Naturally? Not Necessarily.

It is a common misperception among those both within and outside of the apparel industry, that natural fiber production is the answer to ending the environmental sustainability issues faced today. The hidden truth however, is that there really isn’t a favorable direction to go when it comes to deciding which material to use for textile fiber production. As an apparel designer and an avid synthetic material user, I was taken aback when I overheard a fellow coworker discussing the negative impacts that synthetic materials have on the environment. Her comments prompted me to do some research on my own to prove to her that natural materials were not as “pure” as she insisted that they were. I also wanted to gain insight into possible ways that I could produce my garments with a more diverse mindset, incorporating the idea of change, in hopes to inspire my consumers to do the same. Kate Fletcher made some great comparisons in the first chapter of Sustainable Fashion and Textiles, while Textile Exchange’s Charline Ducas also made some strong points as far as the realities of the production and consumption of the two materials.

As I read through Sustainable Fashion and Textiles, I was surprised to learn that it is not ONE specific textile that will lessen the effects on the environment, but rather the LACK of diversity of the materials used. The fact that material diversity is a concept that is lacking in garment production surprised me, as I was convinced that the apparel industry was one of innovations and risks. Apparently, more attention needs to be paid to the use of alternative, more resourceful fibers of a garment and less to a particular look or style of a garment. The reading is not promoting that cotton and polyester, or the “big two fibers”, be cut out of fiber production completely. Instead, Fletcher believes that more work should be done to incorporate more environmental-friendly fibers within the production process. Essentially, it is time for the “underdogs” of fibers to shine!

Synthetic fiber processing is just as harmful as natural fiber processing, according to Fletcher’s assessment of sustainability impacts. Even though 1 kilogram of cotton draws on 8,000 liters of water while 1 kilogram of polyester uses little or no water, polyester does consume twice the energy that is needed to make the same amount of cotton. The reading continues to discuss the range of natural fibers that exist, which include cotton, wool, silk, and linen. Each of these natural fibers are similar in their harm done to the environment, as they all require excessive amounts of water, pesticides, and fertilizers to ensure accurate processing. In comparison, the manufactured fibers mentioned include polyester, nylon, acrylic, and viscose. Once again, high energy consumption, chemical usage, and pollution indexes resulting from generated air emissions are necessary in ensuring accurate processing of these fibers. There are many alternatives listed that can be used in replacement of both the natural and manufactured fibers, but the most impact is attributed to consumer care. Again, by extending ways to improve harmful environmental impacts for BOTH producers and consumers, we are better able to view these issues as a “whole” unified problem. Therefore, we all need to work together on each end to elicit a change.

Textile Exchange’s Charline Ducas also emphasized a stronger focus on improving the impacts of fibers on the environment. She discussed six “trends” that are currently being assessed in order to address these harmful influences, one of which is titled “doing more from less”. This trend highlighted how producers can be more clever in using less water, energy, and chemicals. According to Ducas, the chemical industry is practicing such a change by lessening the amount of indigo used in denim production. A new “Clariant” technology for denim apparently uses 92% less water, 30% less energy, and 87% less cotton waste! Utilizing this technology can save so many of our natural resources while reducing the amount of harm that is done simply by producing one pair of jeans. When you view the cost of improvements through percentages, it is easier to understand how much of a change can be made by researching alternatives in production. I enjoyed the last bit of information that Ducas shared in the video, which was that solutions are available if we just take the time to adopt them into our everyday lives! Collaboration between designers and supply chains are also deemed as vital in promoting such solutions, which means that a change in mindset must also be made to achieve success.

Both Sustainable Fashion and Textiles and Charline Ducas extend very insightful information regarding the natural vs. synthetic conundrum currently being reviewed. In my opinion, making a decision between choosing a natural fiber or a synthetic fiber shouldn’t generate much of a “headache” to whoever is doing the picking, because it is clear that both are equally at fault for the sustainability issues we are facing today. While incorporating some of the mentioned fiber alternatives would make a world of economic difference, it is also important that the consumer do everything in their power to extend the use of their garment. Inspiration to do so however, comes from the careful sustainability efforts used in the production phase by the fiber grower or designer. So my question to you is do you agree with the fact that the environmental impacts should be a two-sided approach? In my opinion, this continual system of push and pull efforts will be sure to bring about a change within the apparel industry, regardless of whether a product is made naturally or synthetically. And even though my coworker and I are on different “fiber teams”, at least now she can realize that changes need to be made by every member of both teams.