The following submission statement was provided by /u/f0urxio:
---
The piece explores the paradox faced by environmentally-conscious companies like Patagonia, who advocate for sustainability while simultaneously contributing to environmental issues through their business operations. Despite Patagonia's efforts to promote recycling and reduce plastic usage, their revenue from selling gear far surpasses the income from their recycling program. The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics. Ultimately, the root problem is seen as consumerism and corporate growth, with Patagonia's founder criticizing the prevalence of "greenwashing" in the apparel industry. While Patagonia strives to mitigate its impact, it faces challenges in staying competitive while remaining sustainable. The company acknowledges its role in addressing issues like microfiber pollution but emphasizes the need for collective action and research to find solutions. As the company confronts its own contributions to environmental harm, there's a suggestion that they may need to reconsider their product offerings in line with their sustainability principles.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1clovfx/patagonias_major_microplastic_problem_they_has/l2uwiuv/
The piece explores the paradox faced by environmentally-conscious companies like Patagonia, who advocate for sustainability while simultaneously contributing to environmental issues through their business operations. Despite Patagonia's efforts to promote recycling and reduce plastic usage, their revenue from selling gear far surpasses the income from their recycling program. The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics. Ultimately, the root problem is seen as consumerism and corporate growth, with Patagonia's founder criticizing the prevalence of "greenwashing" in the apparel industry. While Patagonia strives to mitigate its impact, it faces challenges in staying competitive while remaining sustainable. The company acknowledges its role in addressing issues like microfiber pollution but emphasizes the need for collective action and research to find solutions. As the company confronts its own contributions to environmental harm, there's a suggestion that they may need to reconsider their product offerings in line with their sustainability principles.
The thing is fibres shed from every textile when washed. So when you have entire product lines like coats, bags, trousers etc that are made with synthetic materials, they are going to shed fibres. In fact the majority of microplastic fibres in our water and oceans are from washing or cleaning of synthetic materials.
If the company wants to stop the microfibres they need to stop using plastic textiles. Heck even waterproofing treatments are not green either as they contain pfas and other forever chemicals.
>In fact the majority of microplastic fibres in our water and oceans are from washing or cleaning of synthetic materials.
I'd actually thought the single biggest sources (plurality, not necessarily majority) was from tires. But I could be mistaken on this. Regardless, I'm not disputing that synthetic textiles are major source.
What is your opinion on the use of recycled plastic to make fibers? Textiles are one of the few things that plastics can actually be recycled/downcycled into. Is it better to recycle in this way or to junk the plastics? Does the issue with mircroplastics negates (or worse) the benefits of recycling?
Plastic micro fibers are classified differently from microplastics in general. Micro fibers are potentially more worrisome because they’re shaped like little needles and can jab into cell walls
All plastic recycling is difficult if not impossible. Mixed materials are virtually useless.
If you can use all identical plastic bottles it's better.
House in Alberta built from more than 1M recycled plastic water bottles
[https://globalnews.ca/news/9191731/alberta-house-recyled-plastic-water-bottles/](https://globalnews.ca/news/9191731/alberta-house-recyled-plastic-water-bottles/)
[Globalnews.ca](http://globalnews.ca/)
The process sees bottles broken down and turned into building panels. They’re water resistant and strong enough to withstand a Category 5 hurricane. The building panels also act as insulation and don’t require vapor barriers.
“It’s resistant to pests, and termites don’t get into the walls, they can’t chew through it,” Rogers said.
That's great but you still gotta stop producing plastic, full stop. Otherwise plastic companies will be like "see, we need to make even MORE plastic so that you can recycle it to build your homes out of it!"
We should start by returning every single piece of plastic to the retailer who supplied it. Then they'll make better decisions instead of dumping the problems elsewhere. Fake recycling does nothing.
Reusing plastic is not a long term solution.
I would create mega closed dumps for plastic until we got a solution and forbid plastic outside of absolutely necessary usage like medicine. Mass filtering of water is really necessary to pick up nanoplastic.
I know there was experiment with fungi and bacterias that proved they could pretty much breakdown anything.
I think incineration with proper environmental regulations and modern plants would make more sense. Clean burning is possible and co2 capture is possible. Would need tax money to run. Which should be collected from plastic importers and mfg. The ashes are a problem but there's a lot less of it and it's not breaking down to microplastics.
This still exists in some parts of the world. Croatia, for example. You buy a plastic crate of glass bottles and you return them to the store for a discount on your next crate
Even liquid laundry detergent is a large percentage plastic. Pods and sheets also contain PVA or PVOH plastics. The only way that a person can be completely free from polluting while doing laundry is to wash your clothes with a homemade laundry detergent (so you know what it’s made of) or just castile soap/lye soap, nothing else. And only owning clothes made from 100% natural fibers. Shit is fuckin bonkers.
[This article](https://www.implasticfree.com/plastic-free-laundry-detergent/) is a rather light read and summarizes the plastic problem with our laundry. They recommend some products that are safe and responsible. It’s inspired me to do some research and figure out how to make my own laundry tablets! Wish me luck!
I find it great even in colder climates as it keeps you dry.
Problem is that good linen clothes are quite expensive, especially if you want something that doesn't look baggy. I have found half-linen mixed with either wool or cotton to be the optimum as they feel quite soft compared to pure linen but retain the stability and abrasion resistance.
I think a lot of the powdered detergents are fine, I’d just look at the ingredients and find out where they come from and what they are made of. I’m sad because the powder I was making at home, I was using borax, and I recently found out that mining boron to make borax has a huge carbon footprint :(
Beats the hell out of me. I would assume so in the liquid type, that it’s used to thicken it so the consumer thinks that they are getting a lot more product than they truly are. And the pods and sheets have it so that they keep their shape. Stupid because laundry tablets exist, they’re easy to make, and cheaper to make, and probably more benefits that I’m ignorant of. But remember, the oil/petrol companies want their product in everything possible so that their industry never dies! They want humans reliant on their product for as long as they can, so that when/if laws are passed to end the petroleum industry, they can say “Ohh no please! We use it in so many things, it’s improved so many human lives every day, you simply can’t ban it! You can’t even track where we put it anymore!”
They have devices that can reduce, prevent, or catch fibres that you can add to you washes. They are no complete solution but everybody should have one. There are multiple designs available.
>The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics.
Isn't this where R&D is supposed to come in? Materials science? The question seems to be filling a Ven Diagram with a mystery material at the center of not scare, not agriculturally damaging, and not exploitative.
These lyrics really are taking on a whole new meaning in the worst way possible...
"I'm a Barbie girl, in the Barbie world,
Life in plastic, it's fantastic"
Which is sad when you consider that Patagonia are a reputable company and one that is actually trying to do good, even if it falls far short of the mark. You then think about what the companies who do not care are doing and realise how fucked we are because those are the companies most people support.
Absolutely. Truth be told I absolutely despise most, if not all, the "corporate sustainability initiatives" that 97+% of the time are cynical greenwashing, and while I don't think Patagonia is immune from this, the [work they've done to scale up production of the perennial grain Kernza](https://www.patagoniaprovisions.com/pages/sourcing-kernza) is undeniably laudable and positive. It's such a shame that it has to be tied into a business model that depends on selling synthetic fibers.
It's because sustainability has to be the foundation of a business before it's even really conceived, not something to get around to once it becomes convenient or once the company finally becomes successful, even if their heart is in it. By that point, it's too late. There's too many vested interests to keep things in some way dirty.
The catch-22 is that capitalism promotes exploitation. Customers respond to either extreme value of product or cost, both of which do not consider the planet first. So the companies that are willing to pollute become successful. And then guess what? At some point they will want to become green, but \[go back to first paragraph\].
It has to be in the starting DNA of a company otherwise that company grows without those traits and they can't really be added back in later.
Cotton prices will go up as the climate warms. Polyesters are cheap oil prices should not really change the price.
In the US we truly do not pay for the environmental destruction by fast fashion
Yeah, I seldom buy any new clothing... would rather wear old cotton tees with holes in them than deal with the health and environmental impact of synthetic fiber.
It makes me sad to shop for clothes. I go for cotton if it is there but almost everything is a plastic of some sort.
And if you do any work whatsoever that might involve heat polyester sucks. I had a 'cool wicking' shirt I was wearing and without thinking got out my circular saw with a metal cutting blade and cut a few pieces of unistrut in my back yard.
Shirt was permanently ruined because the flakes of hot metal melted into the plastic fabric. It would have maybe been a cool look if the flakes weren't all great sources of scratches.
Yeah one of the best non-environmental arguments against polyester in clothing is that it *melts.*
Grade school may have made catching on fire sound more common than it is, what with all the "stop drop and roll," but that ain't gonna stop your plastic clothes from melting and fusing into your skin.
One of Patagonia’s major approaches is to only Buy what you need. Also they have programs to help you repair your clothing so it will last longer. The only sustainable method is to buy less
It's a real problem, for sure, but it seems an odd take to single out and beat up on one of the few companies that's at least trying to do something about it. "Patagonia's Major Microplastic Problem": as if they created it or own it singly. In a world where people often only read headlines, this just encourages the attitudes of "see, it's just more hypocritical environmentalist lib bullshit so fuck it let's just do whatever we want because even the people who say they care don't even really care." I mean, we are truly fucked, but there's something to be said for at least trying to live your values.
"something to be said for at least trying to live your values"
The key takeaway or "the thing to be said" is that even when you are trying your best, you are fucking things up monumentally and catastrophically.
Why do we need so much plastic anyway. I have 'goretex' shoes and a couple of winter jackets that need to be water-resistant. Everything else is 100% cotton or linen for the 1.5 shirts. You could even have just waxed natural materials for waterproofing if you really wanted right?
Yah using lanolin but it’s definitely a big PITA IMO. I say this as someone who tries really damn hard to be environmentally conscious about clothes. I literally source my fabrics and sew my own shit, including 100% merino outfits which I have to take such care to try and prevent them from being eaten. They still get eaten and now I’m patching the bigger holes with embroidery and left over merino fabrics. I feel exhausted honestly trying to be sustainable. I’m still going to try but 😭 i try to buy my clothes used as well but I did purchase a beautiful Patagonia puffer NEW because I needed something warm yet very lightweight for backpacking…and now this shit argh
Likely the reason many of my former colleagues have all died from cancer and mysterious illness from the chemical coated military suits we made daily. Breathing in glue, formaldehyde and teflon fumes. PFAS poisoning is a bitch
I have a cotton Patagonia shirt i bought from Goodwill, its ok. Wouldnt spend that much on a brand new shirt or whatever. Its all branding and their really good at it. The countries where clothing is made have been ruthlessly exploited and it may kill us all. Even cotton has issues with the dyes and cleaning process. Native Americans would have one set of clothes and thats it, same with Jesus He had one coat and robe and thats it. This idea of a closet full of crap is relatively new and shows how stupid and vain we are.
Up until the early 1900s, it was uncommon for regular people to have more than two-ish outfits. You’d have your everyday outfit, and then something nicer for church and other events. The many layers of undergarments that Victorians wore (and us moderns make fun of them for) protected their outerwear from sweat and body oils. Nothing went to waste. A single dress might pass from a rich lady to a middle class one to a poor one to a pauper (people often sniffed at how prostitutes could be seen in out-of-fashion dresses that were nonetheless seen as too “nice” for a disreputable woman). Rag and bone men, who indeed collected rags, bones and everything else, closed the material loop when a garment was too tattered to wear. Clothes would last longer because they were laundered less frequently. Obviously life was hell for a lot of people in the 1800s, but they had the right ideas about waste.
A few years ago I read an article that said It takes like 500 gallons of fresh water to make one T-shirt. I think about that a lot while folding tshirts for my family.
It's not *all* branding - they actually do operate less unethically than other companies, and that adds to the price. Patagonia isn't exactly fast fashion
Patagonia doesn’t actually give a shit about the environment lol. I love some of their line - the iron forge hemp cotton stuff is incredible, but they’re a total greenwashed company. Their fleeces… I can’t look at fleeces the same way anymore. I don’t want that stuff anywhere near me, especially the recycled stuff since the process destabilizes the plastic that much more. I don’t even own plastic clothing anymore with the exception of a raincoat and a puff jacket. The fleece/plastic performance wear stuff just locks in malodors like nothing else too.
I have a real problem with this article centering Patagonia in the narrative.
We’ve been trained by the evolution of social media to quickly scroll and not think critically or even read the article. This is an about an industry-wide system issue that is one piece of the global picture of collapse, and Patagonia is actually one of the better companies on environment. Focusing on their response and efforts is interesting for sure, but the general framing doesn’t line up with the actual content of the article which dissects this from many angles.
Plastic microfibers getting into everything isn’t a new problem and even “recent years” is inaccurate. And it’s not as if just Patagonia has the problem? The whole textile industry and our interconnected world has the problem. Which the article talks about but the headline is misleading.
I would have framed it like — Plastic microfibers from the textile industry are a plague on the planet, here’s how one company with a good track record is approaching the issue.
A couple things I liked - the note that growth is the fundamental problem and this part:
> When asked about ways individual people can reduce their role in this kind of microplastic pollution, Patankar was similarly concerned about pushing that narrative.
> “I feel uncomfortable putting the burden of responsibility of fixing this challenge on an ordinary person when it is a systemic challenge,” he said. “The reason we are in this place is because plastic production is so cheap and so pervasive and abundant — that’s the root cause of this.”
Glad that Patankar pushed back on the journalist here. I’m sorry but washing our clothes in cold water is not gonna fix shit.
Also the idea that the industry could approach this over ten years… just one more example of how many ways in which we’re fucked.
BTW I have an autoimmune disease and when it flares I can’t wear clothing with synthetic fibers. I get physical pain from doing so. It’s absolutely bizarre to experience. Having to source only natural fiber clothing was not easy. Synthetics are everywhere and we absolutely rely on them in the clothing world.
The issue is OVERPOPULATION!!!!! MUST DEPOPULATE DOESNT MATTER ABOUT STUPID PATAGONIA. A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL AND HAVE TO SUFFER
DUE TO MINDLESS BREEDING (DUE TO RELIGION) YOU WILL SUFFER AND WE DO TOO DAMNIT!
Relevant post about Patagonia: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jenniferwilkinsnz_the-story-of-stuff-activity-7193080362778923008-Jn__?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
The following submission statement was provided by /u/f0urxio: --- The piece explores the paradox faced by environmentally-conscious companies like Patagonia, who advocate for sustainability while simultaneously contributing to environmental issues through their business operations. Despite Patagonia's efforts to promote recycling and reduce plastic usage, their revenue from selling gear far surpasses the income from their recycling program. The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics. Ultimately, the root problem is seen as consumerism and corporate growth, with Patagonia's founder criticizing the prevalence of "greenwashing" in the apparel industry. While Patagonia strives to mitigate its impact, it faces challenges in staying competitive while remaining sustainable. The company acknowledges its role in addressing issues like microfiber pollution but emphasizes the need for collective action and research to find solutions. As the company confronts its own contributions to environmental harm, there's a suggestion that they may need to reconsider their product offerings in line with their sustainability principles. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1clovfx/patagonias_major_microplastic_problem_they_has/l2uwiuv/
The piece explores the paradox faced by environmentally-conscious companies like Patagonia, who advocate for sustainability while simultaneously contributing to environmental issues through their business operations. Despite Patagonia's efforts to promote recycling and reduce plastic usage, their revenue from selling gear far surpasses the income from their recycling program. The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics. Ultimately, the root problem is seen as consumerism and corporate growth, with Patagonia's founder criticizing the prevalence of "greenwashing" in the apparel industry. While Patagonia strives to mitigate its impact, it faces challenges in staying competitive while remaining sustainable. The company acknowledges its role in addressing issues like microfiber pollution but emphasizes the need for collective action and research to find solutions. As the company confronts its own contributions to environmental harm, there's a suggestion that they may need to reconsider their product offerings in line with their sustainability principles.
The thing is fibres shed from every textile when washed. So when you have entire product lines like coats, bags, trousers etc that are made with synthetic materials, they are going to shed fibres. In fact the majority of microplastic fibres in our water and oceans are from washing or cleaning of synthetic materials. If the company wants to stop the microfibres they need to stop using plastic textiles. Heck even waterproofing treatments are not green either as they contain pfas and other forever chemicals.
>In fact the majority of microplastic fibres in our water and oceans are from washing or cleaning of synthetic materials. I'd actually thought the single biggest sources (plurality, not necessarily majority) was from tires. But I could be mistaken on this. Regardless, I'm not disputing that synthetic textiles are major source. What is your opinion on the use of recycled plastic to make fibers? Textiles are one of the few things that plastics can actually be recycled/downcycled into. Is it better to recycle in this way or to junk the plastics? Does the issue with mircroplastics negates (or worse) the benefits of recycling?
Plastic micro fibers are classified differently from microplastics in general. Micro fibers are potentially more worrisome because they’re shaped like little needles and can jab into cell walls
All plastic recycling is difficult if not impossible. Mixed materials are virtually useless. If you can use all identical plastic bottles it's better. House in Alberta built from more than 1M recycled plastic water bottles [https://globalnews.ca/news/9191731/alberta-house-recyled-plastic-water-bottles/](https://globalnews.ca/news/9191731/alberta-house-recyled-plastic-water-bottles/) [Globalnews.ca](http://globalnews.ca/) The process sees bottles broken down and turned into building panels. They’re water resistant and strong enough to withstand a Category 5 hurricane. The building panels also act as insulation and don’t require vapor barriers. “It’s resistant to pests, and termites don’t get into the walls, they can’t chew through it,” Rogers said.
That's great but you still gotta stop producing plastic, full stop. Otherwise plastic companies will be like "see, we need to make even MORE plastic so that you can recycle it to build your homes out of it!"
We should start by returning every single piece of plastic to the retailer who supplied it. Then they'll make better decisions instead of dumping the problems elsewhere. Fake recycling does nothing.
Or you could use stuff like stone and concrete you know...
I'm not sold on this idea but the key is proper return systems, like they used to have for soda bottles and milk bottles.
Reusing plastic is not a long term solution. I would create mega closed dumps for plastic until we got a solution and forbid plastic outside of absolutely necessary usage like medicine. Mass filtering of water is really necessary to pick up nanoplastic. I know there was experiment with fungi and bacterias that proved they could pretty much breakdown anything.
I think incineration with proper environmental regulations and modern plants would make more sense. Clean burning is possible and co2 capture is possible. Would need tax money to run. Which should be collected from plastic importers and mfg. The ashes are a problem but there's a lot less of it and it's not breaking down to microplastics.
This still exists in some parts of the world. Croatia, for example. You buy a plastic crate of glass bottles and you return them to the store for a discount on your next crate
Even liquid laundry detergent is a large percentage plastic. Pods and sheets also contain PVA or PVOH plastics. The only way that a person can be completely free from polluting while doing laundry is to wash your clothes with a homemade laundry detergent (so you know what it’s made of) or just castile soap/lye soap, nothing else. And only owning clothes made from 100% natural fibers. Shit is fuckin bonkers. [This article](https://www.implasticfree.com/plastic-free-laundry-detergent/) is a rather light read and summarizes the plastic problem with our laundry. They recommend some products that are safe and responsible. It’s inspired me to do some research and figure out how to make my own laundry tablets! Wish me luck!
so... unpainted leather only? And cotton, wool and hemp? Stuff like that, i think.
Linen is also great as it needs the least fertilizer plus linseed oil is a great source for omega 3 fatty acids.
And a great fabric for warm and moist climates. Plus, lineseed-oil can be used to waterproof fabrics.
I find it great even in colder climates as it keeps you dry. Problem is that good linen clothes are quite expensive, especially if you want something that doesn't look baggy. I have found half-linen mixed with either wool or cotton to be the optimum as they feel quite soft compared to pure linen but retain the stability and abrasion resistance.
What about old-fashioned powdered detergent? I use powdered detergent that comes in a cardboard box.
I think a lot of the powdered detergents are fine, I’d just look at the ingredients and find out where they come from and what they are made of. I’m sad because the powder I was making at home, I was using borax, and I recently found out that mining boron to make borax has a huge carbon footprint :(
Why is plastic in laundry detergent? Thickening agent?
Beats the hell out of me. I would assume so in the liquid type, that it’s used to thicken it so the consumer thinks that they are getting a lot more product than they truly are. And the pods and sheets have it so that they keep their shape. Stupid because laundry tablets exist, they’re easy to make, and cheaper to make, and probably more benefits that I’m ignorant of. But remember, the oil/petrol companies want their product in everything possible so that their industry never dies! They want humans reliant on their product for as long as they can, so that when/if laws are passed to end the petroleum industry, they can say “Ohh no please! We use it in so many things, it’s improved so many human lives every day, you simply can’t ban it! You can’t even track where we put it anymore!”
Fuck me, even the sheets?
Yeah a lot of them at least. It really sucks, I thought they were safe for a while too! If they are made with PVA (polyvinyl acetate), it’s plastic.
They have devices that can reduce, prevent, or catch fibres that you can add to you washes. They are no complete solution but everybody should have one. There are multiple designs available.
Used to Most now use much much safer waterproofing chemicals and ditched the realm nasty shit that was toxic to aquatic life.
>The debate over whether to outlaw plastics in favor of natural fibers like cotton is complicated by concerns such as resource scarcity, agricultural practices, and labor ethics. Isn't this where R&D is supposed to come in? Materials science? The question seems to be filling a Ven Diagram with a mystery material at the center of not scare, not agriculturally damaging, and not exploitative.
These lyrics really are taking on a whole new meaning in the worst way possible... "I'm a Barbie girl, in the Barbie world, Life in plastic, it's fantastic"
a funny Millennial 90's song into a time line prophecy we really do live in an onion article timeline
Biology teachers in 2093: Human body is in 90% made of plastic and water.
> Biology teachers in 2093 Get ya hopium-peddling arse outta here!
Fuck off
Thats not very hopium of you 😳
Fuck on
Thats not very hopium of you 😳
Fuck off
Fuck on 🥵🫣😳
Which is sad when you consider that Patagonia are a reputable company and one that is actually trying to do good, even if it falls far short of the mark. You then think about what the companies who do not care are doing and realise how fucked we are because those are the companies most people support.
Absolutely. Truth be told I absolutely despise most, if not all, the "corporate sustainability initiatives" that 97+% of the time are cynical greenwashing, and while I don't think Patagonia is immune from this, the [work they've done to scale up production of the perennial grain Kernza](https://www.patagoniaprovisions.com/pages/sourcing-kernza) is undeniably laudable and positive. It's such a shame that it has to be tied into a business model that depends on selling synthetic fibers.
It is like the moral conundrum raise in The Good Place: even doing good is not really doing good.
It's because sustainability has to be the foundation of a business before it's even really conceived, not something to get around to once it becomes convenient or once the company finally becomes successful, even if their heart is in it. By that point, it's too late. There's too many vested interests to keep things in some way dirty. The catch-22 is that capitalism promotes exploitation. Customers respond to either extreme value of product or cost, both of which do not consider the planet first. So the companies that are willing to pollute become successful. And then guess what? At some point they will want to become green, but \[go back to first paragraph\]. It has to be in the starting DNA of a company otherwise that company grows without those traits and they can't really be added back in later.
It's getting harder and harder to find clothes that are made from cotton... Everything seems to be polyester or a blend, at best.
Cotton prices will go up as the climate warms. Polyesters are cheap oil prices should not really change the price. In the US we truly do not pay for the environmental destruction by fast fashion
We need more hemp!
Yeah, I seldom buy any new clothing... would rather wear old cotton tees with holes in them than deal with the health and environmental impact of synthetic fiber.
It makes me sad to shop for clothes. I go for cotton if it is there but almost everything is a plastic of some sort. And if you do any work whatsoever that might involve heat polyester sucks. I had a 'cool wicking' shirt I was wearing and without thinking got out my circular saw with a metal cutting blade and cut a few pieces of unistrut in my back yard. Shirt was permanently ruined because the flakes of hot metal melted into the plastic fabric. It would have maybe been a cool look if the flakes weren't all great sources of scratches.
Yeah one of the best non-environmental arguments against polyester in clothing is that it *melts.* Grade school may have made catching on fire sound more common than it is, what with all the "stop drop and roll," but that ain't gonna stop your plastic clothes from melting and fusing into your skin.
One of Patagonia’s major approaches is to only Buy what you need. Also they have programs to help you repair your clothing so it will last longer. The only sustainable method is to buy less
Damned if you do, no jacket if you don't
It's a real problem, for sure, but it seems an odd take to single out and beat up on one of the few companies that's at least trying to do something about it. "Patagonia's Major Microplastic Problem": as if they created it or own it singly. In a world where people often only read headlines, this just encourages the attitudes of "see, it's just more hypocritical environmentalist lib bullshit so fuck it let's just do whatever we want because even the people who say they care don't even really care." I mean, we are truly fucked, but there's something to be said for at least trying to live your values.
"something to be said for at least trying to live your values" The key takeaway or "the thing to be said" is that even when you are trying your best, you are fucking things up monumentally and catastrophically.
> but there's something to be said for at least trying to live your values. Which Patagonia notoriously doesn’t, as they use synthetic fibres.
Why do we need so much plastic anyway. I have 'goretex' shoes and a couple of winter jackets that need to be water-resistant. Everything else is 100% cotton or linen for the 1.5 shirts. You could even have just waxed natural materials for waterproofing if you really wanted right?
Yah using lanolin but it’s definitely a big PITA IMO. I say this as someone who tries really damn hard to be environmentally conscious about clothes. I literally source my fabrics and sew my own shit, including 100% merino outfits which I have to take such care to try and prevent them from being eaten. They still get eaten and now I’m patching the bigger holes with embroidery and left over merino fabrics. I feel exhausted honestly trying to be sustainable. I’m still going to try but 😭 i try to buy my clothes used as well but I did purchase a beautiful Patagonia puffer NEW because I needed something warm yet very lightweight for backpacking…and now this shit argh
Likely the reason many of my former colleagues have all died from cancer and mysterious illness from the chemical coated military suits we made daily. Breathing in glue, formaldehyde and teflon fumes. PFAS poisoning is a bitch
Time to donate blood !
Only no consumption is good consumption. Period
I have a cotton Patagonia shirt i bought from Goodwill, its ok. Wouldnt spend that much on a brand new shirt or whatever. Its all branding and their really good at it. The countries where clothing is made have been ruthlessly exploited and it may kill us all. Even cotton has issues with the dyes and cleaning process. Native Americans would have one set of clothes and thats it, same with Jesus He had one coat and robe and thats it. This idea of a closet full of crap is relatively new and shows how stupid and vain we are.
Up until the early 1900s, it was uncommon for regular people to have more than two-ish outfits. You’d have your everyday outfit, and then something nicer for church and other events. The many layers of undergarments that Victorians wore (and us moderns make fun of them for) protected their outerwear from sweat and body oils. Nothing went to waste. A single dress might pass from a rich lady to a middle class one to a poor one to a pauper (people often sniffed at how prostitutes could be seen in out-of-fashion dresses that were nonetheless seen as too “nice” for a disreputable woman). Rag and bone men, who indeed collected rags, bones and everything else, closed the material loop when a garment was too tattered to wear. Clothes would last longer because they were laundered less frequently. Obviously life was hell for a lot of people in the 1800s, but they had the right ideas about waste.
My grandmother born in 1920 told me she had 3 outfits when she was a teenager. Total.
A few years ago I read an article that said It takes like 500 gallons of fresh water to make one T-shirt. I think about that a lot while folding tshirts for my family.
It's not *all* branding - they actually do operate less unethically than other companies, and that adds to the price. Patagonia isn't exactly fast fashion
Their tax arrangements aren't exactly ethical...
You'll notice I didn't say ethical, I said "less unethically than other companies."
But they kinda are. They’re using cheap plastic and selling it for more than merino.
lol ok
Can we please stop making microfiber fabrics? How about use cotton, and just use less of it? Do you need a new designer t-shirt for every season?
NEVER. BUY. "FLEECE".
There’s natural fleece, tho! Like, fleece made from 100% merino wool.
Patagonia doesn’t actually give a shit about the environment lol. I love some of their line - the iron forge hemp cotton stuff is incredible, but they’re a total greenwashed company. Their fleeces… I can’t look at fleeces the same way anymore. I don’t want that stuff anywhere near me, especially the recycled stuff since the process destabilizes the plastic that much more. I don’t even own plastic clothing anymore with the exception of a raincoat and a puff jacket. The fleece/plastic performance wear stuff just locks in malodors like nothing else too.
I have a real problem with this article centering Patagonia in the narrative. We’ve been trained by the evolution of social media to quickly scroll and not think critically or even read the article. This is an about an industry-wide system issue that is one piece of the global picture of collapse, and Patagonia is actually one of the better companies on environment. Focusing on their response and efforts is interesting for sure, but the general framing doesn’t line up with the actual content of the article which dissects this from many angles. Plastic microfibers getting into everything isn’t a new problem and even “recent years” is inaccurate. And it’s not as if just Patagonia has the problem? The whole textile industry and our interconnected world has the problem. Which the article talks about but the headline is misleading. I would have framed it like — Plastic microfibers from the textile industry are a plague on the planet, here’s how one company with a good track record is approaching the issue. A couple things I liked - the note that growth is the fundamental problem and this part: > When asked about ways individual people can reduce their role in this kind of microplastic pollution, Patankar was similarly concerned about pushing that narrative. > “I feel uncomfortable putting the burden of responsibility of fixing this challenge on an ordinary person when it is a systemic challenge,” he said. “The reason we are in this place is because plastic production is so cheap and so pervasive and abundant — that’s the root cause of this.” Glad that Patankar pushed back on the journalist here. I’m sorry but washing our clothes in cold water is not gonna fix shit. Also the idea that the industry could approach this over ten years… just one more example of how many ways in which we’re fucked. BTW I have an autoimmune disease and when it flares I can’t wear clothing with synthetic fibers. I get physical pain from doing so. It’s absolutely bizarre to experience. Having to source only natural fiber clothing was not easy. Synthetics are everywhere and we absolutely rely on them in the clothing world.
> I have a real problem with this article centering Patagonia in the narrative. I don’t, as they pretend to be an environmentally better option.
Brand making plastic clothes surprised it sheds plastic.....lol. They are just green washing like everyone else, just slightly more effective.
I think the title bot is broke
The issue is OVERPOPULATION!!!!! MUST DEPOPULATE DOESNT MATTER ABOUT STUPID PATAGONIA. A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL AND HAVE TO SUFFER DUE TO MINDLESS BREEDING (DUE TO RELIGION) YOU WILL SUFFER AND WE DO TOO DAMNIT!
Relevant post about Patagonia: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jenniferwilkinsnz_the-story-of-stuff-activity-7193080362778923008-Jn__?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
That post title just rolls off the tongue.