The oldest form of recycling

In older generations, anyone who grew up with older siblings knows all about hand-me-downs. When big brother Brian grew out of his shoes, they were handed down to Tom. And then possibly re-soled and handed down to Jimmy. When Jimmy grew out of them they were passed on to another family down the road. Of course there was great excitement on the rare occasion that you actually got something new, but wearing second hand clothing was the norm. Clothing and footwear was built to last and be functional.

The path from functional to fashionable

There was always high fashion, but it didn’t become mainstream until towards the end of the last century, when the growth in branding and mass media started changing customer perceptions and buying habits. Nurturing the desire to fit in and be seen wearing the latest fashions – high street or not – second hand clothing fell out of favour, and was relegated to those who couldn’t afford to buy new. As a result the oldest form of recycling was largely abandoned.

The demand for more affordable fashion items, led to the development of ‘fast fashion’. Factories mass produced clothing items and shoes, often copying leading fashion brands in an attempt to attract more budget conscious buyers. Masses of low quality textiles flooded the market under the guise of giving customers what they want.

The problem is that while these clothing items may have looked fashionable, they didn’t last and instead of being passed on, they were thrown away. This may have been okay in the longer term if it weren’t for three factors:

1. Most of these fashion items are made from artificial polyester type threads, or in the case of shoes, moulded from various forms of plastic. Unlike natural fibers such as cotton, wool or hemp, the clothing being dumped in landfill does not degrade.
    
2. The volume of textile waste is huge. By 2020 the UK recorded 206 456 tonnes of textile waste. In the USA it’s even worse at 14 million tonnes. Only 13% of  materials are recycled and even then, most of these threads are sourced from recycled plastic bottles rather than textiles.
   
   
3. The textile industry uses up vast volumes of water and relies heavily on fossil fuels for production. It is also responsible for 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

There is a great deal of debate around who should be taking responsibility for the volumes of textile waste. Should it be the brands and their marketers? Should consumers buy and use more sustainably? Or is it up to the recycling industry to find a solution? It might be convenient to shift blame but the reality is that it requires a collaborative effort.

Brand responsibility 

Many leading clothing and shoe brands have initiated efforts to rethink the resources they’re using. A significant amount of R&D funding is being poured into finding ways to make textiles from resources that have the potential to be infinitely recycled. These efforts have potential to make a positive impact on resource use and reduce the carbon emissions of the textile industry.

High street brands have the resources and the customer base to recoup some of those R&D costs, especially in the luxury market. But there’s a very small percentage of the textile industry. Despite the admirable intentions, it doesn’t solve the issue of “fast fashion” or impact the supply of low cost, low quality textiles that are used to clothe the majority of the global population.

Consumer consciousness

A positive relating to the topic of textile resources and recycling is that second-hand is back in fashion. Younger consumers are increasingly embracing shopping for clothing at thrift stores. The huge growth in e-commerce brands such as Thread-up, that only sell second-hand clothing, is evidence that there is a growing demand for second hand clothing. This is a huge step in the right direction to extend the lifespan of textiles through re-use.

Recycling innovation

Leading industry players such as Renewcell in Europe are driving innovation in textile recycling with their circular vision and focus on creating partnerships within the fashion industry. But some of the most interesting developments in textile recycling look to repurpose recycled products in other industry sectors. One such example is a very simple recycling idea that uses heat and compression to recycle clothing waste into insulation panels for construction. The recycling process is not massively resource intensive which makes it a more sustainable solution. With the renewed focus on insulating buildings to make them more energy efficient, it’s certainly tapping into an industry where there is demand.

A new business model

What all of these examples highlight is that a new circular business model is required if the fashion industry is to become more sustainable. It requires looking beyond simple consumer supply and demand, or leading industry trends and consider how the fashion industry can start to make a positive impact on the planet.

Recently Patagonia, a leading outdoor apparel brand, sent shockwaves across the globe with its announcement that all the profits of the multi-billion dollar company would be channeled into fighting climate change. It had capitalists shaking their heads – why would anyone give all that money away?

Dig a little deeper into the story and you’ll discover that the founders don’t have the same view. They see it as a necessary, essential investment. They’ve taken a stand, literally putting their money where their mouth is, to advance sustainability. They don’t see it as being idealistic or that circular economy principles are something to commit to with goals of 25 or 30% lowering of emissions or 50% use of recycled materials.  They’ve sent a message loud and clear to all industries that business should not be about take and make….and then try to fix the mess that model creates.  The question is: Will other businesses and brands step up to the challenge now that Patagonia have proven it can  be done?