"Dry Clean Only" -- what are my choices?

Thanks to Jacob for the link to this article in the New York Times.

Reporter Mireya Navarro explores green claims by dry cleaners, which, it turns out, are "not regulated at all". The usual solvent used in dry cleaning, perchloroethylene or perc, is linked to various nasty health problems, including cancer. The EPA has ordered "that perc be phased out in dry cleaners operating in residential buildings by 2020", which gives you some idea how great it is! The "green" cleaners are using other solvents which are not much better. There are no government standards for what makes dry cleaning "green", so once again the consumer if left to self-educate and beware. According to the article,

"The environmentally preferable choice for dry cleaning, experts say,
involves little more than water. In a process known as wet cleaning,
garments are washed with water and biodegradable detergents in
computerized machines that carefully control variables like agitation.
Most stains are water soluble, and most items labeled “dry clean
only” can be professionally wet cleaned without shrinkage or
damage, studies have found."

The Pollution Prevention Center at Occidental College has quite a bit of useful information on the topic.

And yes, you can hand wash that cashmere sweater in cold water and biodegradable detergent and it will be just fine. No wringing or twisting, though.

Barbie B-Cause wins greenwashing prize!

I am thrilled to see that Mattel's "eco-friendly" Barbie, which I noted back in April, has won first place in the Green Web Awards' "Worst Greenwash" category.

Looking for eco-friendly textiles? These tips make it easier.

I've been kvetching quite a bit lately about the lack of information -- and abundance of misinformation -- about eco-fashion's latest darling, bamboo. The short version is that most bamboo on the market is rayon made from bamboo, and that it may or may not have any number of miraculous qualities. My personal take on the general topic of eco-fibers, as a consumer who knows the difference between rayon, silk and cotton, is that I prefer to do business with designers and manufacturers who treat me like a grown-up. My list of tips is still a work in progress, but here's the latest snapshot.

1) What do they call it? Finding "rayon from bamboo" or "bamboo lyocell" on the label makes me feel a whole lot more confident that the manufacturer understands the materials being used and federal labeling regulations. Ditto "azlon from soy" or "corn azlon". There is a reason why the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act exists -- to protect consumers. When someone buys bamboo or soy clothing or yarn, thinking they are "natural", they are misinformed. When their mistaken belief is based on a label or online catalog blurb, that's misinformation. Until the FTC starts enforcing its own regulations, the buyer needs to beware and be wary.

2) Are they honest about the pros and cons and uncertainties? As anyone who's pursued sustainable living knows, it's all about compromises and tough choices. Every day I read a dozen or so fashion bloggers gushing about a new company producing eco-chic clothing. When I look at the website, it's all hype. I appreciate the honesty of companies that are more transparent about the complexities of sourcing and who make an honest attempt to educate consumers.

3) Are they trendiness wolves in sustainable lambs' clothing? What's the difference between some breathless flak telling me that skinny jeans are this year's must-have and her "green is the new black" cousin in ecstasies over some trendy item made from recycled Post-it notes that is designed to be out-of-style in a season? Sheesh. If you want to convince me of your green bonafides, try for well-made, classic, versatile styles, not sartorial one-night stands.

Here are a few of my nominations for companies trying to get it right. Feel free to post your own favorites, as well.

Nike (yes, Nike). Not only are they using their corporate clout to build the organic cotton market, but check the fiber content for their soy jersey line of yoga clothing: "57% soy azlon/38% cotton (5% organic)/5% spandex"

Fashion and Earth. At the other end of the corporate spectrum is this small Canadian newcomer. I sent them one of my NWL "didn't you mean bamboo rayon?" comments and president Adrian Desbarats answered,

"I think this is an excellent point that you bring up AND, you are correct. I have been so busy working on company development that this little, yet important distinction, escaped my notice. However, given that there is some debate regarding bamboo, I agree that there must be clarity when providing bamboo textiles for the consumer – is it bamboo fiber or bamboo rayon? I will have this changed."

And he did. Wow. Integrity and customer responsiveness.

Bamboosa was on the scene when the only bamboo on most people's radar was the stuff invading their back yards. Readers know that I've had some heated email and comment exchanges with Morris Saintsing, their head of sales development and operations. While they don't use the R_ word in their labeling, their website is a model of up-front consumer information about their products and processes, even when that information is technical, such as their explanation of their choice of dyes.

Patagonia's website is more than a catalog, it's a textbook on the environmental impact of clothing. Spend some time on the Environmentalism section of the site (especially my favorite part, the Footprint Chronicles, which lets you see the impact of various products). Their explanation of their e-fibers selections is required reading for the serious green consumer.

Additions to the NWL green honor role are welcome!

Organic Clothing bamboo article, green fatigue and a nifty green wardrobe calculator

I am about to officially begin my sabbatical from my university, and will be spending most of my writing time on the book I am supposed to have completed by December 2009. My plan is to aim for a substantive blog post here once a week, with pointers to items of interest on other days.

Today's morsel comes from Organic Clothing, one of my favorite sustainable clothing blogs. They address some of the most prevalent conflicting claims about bamboo fiber and bamboo rayon, leaving the hapless consumer wondering whose advertising to believe.

I have also been following discussions about bamboo yarns for knitting and crocheting on Ravelry (sorry, you need to be a member to read the discussions, but if you are a crafter,go ahead and sign up to be on the waiting list; you'll love it!) and it appears that savvy crafters are catching on to the bamboo labeling dance. Believe me, when they find out it's rayon, they are not pleased. (Though it does explain why their lovely, soft 100% bamboo handknit socks won't hold their shape.) I am worried that the current eco-fashion hype and hoopla (not at all confined to bamboo, by the way) will result in green fatigue or worse: backlash.

Few fibers on the market are 100% eco-friendly, and we all must make choices -- well-informed choices. To help you make better choices, try out the green wardrobe calculator at Ecotextile News. You may be surprised to find that the answer is not so much what you buy, but how you launder it, how long you wear it, and where it goes when you're done with it.

Feelgood Style: Kindred Spirit

Imagine my pleasure in finding a kindred spirit! Delia Montgomery, founder of Chic Eco, writes on sustainable fashion at Feelgood Style, part of the Green Options blog network. (My, that's a lot of links...). Her recent post "Bamboo Fiber: Greenwash or Treasure?" reinforces the message I've been trying to get across here. Here's a choice morsel:

Conscious fabric retailers need to look for certification from an independent and reliable certification company. Currently, Oeko-Tex is the most comprehensive label for insuring that the garment is healthy for consumers. Other certification bodies are Soil Association, SKAL, or KRAV. Bamboo fabric buyers are wise to ask specific questions about textile development in addition to a label demand.

Tomorrow I'll be winding up my FTC coverage with a post about certification and standards. Stayed tuned!

What about the bamboo ads?

I am having a really existential Nice White Lady moment. What do I do about the bamboo ads that pop up in rotation on my own site? (This is my modest attempt to "monetize" my expertise -- so far it's earned me $11.49 in the last six months, and I won't get paid until it hits $100, sometime in 2013.) Here's what I suggest: send the advertisers a comment along the lines of, "Please label your products according to the FTC regulations: RAYON, MADE FROM BAMBOO." I've been doing this on my own when I get a news alert about a new product, or see another article about the wonders of bamboo textiles. But a few more voices won't hurt.


Additional note after sleeping on the issue: I think I'd also be happy with "Bamboo Rayon". I do think bamboo (the raw material) is a very promising solution to global environmental problems. I'd be even happier to see certification of sustainable processing (there are a few new viscose processes out there) or organic cultivation (ex.- GOTS certification). Many savvy consumers I've talked to are not displeased to find out that "bamboo" is rayon -- they like rayon! -- but they are unhappy with the perceived attempt to mislead them by not using the r___ word.

Bamboo-zled, part 2

On July 15, I attended the 2008 FTC Workshop: Green Building and Textiles in Washington, D.C.; this is the fifth of a series of reports about the presentations and discussions. (To see all, select blog entries tagged "regulation".)

Yesterday, I wrote about the scientific evidence about rayon made from bamboo in the first workshop panel. The final nails for the bamboo coffin were delivered by panelists in the next session, (Tying Up Loose Ends -- Substantiated Green Textile Claims & the Need for FTC Guidance).

Todd Copeland of Patagonia listed the major e-fibers his company uses in its products:

organic cotton
hemp
chlorine-free wool (chlorine is used in the shrink-proofing process)
recycled polyester and nylon
lyocell (the generic name for Tencel®)

Why not bamboo?

"We don't use bamboo because when we went to the processing factories we found out that a regular rayon processing factory is using waste products from the pulp industry to make raw material anyway so substituting bamboo it doesn't give you an environmental story." (source: FTC Workshop transcript.)

Then Kathleen Huddy of The Goodhousekeeping Research Institute took aim at the claims frequently made by designers and retailers of "green" fashion, including those associated with bamboo:

"Proof of substantiation is needed for all claims from ultimate absorbent to antifungal to very vague ones as eco sensitive, good for the environment, and my favorite, beneficial to those with allergies and sensitive skin. If you've got that claim, you better have [large gesture] this much data behind it to tell me that you have really reverend [no idea what this word was -- NWL] it and you can prove it." (source: FTC Workshop transcript.)

Pat Slaven of Consumer Reports batted clean-up and summed up the morning:

"A number of my colleagues have talked at length about rayon manufacturing. It's hardly benign. It includes pulp. Sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, disulfide, lots of water, lots of power. I could go on at length. It's really the topic of a textile 101 lecture, it may be a full course. But we'll spare you this. So the question is is this green washing. A number of the previous panelists have pulled the FTC definition of rayon. Nowhere in it do we define what types of cellulose go into the manufacture of rayon. It's not like [lyocell] that is a clearly defined different process that does have some advantages. Rayon can be made from pretty much any sort of cellulose. We've had a number of discussions on cotton [linters], wood pulp. I went to U.C. Davis, one of my colleagues was working on extracting it from rice and turning it to rayon...So in conclusion, the consumer is being led to believe that she's purchasing a green superior product. But the consumer is indeed purchasing is a cotton-rayon blend path towel. She's paying premium price for the honor. And the privilege. And what does she get? She's getting an ordinary bath towel that at best say bit softer than 100% cotton. We would like to see better labeling. Well, rayon, while stating that something's made from bamboo rather than rayon is misleading, this isn't necessarily a hazard to life and limb [as, say] an automotive rollover standard is but it affects the consumer's pocketbook. As long as consumers are spending more money for something with these claims, we should be seeing better labeling and we should be seeing better superior products." (source: FTC Workshop transcript.)

So there it is, friends. if you like rayon, go ahead and buy RAYON MADE FROM BAMBOO. But don't pay extra for it and don't be greenwashed into thinking that all bamboo is good for the environment.

Bamboo-zled, part 1

On July 15, I attended the 2008 FTC Workshop: Green Building and Textiles in Washington, D.C.; this is the fourth of a series of reports about the presentations and discussions. (To see all, select blog entries tagged "regulation".)

The high point of the morning, for me, was the exposure of the greenwashing associated with bamboo materials. As I explained in an earlier post, while bamboo itself can be grown sustainably, the most commonly used process used to produce textiles are far from green or sustainable by any definition. Speakers Peter Hauser (a professor from North Carolina State University) and Janice Gerde (a specialist in textiles and other materials from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection) delivered a one-two punch to bamboo labeling. Hauser differentiated between materials which could be logically called "natural bamboo fiber" (processed mechanically to produce a linen-like material), "rayon from bamboo" (regenerated cellulose, using the viscose process) and "lyocell from bamboo" (regenerated cellulose, using the more environmentally-friendly lyocell process). According to Hauser, the claims often made for bamboo -- antimicrobial properties, absorbency and breathability -- have been substantiated ONLY for materials made from natural bamboo fiber, which account for a very, very small fraction of the bamboo textiles on the market.

Dr. Gerde followed up with a meticulous overview of existing classifications (U.S. Customs and FTC) for "regenerated cellulose", "cellulose", "man-made fibers", "artificial fibers" and "rayon". (Rayon is considered artificial, or man-made, and never, never "natural", since the processing completely alters the original material.) Gerde then produced the results of an infrared spectrographic comparision of bamboo yarn (purchased in a local yarn shop) and the standard rayon yarn used in testing. They were identical. It was, she emphasized, impossible for U.S. Customs to verify claims that a rayon garment was made of bamboo, as opposed to any other cellulosic material. LaRhea Pepper (Organic Exchange) added during the ensuing discussion that the claim "organic" can only legally be made for the original fiber, but should not be used as a product claim ("100% organic bamboo yarn"), except for natural bamboo (the mechanically-processed version).

2008 FTC Workshop: Green Building and Textiles

On July 15, I attended the 2008 FTC Workshop: Green Building and Textiles in Washington, D.C.; this is the first of a series of reports about the presentations and discussions.

The purpose of FTC public workshops is to engage all the various stakeholders with a particular issue -- in this case "to examine developments in green building and textiles claims and consumer perception of such claims", as part of the FTC's review of its Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, also known as the Green Guides . The Green Guides are intended for marketers and industry, but consumers will also find them interesting, because they articulate the information and language which can -- and can't -- be used in advertising and marketing consumer products.

The agenda and other information about the workshop is still available at the FTC website; I attended only the morning sessions, devoted to textiles. Panelists included representatives of U.S. Customs & Border Protection, Organic Exchange, Patagonia and Consumer Reports. In his opening remarks, William E. Kovacic, FTC Chairman, described the plight of the consumer seeking accurate information in today's green market as "standing under a giant waterfall with a teacup". The questions for the day: What claims are being made by advertisers of "green" products. How do consumers perceive them? What misleading practices have emerged since the publication of the current Green Guides? What revisions are needed to the existing Guides in order to ensure that consumers have the information they need?

The FTC is soliciting public comment on these questions; if you have something to say about green marketing claims on your clothing and household textiles, go to the Filing a Comment section on the conference website.

Free conference on green building and textiles: consumer clarity on bamboo at last?

A friend alerted me to this opportunity:

The Federal Trade Commission is planning to host a public workshop on
July 15, 2008, to examine developments in green building and textiles
claims and consumer perception of such claims.

This is a FREE workshop, scheduled from 9-5 on July 15 in Washington DC, and also via live webcast.

Registration for the DC workshop and additional details are available here.

The FTC oversees consumer protection from fraud, false claims and unsafe products, and is the agency behind the labels you find in your clothing (fiber, care, country of origin). A complete resource list of statutes, rules and other information is available on the FTC website.

I am attending the workshop because of my concerns about greenwashing in the fashion industry, particularly the use of "100% bamboo" in labels. The Textile Fiber Products Identification Act requires that "fibers, whether natural or man-made, must be identified by their generic names". Since most bamboo yarn is created using a viscose process, that would logically suggest that the correct (and honest) label would be "x% rayon", perhaps with the additional notation that it was made from bamboo, as opposed to wood pulp, cotton waste, or some other form of cellulose.

Why does it matter? Because viscose production is very, very NOT eco-friendly. Although rayon manufacture went offshore decades ago, a search on "EPA superfund viscose" will show you that its legacy of polluted ground water lives on. And if you are at all concerned about environmental justice, and not just your own back yard, the "offshoreness" of viscose production should be cold comfort.

Send us your old stuff, so we can make more green stuff

Now, there's two ways to read that sentence. It could be a plea for recyclables (good thing) or to could be a green-tinged ploy to make a lot of cash with free raw materials (maybe not so good). Take a look at Loomstate and Barneys' latest foray into eco-fashion. Your call:

Is it

a) a way to keep T-shirts out of the landfill

b) a way to turn donated freebies into pricey items for the Barneys holiday 2008 collection

c) a way to get eco-fashionistas into Barneys (note the helpful link)

It's nice that part of the proceeds from the recycled shirts will be channeled through 1% for the Planet (a network of business that contribute to environmental causes), because at the usual Barneys' prices, it's unlikely that the shirt donors will have anything to show for their own generosity. I think I'll hang on to my old T-shirts, restyle myself and save the carfare to ship them to Loomstate.

Eco-Barbie!!

Now we know for sure that green consumption -- and its for-profit cousin, greenwashing --has gone mainstream. Mattel has announced a collection of "eco-friendly" accessories for Barbie, sold exclusively through Toys "R" Us. The Barbie BCause" line uses scrap fabric and trims that would otherwise be trash and turns them into patchwork bags and other accessories. Richard Dickson, Senior Vice President of Marketing, explains: Barbie BCause is for eco-conscious girls who believe that being environmentally-friendly is the right thing to do, and we are thrilled to give extra meaning and extra style to what was once just extra Barbie doll fabric.”

Here's a thought: Instead of buying Barbie BCause merchandise for a unrecyclable, over-packaged, sweatshop made plastic caricature of a woman, the eco-conscious girl could make her OWN totes and pillows out of fabric scraps. If she has naked dolls (and all of mine were bald and naked within weeks of acquisition), she could even make clothes for her dolls out of her own old T-shirts, pj's and other clothing. Since Mattel claims they developed the line to educate a younger audience on the importance of becoming more eco-friendly, I know they'd think this would be a great idea!

Greenwashing Index

Thanks to Treehugger, I've found a great new resource for consumer education about environmentalism and greenwashing (making vague, misleading or false claims about a "green" product). The Greenwashing Index invites consumers to post and rate ads, and includes commentary by media experts that adds additional depth to the ratings.

Green is the New Black

Today's Toronto Star has a nifty commentary today about an "environmentally friendly" clothing line introduced by CTV's eTalk and manufactured by Canadian manufacturer Brüzer. The olive-colored tees feature the catchy slogan "green is the new black" and, according to eTalk's website,

"are made from bamboo and organic cotton, material that is highly sustainable and grows quickly without use of pesticides or fertilizers. Naturally fresh with anti-bacterial properties, eShirts feature naturally charged negative ions, which have a positive effect on mind and body, and contain natural micro gaps that siphon away body moisture."

The catch? The fabric might be green, but the dyes...not so much. Now, having a PhD in textiles usually isn't particularly useful or marketable, but it does equip me to be able to say that being an environmentally-conscientious fashionista is not easy. Cotton is an agricultural product, and even organic cotton uses resources that could be used for food crops, which can be a problem. (See also the problems now stemming from diverting corn from the food chain to your fuel tank.) Synthetic fibers -- nylon, acrylic, polyester -- are petrochemicals, aka fossil fibers. Rayon is recycled, but its manufacture involves the use of carbon disulfide, implicated in hearing loss in textile workers. Wool, silk, linen, lycra, hemp, bamboo: no fiber is completely green, and that's not even getting into the additional complications of dyes, finishes and laundering/dry cleaning.

Assuming naturism is not an option, what does a Nice White Lady do? Americans hate to hear this, but the problem is not so much WHAT we consume but the bottomless pit of our desire. Forty tee shirts? Twelve pairs of organic cotton jeans? A different pair of shoes for each day of the month? Why, why, why? Consider this: when Hurricane Andrew, (after Katrina the second most destructive storm in our history) hit Florida in 1992, the Red Cross issued an anti-plea: no used clothing. Even in the midst of 26.5 billion dollars' worth of destruction, there was enough second-hand clothing in Florida to clothe the naked many times over. If the clothing factories all shut down tomorrow, it would be a while before most of us literally had nothing to wear.

Here's what's in my closet: 5 linear feet of clothes, including two pairs of jeans (the old ones and the new ones). Mostly "classic" garments. No fad items.  Some of my favorite items are thrift-store finds, like my $3 Benetton sweater. When I buy something new, I discard or donate something old.