Photo: Getty Images
The New Sustainable Material Making Fashion Waves? Wood
Fairchild Media released an article explaining how, “Today, 6.4 percent of textiles are produced with wood-based feedstock, according to sustainability nonprofit Textile Exchange. With deforestation responsible for up to 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, pivoting to ‘forest-positive’ sourcing for man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCF) such as viscose, lyocell, modal and acetate, has never been more critical.”
It’s always been more than just chopping down and replanting trees, since trees and forests support a complex network of biodiversity and life.
Additionally, “The United Nations estimates that one-quarter of the world’s population, or 1.6 billion people, depend on forests for their subsistence needs, livelihoods and incomes.”
The proposed solution is man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCF), which are “regenerated fibers usually made from the dissolved wood pulp or ‘cellulose’ of trees. Viscose, lyocell, and modal are all kinds of manmade cellulosics. Because they’re plant-based, MMCFs are renewable, and so have the potential to be a climate-friendly material if the wood is sourced sustainably and the processing chemicals are handled properly,” according to Textile Exchange.
For apparel products in particular, this new type of material will disrupt the current fashion system, which is operating “in a linear manner of extracting virgin resources and disposing of clothing once it has reached its perceived end-of-life, generating a huge amount of waste,” according to Fashion For Good. “Textile-to-textile recycling holds significant potential to close the loop in MMCF — alleviating the strain on virgin resources (problem 1) and reducing the amount of used textiles going to landfill / incineration (problem 2).” Using cotton waste is also more efficient than virgin wood in terms of its yield, “given the purity of cellulose in cotton.”
For Julia Kozlik, textile program lead at the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC), this issue is at the forefront of her mind. Although all of this sounds promising, “Kozlik said that much of this is still new to many brands that might be just beginning to implement certain policies around MMCF sourcing. They might not be aware of what tools they can use to trace and verify materials once they leave the forest.” She also stated, “They might not even know that viscose comes from trees. But also there’s little visibility — we don’t really have enough verified statements, claims or anything about the origins of those fibers that consumers can see from their garments.”
According to Fairchild Media, the aim is to support retailers so they’ll begin:
- Understanding the sourcing landscape, which includes the location of forests and their specific social and environmental contexts.
- Establishing a sourcing policy that encompasses sustainable forest management standards.
According to Kozlik, “The market share of MMCFs verified by PEFC and the Forest Stewardship Council has been increasing from 55 percent to 60 percent in 2020 to 60 percent to 65 percent in 2021. But that leaves another 35 percent of the fibers with unknown sources.”
Ultimately, all of this bodes well as many fashion brands have also pledged to completely switch to deforestation-free leather by 2030.
Without any current loud opposition to this new MMCF system, there don’t appear to be any cons at the moment.
Discussion Questions
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: Do you think the transition to MMCF and deforestation-free leather will be enough to convince all brands to make the switch to sustainability? Are there more measures that need to be taken to help the planet?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
This very promising, but it will take time. Retailers and brands have developed their supply-chain and manufacturing processes over decades, and convincing them to transition MMCF and deforestation-free leather will require convincing. Given the magnitude of the global impact of climate change that we are all experiencing, anything that can contribute to helping reduce waste and the impact on the environment should be undertaken.
Another factor not mentioned yet is the comparison to cotton fabrics – we should not forget both the high water consumption used to produce cotton and then also who is working those fields under what conditions, i.e. Xinjiang and the Chinese government’s human rights abuses there. Re-considering North American forest production and better use of locally-grown fiber is going to deliver shorter supply chains (with cost savings potential) with higher public accountability.
Over the next decade, decarbonization and other sustainability efforts won’t be elective. Consumer demand, regulation, innovation, and physical constraints are moving faster than most realize.
In many ways, the first phase of evolution will be the easiest; many initiatives are self-funding through cost savings or incremental sales.
The sooner the discipline becomes embedded in sourcing, product design, packaging, distribution, logistics, branding, and marketing, the less painful the transitions will be.
One look at the news this month is all the answer anyone should need to answer these questions. Reports said it was close to 60C in Spain last week. Almost 130F in Death Valley, California this weekend. Pheonix had almost a week of greater than 115F temperatures. Wildfires still burning out of control in Canada with air quality problems potentially lasting for months in both Canada and the US (62 million people in the US are under air quality alerts today). Florida ocean water temperatures north of 90F.
Everyone needs to do everything we can to help. MMCFs are an important, if small, step in the right direction.
The customer is going to drive a switch to sustainability. Somehow I think the “how its done” will be whatever is least expensive, but it seems like change is coming.
PS It’s not about “helping the planet.” It’s about keeping an environment that sustains life as we know it.
It’s way past time for retailers, brands, and consumers to pay more attention to sustainability and the environment. How many wake up calls do we need? Just this summer we’ve seen widespread wildfires, unhealthy air across much of North America, devastating floods, tornadoes, and unrelenting triple digit heat. At what point do we collectively wake up and start doing the many, many things we need to do. I mean, seriously……………..
It’s time for retailers and brands to LEAD on this issue.
Al,
I agree, but rightly wrongly — and i think very wrongly — this issue is driven by money not morality. My only disagreement with your argument is that it isn’t, ” … time for retailers and brands to LEAD on this issue,” is actually WAY past time for retailers and brands to LEAD on this issue. Maybe the French are right and the only way to force companies to do the “right” thing in terms of promoting a sustainable environment is to punish them when they don’t.
Everyone must do their share and fashion in general, and apparel specifically, must find ways to either reduce the waste they help generate or make that waste more environmentally friendly. It’s also possible that consumers will continue to thrift and to decrease the rate at which they turnover their closets which should provide a sufficient profit motive for brands and retailers to adapt to more eco friendly practices.
John,
And there are simple things manufacturers could do to facilitate what you suggest. For example, Carhartt and a handful of fashion brands have begin offering repair services designed to extend the life of a consumer’s wardrobe. Replacing a zipper on an otherwise perfectly good coat isn’t exactly rocket science but it can begin to make a difference, particularly in inflationary times.
The article does not mention the costs of textile to textile recycling versus extracting virgin resources. Cost tends to be a pretty big factor when trying to initiate earth friendly programs. Everybody nods at the well intended speeches and programs and then they turn around and buy the cheap stuff. So absolutely, Mother Nature is begging us to embrace textile to textile recycling, but $$$ will be a factor in the pace at which it all happens.
Exactly, Jeff. ” $$$ will be a factor in the pace at which it all happens.” Most people will not pay extra. Companies will not make the needed investments. Is government regulation the only answer? That will never happen, either.
Great point Jeff. There have been significant breakthroughs in textile-to-textile recycling, but not enough to make recycled “raw” materials cost competitive at scale.
It will all depend on whether the consumer is willing to pay more and/or transition their tastes for the greater good. Right now, true sustainability is not scalable and profitable. More responsible factories need to surface. Businesses will almost always opt for a lower cost structure, which usually means lower paid, lower quality production. Aside from forest protection, the fashion industry needs to look to water purification–the dyes and fabric contaminants.
This is good news for the planet and for those of us who depend on it for life. This is long overdue. Consumes will drive adoption. I suspect they’re going to expect more accountability and traceability about the products they buy. The question in my mind is, will this trickle down the market enough to change the sourcing model for cheap fast fashion?
Mark and Keith make good comments and a to-the-point summary.
However, the solution is up to the shopping public. We will not see companies make the changes unless it benefits their income. Only niche positions will win shoppers’ sales and loyalty. We all talk about our concern for the environment. But, as they say, we don’t “walk the talk.”
Friends pat me on the back for my environmental concern since buying a Tesla. But the reality is if it weren’t giving me huge operating savings, I wouldn’t have made the purchase.
It can and should work, disposable needs to be socially unacceptable. You don’t see many fur coats anymore, so there is a precedent.
The direct answer to the question is, “No.” Alternative materials, upcycling, and recycling are not new ideas and the fashion industry remains one of the largest commercial environmental threats. True, a few companies have instituted programs directly aimed at promoting sustainability, but the industry as a whole isn’t even attempting to look like it is following their lead. So, enter national laws like those in France that make manufacturers responsible for their products for their full lifecycle. Gene Detroyer is right, this is about money, not intentionality. Consumers won’t pay more for more sustainable [as opposed to sustainable] goods and somebody has to be responsible for picking up the environmental tab.
With the rise of conscious consumerism and the significant heat waves this summer, it’s high time brands increase their transition efforts to man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCF) and deforestation-free leather. While the US market does not currently have the governmental mandates that the EU market has, the consumer market always has and always will drive brands to change their operating models.
Considering the accelerating impacts of global climate change, the rapid transition to new sustainable product development models is a very encouraging sign. Sustainability matters and the fashion product development cycle is about to be reimagined with sustainable sourcing, environmentally conscious strategies, and a move to preserve our rain forests.
Consumers will ultimately drive the sustainability agenda and retailers will have to respond and do so quickly. However, there is still a large demand for disposable cheap fashion which works against the sustainability movement. The World has no choice and companies that drive this will start to see big benefits in their relationship with certain customers, it will take a long time for many to change but this is none negotiable and responsible retailers need to act now.
No offense to Dennis, but I found this utterly confusing: leather > deforestation….What?? the idea that the “solution” is…wood-pulp, somehow manages to make it even more so.
The likelihood of this becoming a major issue is close to zero.
Money rules this issue, as many others here have rightly observed. Ad hoc efforts to recycle fiber will never deliver a pay-back, no matter how much fashion companies desire to appear eco-conscious.
Institutionalizing a “full fiber cycle” – from origin, to manufacture, to consumer use, and back to raw materials – would be commendable. It is ultimately necessary for the health of the planet.
Now, who is willing to put up the capital and wield the authority to make this happen at a global scale? Governments? N.G.O.s? The U.N.?
Complex topic but good one. Sustainable sourcing improvements needs to be made but there is also the impact on the quality for the end consumer if they will hold up and how much more might be returned or thrown away because they don’t last. It’s great that it better sourced materials but if their returned or in the garbage, then what’s the point. (Don’t let this stop the change, but it must be taken into account in the decision and adjustments).