item of clothing for 9 months longer a person can actually reduce his or her carbon footprint by 30 percent. Some companies, such as Patagonia, actually ask that you send in a damaged item of clothing for free repair rather than tossing it and buying something new.Another thing you can do is to thrift shop. If everyone bought one used item instead of new this year, the amount of CO2 emissions saved would be equivalent to removing half a million cars from the road for a year. Finally, as the holiday season is in full swing and many are still scrambling to buy gifts for loved ones, you might consider gifting experiences or something hand-made rather than store-bought garb.
A Mercury-bound spacecraft's noisy flyby of our home planet.
- There is no sound in space, but if there was, this is what it might sound like passing by Earth.
- A spacecraft bound for Mercury recorded data while swinging around our planet, and that data was converted into sound.
- Yes, in space no one can hear you scream, but this is still some chill stuff.
First off, let's be clear what we mean by "hear" here. (Here, here!)
Sound, as we know it, requires air. What our ears capture is actually oscillating waves of fluctuating air pressure. Cilia, fibers in our ears, respond to these fluctuations by firing off corresponding clusters of tones at different pitches to our brains. This is what we perceive as sound.
All of which is to say, sound requires air, and space is notoriously void of that. So, in terms of human-perceivable sound, it's silent out there. Nonetheless, there can be cyclical events in space — such as oscillating values in streams of captured data — that can be mapped to pitches, and thus made audible.
Image source: European Space Agency
The European Space Agency's BepiColombo spacecraft took off from Kourou, French Guyana on October 20, 2019, on its way to Mercury. To reduce its speed for the proper trajectory to Mercury, BepiColombo executed a "gravity-assist flyby," slinging itself around the Earth before leaving home. Over the course of its 34-minute flyby, its two data recorders captured five data sets that Italy's National Institute for Astrophysics (INAF) enhanced and converted into sound waves.
Into and out of Earth's shadow
In April, BepiColombo began its closest approach to Earth, ranging from 256,393 kilometers (159,315 miles) to 129,488 kilometers (80,460 miles) away. The audio above starts as BepiColombo begins to sneak into the Earth's shadow facing away from the sun.
The data was captured by BepiColombo's Italian Spring Accelerometer (ISA) instrument. Says Carmelo Magnafico of the ISA team, "When the spacecraft enters the shadow and the force of the Sun disappears, we can hear a slight vibration. The solar panels, previously flexed by the Sun, then find a new balance. Upon exiting the shadow, we can hear the effect again."
In addition to making for some cool sounds, the phenomenon allowed the ISA team to confirm just how sensitive their instrument is. "This is an extraordinary situation," says Carmelo. "Since we started the cruise, we have only been in direct sunshine, so we did not have the possibility to check effectively whether our instrument is measuring the variations of the force of the sunlight."
When the craft arrives at Mercury, the ISA will be tasked with studying the planets gravity.
The second clip is derived from data captured by BepiColombo's MPO-MAG magnetometer, AKA MERMAG, as the craft traveled through Earth's magnetosphere, the area surrounding the planet that's determined by the its magnetic field.
BepiColombo eventually entered the hellish mangentosheath, the region battered by cosmic plasma from the sun before the craft passed into the relatively peaceful magentopause that marks the transition between the magnetosphere and Earth's own magnetic field.
MERMAG will map Mercury's magnetosphere, as well as the magnetic state of the planet's interior. As a secondary objective, it will assess the interaction of the solar wind, Mercury's magnetic field, and the planet, analyzing the dynamics of the magnetosphere and its interaction with Mercury.
Recording session over, BepiColombo is now slipping through space silently with its arrival at Mercury planned for 2025.
Erin Meyer explains the keeper test and how it can make or break a team.
- There are numerous strategies for building and maintaining a high-performing team, but unfortunately they are not plug-and-play. What works for some companies will not necessarily work for others. Erin Meyer, co-author of No Rules Rules: Netflix and the Culture of Reinvention, shares one alternative employed by one of the largest tech and media services companies in the world.
- Instead of the 'Rank and Yank' method once used by GE, Meyer explains how Netflix managers use the 'keeper test' to determine if employees are crucial pieces of the larger team and are worth fighting to keep.
- "An individual performance problem is a systemic problem that impacts the entire team," she says. This is a valuable lesson that could determine whether the team fails or whether an organization advances to the next level.