YRE Article 15–18 years old: 2nd Place
THE DRAWBACKS TO CLOTHING CONSUMPTION (Sweden)
Every day an enormous quantity of clothing is bought — but worst of all, a lot of it is thrown away. This affects workers, the environment and consumers. The consequences could be devastating.
Over the last ten years, our clothing purchases have increased by almost 40%, while our spending on clothes has remained the same. With increased prosperity and falling clothing prices, we now have the opportunity to buy new clothes whenever we want. Clothes are also of inferior quality and do not last as long. Buying a new spring jacket every year and new garments every week isn’t environmentally sustainable.
What do the clothes we buy so many of contain?
To make 1 kg of fabric for T-shirts, as much as 3 kg of chemicals are required, some of which remain in the clothes we buy. Even more chemicals are added to many garments — for example, to counteract mould and the smell of perspiration. These can be carcinogenic, mutagenic, reproductively toxic or allergenic.
The Swedish Chemicals Agency’s study showed:
• Of the 2,500 reviewed substances found in textiles, 350 were found to be hazardous to health or the environment.
• Only 53 of them are banned in the EU.
Source: TT
According to my survey,* 28% of consumers give new garments an initial wash to avoid being exposed to chemicals. This leads to environmentally friendly chemicals being released into the environment since treatment plants are unable to remove them.
‘To avoid hazardous chemicals, choose clothing which is either eco-labelled or made by companies which have invested in their production,’ . ‘Most importantly, DON’T BUY CLOTHES FROM ASIA OVER THE INTERNET! EU laws don’t apply over there, and even well-known brands might use substances which are illegal in the EU´, says Sandra Roos, a researcher at Swerea IVF in Mölndal.
‘The greatest cost to the environment comes from how clothes are dyed, how much water has had to be heated and which chemicals are used in production’, Sandra continues.
PFAS is the collective name for the various industrially developed chemicals which can be found in everything from functional clothing to baking paper. Experiments conducted on animals show that certain PFAS adversely affect reproduction, immune systems, thyroid hormones and the liver. Others are suspected carcinogens and appear on the EU’s list of particularly hazardous substances. Highly fluorinated chemicals are known to have one thing in common: they are extremely difficult to break down. This means that even if we were to stop using PFAS tomorrow, it would be a long time before exposure ceased entirely.
‘You should also avoid buying garments marked “odourless”, for example. This indicates that a poisonous substance has been added to keep bacteria away. Unless you’re working as a coast guard or climbing the Himalayas, you probably don’t need fluorinated substances (PFAS) in your outerwear either, in which case you should try to find an alternative which is fluorine-free and preferably eco-labelled,’ Sandra points out.
‘I don’t think we can carry on like this in the long term,’ says Cecilia Flatow, a purchaser in the textile industry from Gothenburg. ‘There will be tougher chemical laws and big businesses will have to keep a record of the improvements they’ve made in their sustainability reports. Hopefully we’ll change the way we shop and customers will choose longer-lasting clothes and make fewer purchases. With the introduction of more stringent legal requirements, the clothing industry has been forced to change and regulate its activities. We’re beginning to realise the consequences of our actions AND — a number of hazardous substances have already been phased out. Hopefully recycling clothes will pay off in the end.
‘There’s a strong trend which opposes lifecycle thinking. Bio-based materials such as lyocell and viscose are the future, and PET bottles are already popular. Perhaps the technology of the future can also recycle textile materials into new textiles. The materials of the future will also be produced using more energy-efficient means. There might be an increase in the use of non-woven materials, since weaving is extremely energy-intensive. There will also be technological advancements which lead to yarn spinning, knitting, weaving and dyeing becoming more environmentally friendly. Even today, synthetic fibres which have been pre-dyed in the plastic granule stage — before the fibre is melted and spun — have become increasingly common,‘ says Sandra. ‘The clothing chains of today have already started investing in organic cotton and recycled polyester, which do not require so much water for their production.’
But who’s responsible for this vicious circle? ‘Everyone plays “the blame game”, as we usually call it,’ says Sandra. ‘I prefer to see it as all of us having a responsibility when we end up in a situation where we’re free to make a choice.’
To private individuals wanting to take action, Sandra says: ‘I think we should have the attitude that our bodies are fine as they are. Unfortunately, the advertising industry tries to drill it into us that we’re not good enough or that we’re dull, ugly, fat or whatever unless we buy their products. Only buy the things you really want and watch out for adverts which promise that a particular piece of clothing will make you exciting, good-looking, slim, smart, popular and so on.’ By extending the life of clothing — by buying second-hand or mending damaged clothes, for instance — you’ll be performing a great service for the environment. By buying a pair of second-hand jeans, you save not only money but also 11,000 litres of water!
Illustration below: envarldutansopor.nu
Translation: Annual textile consumption (15 kg) measured in t-shirts.
3 kg goes to second-hand
4 kg goes into the wardrobe
8 kg goes in the bin
Written by student from Sweden.
