carbonneutral Archives

Net zero fashion

10 July, 2023 / Leave a Comment

Greenwashing from the top down

Net zero fashion is one of the latest buzzwords in sustainability. But can we trust those who promote their garments with this label?

We know that green eco-whatever labels have flooded the fashion industry, like any other activity related to selling products or services. The food industry was probably the first to launch organic products, which, by itself, means nothing. See the video here. Also, according to Fondazione Veronesi, the differences between organic and non-organic food are few and negligible.

After the food industry, it was time for fashion, furniture and now, sustainable tourism, all of which sound like enormous bullshit.

Net zero fashion according to the UN

Take the UN playbook on “Sustainable Fashion Communication.” Though the basic principle, fighting overconsumption, is valuable, we didn’t like the fact they mention some fashion brands. It seems like they take for granted that these brands are doing great work in terms of sustainability while they are perfectly aware that there is zero control!

For instance, the UN playbook mentions Allbirds.
“Footwear brand Allbirds developed a life cycle assessment (LCA) tool to estimate the cradle-to-grave carbon footprint of its products.”
“Allbirds then took it a step further in 2023 announcing what it refers to as the world’s first net zero carbon shoe.”
At some point, a line that says: “According to the company’s assessment, on average, a pair of Allbirds shoes has a footprint of 7.12 kg CO2e.”

That “according to the company” sounds really weird! Even more, coming from the UN! They better avoid mentioning any fashion brand…

Net zero fashion according to Business of Fashion

By the way, a few days later, a newsletter from the Business of Fashion got our attention. It was about Allbirds and the launch of their new sneakers. We quote B.O.F:

“By focusing on materials that draw down more carbon than they emit and lowering transport and manufacturing impact as much as possible, the brand says it has succeeded in designing ‘the world’s first net zero-carbon shoe.’ But the basis of such calculations for the industry is fraught. Fashion’s environmental impact data is notoriously poor and accepted standards for carbon accounting are still evolving, meaning net-zero product claims are testing new ground.”

Net zero according to science

So what? The UN released the playbook to help spread sustainable fashion communication, but they did not do a great job. It seems like they are greenwashing from the top down.

Since there is no control, it is not serious to mention fashion brands at all. Also, since the UN says “lead with science” – on this point, we totally agree! So, here is what the climate scientist Kevin Anderson says about net zero:

“Net Zero is a real dangerous turn in my view, and if you hear the language of net zero, I’d be very cautious about the optimism of the person who’s saying it actually has. Unpick it, reveal what’s behind it, and you’ll realise what they mean, and what they mean is NOT zero emissions, not net zero, not zero emissions.
I always say ‘net zero’ is Latin for ‘kick the can down the road.”
Kevin Anderson

Lead with science UN, and reveal what’s behind net zero fashion!

Net zero fashion Read More »

Carbon neutral: plant a tree?

Offsetting carbon emissions: why it is misleading

The carbon neutral definition may induce people to think that a brand that claims this practice is sustainable. But, planting trees isn’t enough to solve the climate change issue.

Indeed, it’s always interesting to read how the fashion industry is involved in sustainable practices. Which, now, we can place under the umbrella of corporate change. We get itchy just thinking about it! There is no company that doesn’t talk about its eco-friendly policies. The bigger they are, the more they blurt out promises they cannot keep.

Sustainable brands

According to the Circular Fashion Index 2023, Gucci is the most sustainable among luxury brands. Kearny, a strategic consultancy company that analyses the impact of the circularity of brands, operates this ranking. They rank fast fashion brands, too! So, fast fashion has sustainable practices – really?

We feel a little disappointed when agencies release these rankings because of the misleading impact. In fact, we think industries use the word sustainable too much. After checking out those rankings, our question is: how can brands structured on an overproduction model be sustainable?

Carbon neutral or greenwashing?

But, while some magazines posted the list of the most sustainable brands or sustainable mega entities, The Guardian released an article that dampens enthusiasm.

“Adverts that claim products are carbon neutral using offsets are to be banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog unless companies can prove they really work, the Guardian can reveal, as Gucci becomes the latest company to struggle with a high-profile environmental commitment based on offsetting.
Amid growing concern that firms are misleading consumers about the environmental impact of their products, the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) is to begin stricter enforcement around the use of terms such as “carbon neutral”, “net zero” and “nature positive” as part of a greenwashing crackdown later this year after a six-month review.”
The Guardian

Offset CO2 emissions: what does it mean?

Offsetting CO2 emissions means balancing the amount of CO generated by any activity through reforestation, parks and natural reserves protection. These projects generate carbon credits.

“In January, a joint Guardian investigation found that many rainforest offsets certified by Verra, which operates the world’s leading carbon standard, had little impact despite being widely used by major companies for environmental claims, also finding evidence of forced evictions at a flagship project in Peru used by Disney and Apple.”
The Guardian

Specifically, The Guardian revealed that more than 90% of rainforest carbon offsets by the biggest certifier are worthless!
Therefore, planting trees isn’t helping with climate change.

When big brands, corporations and millionaires talk about sustainability and carbon emissions, always be careful. They are the problem. And if they want to be part of the solution, they must change their overproduction model and lifestyle first.

Changing marketing isn’t enough. Carbon-neutral and sustainable claims are just smoke and mirrors.