Fast-fashion brands claim they’re cleaning up their act for the planet, but their premise might be inherently flawed
Author: Marianna Cerini
The fashion industry has a fossil fuel problem. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, fashion is responsible for up to 10% of global carbon dioxide output—more than international flights and maritime shipping combined. The sector consumes around 100 billion cubic meters of water and produces some 92 million tons of textile waste annually—87% of which ends up in landfills or polluting incinerators. It also accounts for one-fifth of the 300 million tons of plastic produced globally each year and contributes to an estimated 17% to 20% of water pollution through processes such as dyeing. These figures are set to keep growing: Production of synthetic fibers, which are usually made with materials extracted from fossil fuels, is estimated to increase over the next two decades, while overall apparel consumption is projected to rise by 65% to 102 million metric tons a year by 2030. In many cases, such initiatives are meaningful but not significant enough to compensate for the overall impact of the industry. In September, fast retailer Uniqlo unveiled a 1 million square foot solar-paneled roof on its New Jersey distribution center aimed to provide “the equivalent of enough clean energy to power 500 households a year” and “mark a significant step forward in Uniqlo’s overall climate strategy,” according to a statement. Inditex’s Zara recently committed to make 50% of the items it sells in 2022 with recycled materials and “ecologically grown cotton.”