Environmental responsibility and 'natural' clothing.

[Deaner666]

Chris Townsend (long distance walker) has just posted an interesting article on his blog (view it here).

I've been gradually moving to more 'natural' fibre materials recently. Not specifically because of any perceived environmental impact of synthetic garments or their manufacture, but more because I'm becoming less and less tolerant of the 'feel' of synthetics, especially over prolonged periods (and because I hate the static shock I always get stepping out of my car when I'm encased in nylon). I've been using merino wool base layers for a while now and the reduced pong is a definite bonus - even if they do take a little longer to dry out. I've started wearing a heavy cotton shirt over the top of a thin merino base layer (some old Swedish army issue thing) instead of a synthetic fleece, which is working out great in this slightly cooler autumn period. I'm also regularly wearing a thickly woven wool waistcoat I picked up in India last year (all the shepherds were wearing them in the mountains and looked well smart!). It's lovely and warm, mega breathable and smells amazing! I wouldn't want to carry it in a pack over any distance though.

Although claims about environmental impact weren't at the forefront of my decision-making (I always take those kinds of claims with a pinch of salt - a bit like Fairtrade), I did kind of assume that by moving to 'natural' fibres I was being sonewhat more environmentally friendly. The below quote from Chris' article struck me though, particularly in relation to bushcraft.

Patagonia switched to using only 100% organic cotton years ago and Howies also use nothing else while companies like Nike, Timberland and Berghaus use some organic cotton. Others however continue to promote conventional cotton as a natural, environmentally friendly material – Ventile, a fabric I like, for example describes itself as having “the benefit of cotton with environmental peace of mind” without any mention as to whether Ventile is made from organic cotton. Perhaps of more interest for outdoor clothing is wool, a favourite of mine. This can be harmful or relatively harmless, depending on where the sheep live, how they are treated and how the yarn is produced. Sheep can cause massive damage to alpine and forest meadows and desert lands – John Muir didn’t describe them as “hooved locusts” for nothing. He saw the damage sheep were doing to the meadows in the High Sierra in California. In many areas of the Scottish hills overgrazing by sheep prevents forest regeneration. However sheep in lowland areas, especially grasslands with damp climates, cause far less damage. Then there are the chemicals often used in wool production from pesticides in sheep dip to chlorine bleaches and heavy metal dyes, all of which are pollutants. And as for leather, well the tanning process results in masses of hazardous waste that can pollute groundwater and is dangerous for workers.

I believe there's a time and a place for each type of garment. Over the last few years I've leaned towards synthetics because my activities have been more fast and light (running, rock climbing, winter mountaineering, long distance trekking); but with a kid on the way, less money and less free time to travel I'm concentrating more on bushcraft activities, which tend to involve more time in one place, less carrying and more ponderous activity - I'm finding the natural materials are often better suited for this and was happy that it was probably more environmentally friendly in the long run. Turns out I might be wrong on that front.

What are other people's thoughts?

 

[John Fenna]

I am moving towards natural fibres myself - for comfort and performance as much as anything but we have to bear in mind that any comercially made item is likely to involve some - if not lots - non eco treatment/massive airmiles and be a detriment to the environment.
The only way to avoid non eco gear is to avoid gear!
I try to use recycled materials as much as possible (the leather I use to make my pouches for instance is mainly stuff that is destined for the bin in charity shops as it is deemed unsaleable due to missing buttons, torn seams or such damage) and I try not to use "new" gear when making anything for myself.
Refurbish, reuse, recycle, respect
Hypocritically enough - a lot of my work is reviewing new gear for magazines ...but I try to promote gear that will last, is made from ethically produced fabrics/materials and has a "reduced" impact as well as performance... when I can.
Humanity is a virus that is in the process of killing its host - and we do not seem to have an anti-viral at our disposal yet!

 

[Deaner666]

Refurbish, reuse, recycle, respect

I have to agree - re-using and repairing are surely the most ecologically sound way to go. I guess in this respect natural fibres are better than synthetic. It's easier and more environmentally friendly to sew up a cotton, leather or wool garment and have it function as it originally did than it is to petro-chemically rebond a complex poly garment.

 

[RonW]

Well, you're not exactly alone on this one.

Here are my thoughts on the subject; http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74892&highlight=

 

[Deaner666]

Sorry RonW, I missed that thread. It's certainly very interesting - it seems you're further down the line I've only just started pursuing. I was looking at making some moccasins sometime soon. I'm about to get hold of some rabbit pelts to tan and make some mitts.

I think the key thing I took from your thread, which you described better than me, is that you've gone down this route because of the 'feel' of wearing natural materials over synthetics. I had been encased in synthetics for so long that I forgot what it was like to wear more natural materials. It was really when my girlfriend bought me two lovely wooly tops from White Stuff (totally un-bushcraft but hey, we all live in the real world of offices and going out to restaurants as well!) that I remembered what it was like not to walk round as a portable lightning conductor. Stripping off my nylon baselayer in a dark mountain hut and lighting it up with static electric sparks like a fireworks display was the last straw for me!

 

[EdS]

With natural fibres you really need to read the small print regarding environmental impact. Bamboo - it iis just another source of cellulose to make rayon. The process is very polluting, using all sorts of organic solvens and done in factories with little pollution control.

Simiarly, prehaps the best know merino wool brand doesn't have the greatest environmental record, not only shipping wool for NZ to China to start with, they then had some, shall we say issues with pollution etc..

Anything budget is likely to have a relativily high environmental impact as control = cost. However, just becausse it is a big brand doesn't mean it is top of the class. As a rule look for things made in Europe, Oz, NZ and USA for garments with a lower environmental impact, as there are more regulatory requirements so the base line control is higher.

 

[ganstey]

Also remember that cotton has an environmental impact as well. "Cotton, for example, exported from Egypt to the UK and elsewhere, contains about 9000 litres of embedded water per kilogram" - Open University. Water is becoming a scarce commodity as well in many parts of the world.

Having said that, I'm moving from man-made fibres to cotton and wool as I find them more comfortable.

Graham

 

[Teepee]

I'm a big fan of Klattermusen stuff. Not only is it fantastic kit-some of the best in the world, they really seem to care about their impact. They use lots of recycled fibres.

Also remember that cotton has an environmental impact as well. "Cotton, for example, exported from Egypt to the UK and elsewhere, contains about 9000 litres of embedded water per kilogram"

Erm?.......1L of water weighs 1 kg.

 

[ganstey]

Erm?.......1L of water weighs 1 kg.

What it means is that... it takes 9000 litres of water to produce 1Kg of cotton suitable for export to the UK and elsewhere. That would include not only water used in the processing, but also the water needed to grow the cotton.

Graham

 

[Teepee]

It was the word 'embedded' that threw me.

Thats a lot of water-I'm guessing lots of it is abstracted from under the desert or from the nile-another resource rapidly declining.

 

[ganstey]

Thats a lot of water-I'm guessing lots of it is abstracted from under the desert or from the nile-another resource rapidly declining.

Virtually all of it comes from the Nile (there are a few bore holes, but these are insignificant). Many scientists are saying that in terms of resource-scarcity, water is going to be the next oil. The big problem with that is that we can live without oil, but we can't live without water

 

[RonW]

That is why I use (or try to) woolen surplus gear.
The reason is simple; First of all I simply love wool. Furthermore it has already been produced, so it had its impact a long time ago. By reusing it, there is no need to manufacture more gear, so the impact is none. An additional bonus is that is will not be thrown away, so there's no waste. And if it gets thrown away eventually it will be biodegradable (I hope!).
The cotton gear I have will be used up and the polycotton I have will be resold, so it too will last a little longer befor it ends up on the garbagedump.

 

[santaman2000]

...I had been encased in synthetics for so long that I forgot what it was like to wear more natural materials. It was really when my girlfriend bought me two lovely wooly tops...that I remembered what it was like not to walk round as a portable lightning conductor. Stripping off my nylon baselayer in a dark mountain hut and lighting it up with static electric sparks like a fireworks display was the last straw for me!

I love the feel of wool too. But be aware that wool is banned on flight-lines, re-fueling points, and other areas with flameable gasses or liquids because of its high potential to generate static charges. It's actually higher than the synthetics; most of the synthetics are approved for such areas (which I personally don't agree with)

 

[Deaner666]

@santaman2000 I didn't realise that... I've never experienced static with wool and yet I ALWAYS do with synthetics. Again I come back to the feel... wearing synthetics gives me a sensation of the material sliding over the ends of my raised hairs which I don't find very comfortable. Wool and cotton and leather don't seem to put my hairs on end in the first place and just rest against the skin (I suppose this could just be because they're heavier).

Putting it like that, I wonder how much my issues with static are down to the fact I'm a very hairy bloke? I know some people seem more prone to static than others and that I suffer from it a lot. Atmospheric pressure and humidity seem to have a lot to do with it too. I definitely get shocked more on warm muggy days.

That was a bit of a tangent

 

[santaman2000]

I've never delved into the reasons behind why some materials are more static prone than others either. You're quite right about the weather conditions effect though. I experienced much more of a problem when I was stationed in the desert Southwest (Southern Nevada) than I ever have here in humid Florida. Discharges there were quite painful whereas they're almost non-existent here..

 

[Martti]

As a environmental planner I give a though before I buy an item; do I really need that product and if I do, should I invest more to something else which would provide the same services and even more with extended service time. When it comes to clothing, an ideal kit for me would be compromised of 100% wool. I am closing in, but not quite there yet. I prefer using new old stocks of fabric to sew my own set of clothing, if possible. If wool is not a plausible thing to use, then I try to use domestic options to cotton, that is linen or cellulose fibers.

 

[johnboy]

I love the feel of wool too. But be aware that wool is banned on flight-lines, re-fueling points, and other areas with flameable gasses or liquids because of its high potential to generate static charges. It's actually higher than the synthetics; most of the synthetics are approved for such areas (which I personally don't agree with)

That's interesting, my anti static gilet at work has a wool liner.....

 

[Tengu]

Most of my clothing is second hand. I cannot afford to buy new.

And I use it until it wears out.

 

[rik_uk3]

Wear what you want, its up to you. A pile jacket is as warm as wool, washes easily, retains warmth when wet. That said I like my wooly jumpers too. Pick and mix for me.

 

[santaman2000]

That's interesting, my anti static gilet at work has a wool liner.....

Very interesting indeed.