Cora Ball is simply a laundry ball that collects microfibers and prevents them from getting into the ocean. As I explained in Part 5 of my series The Real Global Price of What You Wear, synthetic fabrics shed microfibers during washing, which then enter our waterways, pollute the oceans, and ultimately harm fish, marine mammals, and even humans.
When you use a Cora Ball in your washing machine, it collects these microfibers. The company cites a 2020 study that indicated that using a Cora Ball “prevents 31% of the microfibers per load from washing downstream” and “helps prevent microfibers from breaking off your clothes” in the first place.1 I’m not clear on how it prevents fibers from breaking off clothes, so I’m not sure about this claim. A 2019 study claimed Cora Ball captured 26% of microfibers,2 and a 2021 study put the number at just 10%. The latter study described that the “difference between the two studies can be explained by the different length of studied fibre…since the trapping efficiency of Cora Ball increases with the size (length and lint) of fibres.”3 (The studies also indicated that the Guppy Bag has a higher rate of microfiber collection.)
People researching how to keep plastic out of the ocean invented the Cora Ball. The co-founders of Cora Ball “first founded the nonprofit Rozalia Project for a Clean Ocean to launch their mission of preserving a thriving marine ecosystem by tackling marine debris through cleanup, education, research, and solutions development.”4 The company now addresses other plastic problems through non-plastic product creation.
The company makes the laundry balls from recycled plastic, manufactures them in the United States, and the company even has a take-back program!
Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay.
So I Tried It
I ordered one about 6 months ago and threw it in my washer and left it in for every wash. For the first couple of months, I didn’t see much collecting in it – just a few pet and human hairs, and a single loose thread or two. I finally started seeing a tiny bit of accumulated lint, but not enough to even pick out of the ball. From Cora Ball’s welcome email, this seemed fairly normal: “Sometimes, after everyday clothing loads, you may not see much. It may be there accumulating and tangling up with hair and larger fibers, it’s just too small to see and you will be able to remove it when the tangles do get big enough to grab.”5 So I just left it in the machine for months.
Then I made a mistake. I had purchased some fabric for a sewing project and washed it before doing the project (as is often recommended). The fabric frayed and got badly tangled in the Cora Ball. I’d also washed a blanket with fringe, and that also got tangled in the ball. All are made of cotton and should not be as harmful to the environment as synthetic fabrics. But the company recommends not washing those types of things with their laundry ball. On their FAQ page: “We recommend that you DO NOT wash anything with lace, tassels, chunky or wide-knit, crocheted sections, or fraying threads with Cora Ball.”6 Those mistakes left me with this mess:
Photos by Marie Cullis.
Cleaning the Cora Ball
I spent about 30 minutes using scissors and my fingers to try to remove the strings and threads, but I couldn’t get all of it out. I certainly can’t replace it at $46.00 per ball, but it’s still usable and I’m not going to give up on it.
Up close, some of the microfibers or “lint” are visible in the threads (it looks gray and fuzzy):
Photos by Marie Cullis.
The Real Solutions
Of course, the real solutions lie in avoiding synthetic textiles in the first place. While I buy as little fast fashion as possible, some inevitably enters my home since I buy some of my family’s clothing second-hand. You don’t always have a choice in the fabric content of second-hand clothing.
Is it better to buy second-hand clothing or newly produced natural fiber clothing?
Both are good practices. Though in general, the answer is always TO BUY LESS. For my family, we buy second-hand because it is far more affordable than new clothing of any type. It’s better for the environment since those clothing items have already been produced. And it is always better to reuse rather than put them in a landfill or ship them to developing countries, where the discarded items may worsen that country’s waste problems.
While I ask that people focus on shifting away from synthetic clothing and fabrics, buy less, and buy second-hand when able, I do think that Cora Ball can help with already-owned synthetics. And I recognize that some outdoor gear and swimwear must be made from synthetics. While Cora Ball will help, it is not the only solution to our global pollution problems.
So I’m asking that if you buy one, please don’t think you’re done helping solve the crisis. Continue to think about these problems and make improvements. I’m certainly going to continue using mine.
If you’ve tried this product, I’d love for you to leave me a comment about your experience. Thank you for reading, and please share and subscribe!
This is an honest review, and I did not get paid or receive goods in exchange for this review.
Footnotes:
Article, “The efficiency of devices intended to reduce microfibre release during clothes washing,” by Imogen E. Napper, Aaron C. Barrett, Richard C. Thompson, Science of The Total Environment, Volume 738, October 10, 2020. ↩︎
Article, “Capturing microfibers – marketed technologies reduce microfiber emissions from washing machines,” by Hayley K. McIlwraith, Jack Lin, Lisa M. Erdle, Nicholas Mallos, Miriam L. Diamond, Chelsea M. Rochman, Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 139, February 2019. ↩︎
Article, “Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying,” by Kärkkäinen, N. and Sillanpää, M., Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Volume 28, April 2021. ↩︎
Page, “Meet the Cora Ball Team,” coraball.com, August 16, 2022. ↩︎
Page, “Frequently Asked Questions,” coraball.com, accessed July 26, 2025. ↩︎
Page, “Frequently Asked Questions,” coraball.com, accessed July 26, 2025. ↩︎
I don’t usually write about politics, and especially not elections. But this year is different.
The stakes are super high.
If Trump wins, his administration will enact an initiative called Project 2025. Written by the Heritage Foundation, is the far-right’s 900-page policy playbook (their words, not mine) for the next Republican president. If you’re not familiar, I encourage you to learn about it.1 It changes many things, from the basic structure of our government to demolishing the Department of Education, to mass deportations and the reduction of human rights. Many in the Republican Party take it very seriously.
Today I want to tell you how Project 2025 will harm us, the environment, and the climate crisis. It will halt all progress on the climate crisis and worsen, especially since the U.S. is one of the biggest contributors to climate change.
Simply put, Project 2025 “seeks to gut the country’s 250-year-old system of checks and balances in order to implement extreme policies that would increase global temperatures and undercut developing countries’ efforts to remain resilient in the face of climate impacts.”2
It saddens me to write this article and I’ve avoided it for a long time.
But with the election upon us and the polls so closely tied, I think people should know the risks.
“Simply put, Project 2025 would be game over for climate progress.” -Sierra Club3
Project 2025 Will Negatively Impact the Environment
We will become a nation of “Profit over Planet” if we elect Trump. Photo by Markus Spiske on Pexels.
“An analysis conducted by the United Kingdom-based Carbon Brief found that a Trump presidency would lead to 400 billion metric tons of additional emissions in the U.S. by 2030 — the emissions output of the European Union and Japan combined.” -Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections4
Project 2025 tells us exactly what the far-right intends to do. They’re not even trying to hide it – they’ve published it! You can download the book for free and read it yourself.
But protecting the environment, endangered species, and climate change are not part of their agenda. They intend to roll back many environment-related laws and policies. Here are the highlights of Project 2025’s goals regarding the environment, courtesy of the Sierra Club:
“Eliminating or rolling back safeguards that protect Americans’ access to clean air, clean drinking water, and protected public lands.
Handing our public lands over to oil and gas companies to drill whenever and wherever they want, including in some of our most precious and pristine public lands, while leaving us to deal with the pollution and toxic waste they leave behind.
Halting all government action to reach our climate goals, putting Americans and the U.S. economy at further risk of more extreme weather and a faster-warming planet.
Privatizing the National Weather Service and preventing it from forecasting extreme weather events and providing research on the advancing climate crisis.”5
In short, “The document calls for ‘unleashing all of America’s energy resources’ by eliminating federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands, curtailing federal investments in renewable energy technologies, and easing environmental permitting restrictions and procedures for new fossil fuel projects such as power plants.”6
Project 2025 intends to let the oil and gas corporations take the lead, because of greed. The authors of Project 2025 erroneously wrote, “Environmental ideologues would ban the fuels that run almost all of the world’s cars, planes, factories, farms, and electricity grids.” This is nowhere close to the truth. No one wants to ban these fuels. We want to reduce our reliance on them. Project 2025 advises that “The next conservative President should go beyond merely defending America’s energy interests but go on offense, asserting them around the world. America’s vast reserves of oil and natural gas are not an environmental problem; they are the lifeblood of economic growth.”7 But we know that there are many other sources of economic growth.
“[Project 2025] would effectively abandon America’s critical leadership role in addressing the climate crisis.” -Center for American Progress8
Moreover, Project 2025 recommends withdrawing the U.S. from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. Trump already withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Agreement during his first term.
“If enacted, the policies proposed in Project 2025 would seriously jeopardize the world’s ability to avoid the worst impacts of climate change associated with breaching the 1.5 degree Celsius temperature rise limit set out in the Paris Agreement.” -Center for American Progress9
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash.
Project 2025 intends to reduce the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They will mandate that states handle their own environmental issues. The playbook indicates that the federal EPA can provide some expertise, a few resources, and be supportive under the guise that the people living in states should make decisions about where they live. “EPA’s structure and mission should be greatly circumscribed to reflect the principles of cooperative federalism and limited government. This will require significant restructuring and streamlining of the agency.”10 However, the states have never had the resources to manage environmental problems, often created by wealthy corporations. This is why the EPA was established in the first place.
“The environmental oversight capacities of the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency would be curbed significantly or eliminated altogether, preventing these agencies from tracking methane emissions, managing environmental pollutants and chemicals, and conducting climate change research.” -Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections11
Furthermore, when regulating the dumping of chemicals or agricultural runoff into a river, a state downstream would have no authority over what an upstream state discharges. This could result in the upstream state inadvertently polluting the water for those downstream. State-level regulation alone is insufficient to protect people from environmental pollution and toxic chemicals.
What this is really about is profit from energy, whether dirty or clean. The government wants to profit, and ensure its corporate affiliates profit to the fullest extent from energy production. The language in Project 2025, such as that “bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency quietly strangles domestic energy production through difficult-to-understand rulemaking processes,” is just ridiculous.12
Project 2025 specifically calls out the Obama and Biden Administrations for pursuing renewable energy. Renewable anything, is a no-brainer. Of course we should be looking at renewable energy. But the authors use inflammatory language to describe their version of recent history: “The Biden Administration’s assault on the energy sector as the Administration uses its regulatory might to make coal, oil, and natural gas operations very expensive and increasingly inaccessible while forcing the economy to build out and rely on unreliable renewables. This approach has also been applied to pesticides and chemicals as the Biden Administration pushes the ‘greening’ of agriculture and manufacturing among other industrial activities.”13
There is no assault on the energy sector. Those administrations are trying to reduce our sole reliance on fossil fuels, not ban them. We lack the infrastructure needed to eliminate their total use anyway. And the ‘greening’ of pesticides and chemicals is weak among all administrations – we are exposed to toxic chemicals in everything. We certainly don’t need more chemical exposure!
The absurd language in Project 2025 persists: “Although the U.S. environmental story is very positive, there has been a return to fear-based rhetoric within the agency, especially as it pertains to the perceived threat of climate change. Mischaracterizing the state of our environment generally and the actual harms reasonably attributable to climate change specifically is a favored tool that the Left uses to scare the American public into accepting their ineffective, liberty-crushing regulations, diminished private property rights, and exorbitant costs.”14 Again, the science about the changing climate is clear and climate change is not a perception. There is a ninety-seven percent consensus among scientists across the world. And no side or administration is trying to scare Americans.
“In effect, the Biden EPA has once again presented a false choice to the American people: that they have to choose between a healthy environment and a strong, growing economy.”15 This is false. This is not anything close to what the Biden Administration, or any other administration, has ever indicated. Not once.
“[Project 2025] would also undermine the country’s extensive network of environmental and climate policies and alter the future of American fossil fuel production, climate action, and environmental justice.” -Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections11
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Photo courtesy of NOAA Photo Library on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY 2.0).
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) mission is “to better understand our natural world and help protect its precious resources extends beyond national borders to monitor global weather and climate, and work with partners around the world.” The organization states that “From daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and climate monitoring to fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting marine commerce, NOAA’s products and services support economic vitality and affect more than one-third of America’s gross domestic product.”17 This is an important agency!
But Project 2025 does not agree: “The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.”18
NOAA consists of six main offices:
The National Weather Service (NWS)
The National Ocean Service (NOS)
The Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR)
The National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS)
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
The Office of Marine and Aviation Operations and NOAA Corps
According to Project 2025: “Together, these form a colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity. This industry’s mission emphasis on prediction and management seems designed around the fatal conceit of planning for the unplannable. That is not to say NOAA is useless, but its current organization corrupts its useful functions. It should be broken up and downsized.”19
Climate change alarm industry? The only alarm is that the climate is changing. And we have to figure out how we humans can adapt and survive the changes. Or we won’t.
Political Appointees, Not Federal Employees
Photo by Jose M on Unsplash.
Further, Project 2025 intends to “Ensure Appointees Agree with Administration Aims. Scientific agencies like NOAA are vulnerable to obstructionism of an Administration’s aims if political appointees are not wholly in sync with Administration policy. Particular attention must be paid to appointments in this area.”20 This refers to the fact that Project 2025 plans to change all federal workers to ‘political appointees’ that align with the conservative right only. They will not appoint anyone who does not align with their beliefs, regardless of education or expertise. This means that no one who believes in environmentalism or climate change will be working for the federal government. That is beyond disturbing.
The National Weather Service
Photo courtesy of NOAA Photo Library on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY 2.0).
The National Weather Service (NWS) is super important. They provide the very data that provides us with weather predictions and tracks major storms, tornados, hurricanes, flooding, wind, etc. This organization is how we all get our weather data (weekly forecasts) and major announcements (i.e., hurricane warnings).
From Project 2025: “Data collected by the department should be presented neutrally, without adjustments intended to support any one side in the climate debate.”21 There is no debate; the science is clear. And, the NWS is not politically aligned.
So Project 2025 wants to change the NWS: “Americans rely on weather forecasts and warnings provided by local radio stations and colleges that are produced not by the NWS, but by private companies such as AccuWeather.”22 The authors cited a study that Accuweather was the most accurate than competitors and implied they are better than NWS – but the National Weather Service was not one of the listed competitors. This is because Accuweather and other weather outlets get their data from the NWS.
The fact is that “NWS forecasts, warnings, and data and products form a national information database and infrastructure used by other governmental agencies, the private sector, the public, and the global community.”23 This is a free service the government provides. Every news and weather station gets their data from the National Weather Service and translates it to us.
If you’ve ever received a flood, tornado, or hurricane warning, that is the National Weather Service.
If you have a weather radio, that is the National Weather Service.
But Project 2025 wants the NWS to fully commercialize its forecasting operations. They believe private companies, like Accuweather, will pay for it. They want the government to sell this information. So it’s really about money and greed.
“[Project 2025] appears to leave the National Hurricane Center intact, saying the data it collects should be ‘presented neutrally, without adjustments intended to support any one side in the climate debate.’ But the National Hurricane Center pulls much of its data from the National Weather Service, as do most other private weather service companies, and eliminating public weather data could devastate Americans’ access to accurate weather forecasts.” -Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections24
What’s worse, Project 2025 plans to eliminate the National Flood Insurance Program and have flood insurance sold by private insurers. “That notion skates right over the fact that the federal program was initially established because private insurers found that it was economically unfeasible to insure the nation’s flood-prone homes — long before climate change began wreaking havoc on the insurance market.”25 So if you live in a flood zone, you must vote against Trump and Project 2025. Or you’ll likely not be able to afford flood insurance or a new home.
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
View of a hurricane from the International Space Station. Image courtesy of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY 2.0).
Project 2025 would seek to downsize the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). OAR, also called NOAA Research, “enables better forecasts, earlier warnings for natural disasters, and a greater understanding of the Earth.”26 The Project 2025 authors wrote, “OAR provides theoretical science, as opposed to the applied science of the National Hurricane Center. OAR is, however, the source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism. The preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded. OAR is a large network of research laboratories, an undersea research center, and several joint research institutes with universities. These operations should be reviewed with an aim of consolidation and reduction of bloat.” We must vote climate deniers out. It is not alarmism nor is it theoretical. We can see climate change every day with our own eyes.
30×30 and America the Beautiful
Photo by Adam Kool on Unsplash.
Under Executive Order 14008, President Biden issued a call to action to conserve, connect, and restore at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030 for the sake of our economy, our health, and our well-being. America the Beautiful is “a decade-long challenge to pursue a locally led and voluntary, nationwide effort to conserve, connect, and restore the lands, waters, and wildlife upon which we all depend,” with eight key principles that help the environment, people, and the economy.27
Project 2025 calls for withdrawing both initiatives. “The 30×30 Executive Order and the American the Beautiful Initiative are being used to advance an agenda to close vast areas of the ocean to commercial activities, including fishing, while rapidly advancing offshore wind energy development to the detriment of fisheries and other existing ocean-based industries.”28 These initiatives would provide for more Marine Protected Areas. We’ve overfished many parts of the ocean, and other activities such as deepsea mining and oil drilling have harmed marine life. If we kill off all of the fish, we aren’t going to have any left.
“Don’t boo. Vote.” -Barack Obama
Endangered Species Act(ESA)
The bald eagle, our national bird, was saved by the removal of DDT and the Endangered Species Act. Image by Dee from Pixabay.
The Trump Administration passed two regulations that limited the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The first one made it easier “to remove a species from the endangered list” and weakened protections for threatened species. Regulators were also “allowed to conduct economic assessments — for instance, estimating lost revenue from a prohibition on logging in a critical habitat — when deciding whether a species warrants protection.”29 It also made it more difficult for regulators to factor in climate change.
The second Trump Administration regulation limited the definition of ‘critical habitat’ for imperiled species and required regulators not to designate areas as critical habitat if there would be greater economic benefit from developing them.30 AP News wrote that this “forced the agency to disprove ‘speculative claims of economic harm made by industries such as mining, logging, and oil and gas’ as they sought to extract resources from public lands,” citing Earthjustice.org.31 The Biden Administration repealed both. Project 2025 calls to “rescind the Biden rules and reinstate the Trump rules regarding” the Endangered Species Act rules defining Critical Habitat and Critical Habitat Exclusions.32
But it gets worse.
Project 2025 also wants to:
Delist the grizzly bear in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystems.
Delist the gray wolf in the lower 48 states under the ESA.
Direct the Fish and Wildlife Service to end its abuse of Section 10(j) of the ESA by re-introducing so-called “experiment species” populations into areas that no longer qualify as habitat and lie outside the historic ranges of those species, which brings with it the full weight of the ESA in areas previously without federal government oversight.33 This means that the Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) may designate a listed species as experimental and release them in an area outside of its current range that is also geographically isolated from other populations of the species. “Treating the experimental population as threatened allows the FWS the discretion to devise management programs and special regulations for that population.”34 It is unclear what Project 2025 considers “abuse” of said section, but we can assume it will pose restrictions on the Fish & Wildlife Service’s protections.
Abolish the Biological Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and obtain necessary scientific research about species of concern from universities via competitive requests for proposals.35Currently, the “USGS is the biological research arm of the U.S. Department of the Interior, providing unbiased science to support the conservation of public lands and their resources.”36 We don’t need to take the lowest bid on any scientific research, which is the purpose of requests for proposals.
Direct the Fish & Wildlife Service to design and implement an Endangered Species Act program that ensures independent decision-making by ending reliance on so-called species specialists who have obvious self-interest, ideological bias, and land-use agendas. Of course, scientists who study specific species have a vested interest in them and their survival. We wouldn’t want someone without interest to make these decisions.
Modify Regulations Implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act. These acts are currently being abused at a cost to fisheries and Native American subsistence activities around the U.S.37 It is not clear what abuses Project 2025 is referring to here. The Marine Mammal Protection Act is a vital law protecting species we are at risk of losing forever.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA)
Photo by REGINE THOLEN on Unsplash.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), passed in 1918, prohibits the killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transporting of protected migratory bird species, eggs, and nests without prior authorization by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). “For decades the FWS, under both Republican and Democratic presidents, interpreted the rule to prohibit ‘incidental take’—the unintentional but predictable killing of birds, often at industrial sites. The FWS typically enforced only egregious cases of incidental take, such as when it levied a $100 million fine against BP for the deaths of an estimated one million birds in its 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. But the threat of prosecution gave the government leverage to urge companies to adopt often simple and inexpensive practices to prevent avian deaths, such as covering oil pits and spacing power lines far enough apart to avoid electrocuting raptors.”38 This act protected birds for over one hundred years.
However, in January 2021, the Trump administration implemented a rule permitting companies and individuals to kill migratory birds, provided it was unintentional. Then the Biden administration repealed this rule in September 2021, restoring protections for the birds. Project 2025 plans to reinstate the Trump-era regulations regarding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).39
Please Vote Accordingly
Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels.
The risks are far above and beyond what I’ve covered here. Project 2025 is a blueprint for completely restructuring the government at almost every level, every department, and every sector. It’s a gut job affecting far more than climate change and the environment. I encourage you to read it for yourself.
I felt it important to highlight some of the proposed changes in Project 2025. Especially with the election less than two weeks away. People deserve to know the devastating effects it could have on our lives, endangered species, and the environment. I’ve only covered a few of the environmental topics in this article. But the more I read of the 900-page document, the worse it gets.
Thank you for reading – please share and subscribe. Most importantly, go vote!
Additional Resources:
Article, “What Project 2025 Would Do to the Environment – and How We Will Respond,” earthjustice.org, August 30, 2024.
Article, “Conservation Groups Say Project 2025 Would Gut Wildlife and Public Land Protections,” sierraclub.org, August 20, 2024.
Blog, “New Modeling Shows How Bad Project 2025 Would Be Compared to a Clean Energy Future,” evergreenaction.com, August 15, 2024.
Footnotes:
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023. Even if you only read the Foreword of this manifesto, you will find the entire basis of the conservative right’s agenda. ↩︎
Article, “Project 2025 Would Jeopardize Global Climate Action,” Center for American Progress, August 19, 2024. ↩︎
Article, “What is Project 2025 and why would it be devastating for the environment?” Sierra Club, accessed October 16, 2016. ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Article, “What is Project 2025 and why would it be devastating for the environment?” Sierra Club, accessed October 16, 2016. ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Foreword. The rhetoric gets even worse, asserting that the left would stop relying on human intelligence, which is insulting: “Abandoning confidence in human resilience and creativity in responding to the challenges of the future would raise impediments to the most meaningful human activities. They would stand human affairs on their head, regarding human activity itself as fundamentally a threat to be sacrificed to the god of nature.” ↩︎
Article, “Project 2025 Would Jeopardize Global Climate Action,” Center for American Progress, August 19, 2024. ↩︎
Article, “Project 2025 Would Jeopardize Global Climate Action,” Center for American Progress, August 19, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 13, “Environmental Protection Agency.” ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Foreword. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 13, “Environmental Protection Agency.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 13, “Environmental Protection Agency.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 13, “Environmental Protection Agency.” ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Page, “About our agency,” noaa.gov, updated May 2, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Page, “About the NWS: Forecasts and Service,” weather.gov, accessed October 20, 2024. ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Article, “What Project 2025 would do to climate policy in the US,” by Zoya Teirstein, Yale Climate Connections, July 29, 2024. ↩︎
Page, “About NOAA Research,” noaa.gov, accessed October 22, 2024. ↩︎
Page, “America the Beautiful,” Department of the Interior, accessed October 21, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Article, “U.S. Significantly Weakens Endangered Species Act,” by Lisa Friedman, New York Times, August 12, 2019. ↩︎
Press Release, “Trump Administration Finalizes Another Rule To Gut Endangered Species Act,” EarthJustice.org, December 17, 2020. ↩︎
Article, “Biden administration reverses Trump endangered species rule,” by John Flesher, AP News, July 21, 2022. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 16, “Department of the Interior.” ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 16, “Department of the Interior.” ↩︎
Fact Sheet, “What is a 10(j) Rule?,” US Fish & Wildlife Service, October 2018. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 16, “Department of the Interior.” ↩︎
Page, “Biology,” usgs.gov, accessed October 22, 2024. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 21, “Department of Commerce.” ↩︎
Article, “Trump to Birds: Drop Dead,” by Andy McGlashen, audubon.org, January 5, 2021. ↩︎
Book, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, The Heritage Foundation, 2023, Chapter 16, “Department of the Interior.” ↩︎
One of the best ways to fight fast fashion and textile waste is to make your existing wardrobe last longer. We can do this by washing our clothes less, but better, and by repairing and mending. “According to the EPA, for every 2 million tons of textiles we keep in circulation and out of landfills, we can reduce carbon emissions equivalent to taking 1 million cars off the road,” wrote Elizabeth L. Cline. “In fact, reusing a ton of textiles saves twice as much carbon as recycling a ton of plastic, one of the most commonly recycled materials.”1
But what else can we do?
Stop Shopping!
“Today’s rapid cycle of production, buying, and disposal of clothing impairs our ability to feel satisfied and connected with our wardrobes. It’s time for a new, slower approach to repairing clothes and to cherishing what we have.” -Zoe Edwards, Mend It, Wear It, Love It!2
Stop shopping. Or at least shop much less. Since most of us overbuy, we should buy less clothing going forward.
You don’t have to be a minimalist, but you don’t need closets and dressers and shelves overflowing with clothing. You can’t possibly wear all of it. Calculate how much clothing you need by how often you do laundry. For most people, this is one or two week’s worth. Then, account for the few special pieces you need – a black dress or a suit, or maybe you wear uniforms to work – it will be unique for everyone. Own only the amount of workout clothing you actually work out in. Don’t keep clothes that don’t fit (unless you regularly fluctuate in sizes). Limit excess of all types of clothing.
Subconsciously, or maybe even consciously, clothing represents who we are or the person we want others to perceive us as. Wear the clothing that makes you feel good. But fight against the influence of advertising, trends, and fast fashion sales. As Dana Thomas in Fashionopolis wrote, “[Fashion] preys on our insecurities and our increasingly short attention spans. We are prone to a barrage of fashion images – on social media, on television, on billboards, in the press – begging us, taunting us to indulge in what one executive described as ‘temporary treasure.'”3 Be selective and intentional about the pieces you purchase.
“Volume is what gave birth to sweatshops. Volume is what makes fast fashion so profitable. Volume is what’s stuffing our closets. Volume is what’s rotting in our landfills.” -Dana Thomas, Fashionopolis4
Photo by Junko Nakase on Unsplash.
We Can Spend Our Money Differently
“The number one reason we buy what we don’t wear is because it’s on sale or it’s so cheap that we’re willing to overlook flaws.” -Elizabeth L. Cline, The Conscious Closet5
Don’t buy a $5 shirt because it is cheap. Buy a shirt because it feels good on your body. Embrace slow fashion, which is the idea that a thoughtful and intentional wardrobe greatly reduces environmental impact. It is the opposite of excessive production, overcomplicated supply chains, and mindless consumption.
“Most of our clothes are bought on impulse; we’re buying items without wider thought of how they fit into our lives or our wardrobes.” -Elizabeth L. Cline, The Conscious Closet6
Buy Quality, Not Quantity
Buy more classic pieces and less trendy items. This will allow you to mix and match more easily and allow you to wear your clothes much, much longer. Buy fewer, higher-quality pieces and buy second-hand when possible. In The Conscious Closet, Elizabeth L. Cline wrote that you should be skeptical of cheap and heavily discounted items. She says to try everything on because it takes more time and hassle to return an item than to just try it on in the first place. Buy one or two quality pieces at a time instead of trying to revamp your whole closet in one shopping trip. Plan ahead, and hold out for those great items instead of settling for items that are just okay.7
“Consumption has accelerated to such a furious pace that most of us don’t thoroughly consider what we purchase.” -Katrina Rodabaugh, Make Thrift Mend8
Cline offered these tips to identify quality clothing items:
Study the sewing and construction details of your own clothes that have lasted a long time. Look at your grandmother’s clothing or at clothes in vintage shops, as clothes made decades ago were not meant to be thrown away.
Check out a variety of brands and stores.
Look at men’s clothes, which are typically made better than women’s.
Quality includes good fabric, construction, fit, and a warranty. Usually the better the guarantee or warranty, the better the quality. “Nudie Jeans, a sustainable denim brand, offers free repairs on jeans for life, for example. Patagonia offers repairs, replacements, or refunds for damaged products or if the product simply doesn’t live up to expectations.” Other brands offer repairs within one or two years of purchase.9
“Quality clothing is made to last, wear well, and look good over time.” -Elizabeth L. Cline, The Conscious Closet10
Beware of Outlets and Off-Price Stores
There has been a drop in quality at factory outlets since the 2000s. These stores used to sell name-brand items with slight defects and imperfections, or overstock. But now most outlet stores have a special line of lower quality items, made just for those stores. It is the same for off-price stores such as T.J. Maxx, Ross Dress for Less, Marshalls, etc. These stores carry clothing without hems, fabrics that shed fibers in your hands when you touch them, and no regularity in sizing.
“Off-price stores and outlets were once a reliable way to land well-made and name-brand products at a discount, but no longer. Today, many sell a lot of factory rejects or canceled orders – the products that should have never made it to a store in the first place…[they are] manufactured exclusively for these stores and [are] intentionally mislabeled as discounted.” -Elizabeth L. Cline11
Image by Michal Jarmoluk from Pixabay.
Buy from Responsible Brands
Research which brands are ethical and sustainable, or follow sustainable fashion writers like Elizabeth L. Cline to get the information. Or look for brands that use recycled textiles to make new clothing, such as Patagonia and Osom Brand.
Focus on what is most important to you. Sophie Benson, author of Sustainable Wardrobe, wrote, “Just as style is personal, so too are our moral drivers. For instance, I’m vegan, therefore I wouldn’t buy new leather. You might appreciate the longevity of leather but want to ensure it’s vegetable-tanned. One person might want to do their best to keep clothes in circulation by shopping exclusively secondhand via charity shops, another might be dead set on supporting independent brands who manufacture small batches at every opportunity. The better you understand your own principles and priorities, the easier it becomes to know whether a brand or product lives up to them.”12
Affordability
Sometimes buying higher quality or ethical/sustainable means the monetary cost is higher. Conscious fashion brands are mainly independent startups and smaller companies.13 So those companies have a higher overhead because they use responsibly sourced fabrics, little or no chemicals, and pay proper wages to workers. See Additional Resources below for a few brands that have good labor standards and sustainable practices, as well as an article on sustainable brands by budget.
But affordability is an issue. While it’s easy to say ‘just buy higher quality pieces’ or ‘purchase from sustainable fashion companies,” the reality of that is often difficult. What author Leah Thomas calls ‘the elephant in the room’: not everyone can affordably access sustainable clothing. Sustainable clothing often costs far more than the $10 shirt at H&M. Thomas argues that many sustainable fashion brands also do not offer plus-sized clothing even though over 60% of American women wear a size 14 or larger.14
Image by Daniel Kapelrud from Pixabay.
Second-Hand Clothing
Affordability is why second-hand clothing is key: you can find higher-quality pieces without paying the high retail price. There are thousands of thrift stores, yard sales, and second-hand shops everywhere, as well as online stores.
Buying second-hand is always better for the environment and much more affordable.
There are also consignment shops in most areas. Just search “consignment near me” on the internet. These shops can vary from children’s clothing to boutique clothing to upscale women’s wear. Items at consignment shops have been inspected and vetted more thoroughly than items at thrift stores, and are sometimes cleaned or repaired before being sold.15
Used clothing is also all over the internet. Sites like eBay, Poshmark, The RealReal, Mercari, ThreadUp, and OfferUp are just a few places where you can find any type of clothing you want.*
Image by StockSnap from Pixabay.
Stop ‘Wardrobing’
‘Wardrobing’ refers to buying the same item in multiple sizes when shopping online, and returning the ones that don’t fit. Now, it would help if companies would standardize sizes, especially in women’s clothes. But try using the size charts and measurement guides on clothing sites when they are offered.
The reason is that returned clothing sometimes gets landfilled. “Reverse logistics -which includes things like opening returned packages, inspecting returned items, steaming or cleaning them, adding them back into the system and repackaging them – can be time-consuming and costly, so many brands simply cut their losses and dispose of returned items. In the US, 2.3 billion kilograms (5 billion pounds) in weight of returned goods ends up in landfill each year, creating 15 million tonnes of carbon emissions.”16 This is a poor practice that companies should be barred from, but let’s do what we can to reduce returns in the meantime.
Build a Capsule Wardrobe
A capsule wardrobe is a curated but versatile wardrobe. As Elizabeth L. Cline wrote, “What defines a capsule wardrobe is not its smallness but the versatility and intentionality of its contents.“17
Courtney Carver’s Project 333 is a great capsule wardrobe plan! It embraces minimalism and stress reduction, while fighting fast fashion and supporting sustainability.
“You get to wear your favorite things every day.” -Courtney Carver18
Renting
Renting is another viable solution. According to Dana Thomas, author of Fashionopolis, the average professional woman spends $3,000 or more per year on buying clothing. “Renting fashion could change the entire shape of the apparel industry. Imagine if that $3,000-a-year clothing budget was spent on renting instead of buying. Fewer clothes would be made, and what is out there could be circulated more, tossed less.” Rent the Runway is a well-known example.19 See Additional Resources below for an article covering several rental subscription services.
Photo by form PxHere.
Consume Less
We need companies to produce less clothing, and we need to consume less. What changes can you make to reduce clothing waste?
So slow down, buy less, buy natural, buy better, buy second-hand. You’ll save money, time, and the environment. Please share and subscribe, and thank you for reading!
“If I had to give one piece of advice on what turned my wardrobe into a Slow Fashion wardrobe, I’d say ‘pause.’ If we could just pause our shopping habits, slow down our consumption, and pay attention to the clothes we bring into our homes, we’d collectively make a huge shift.” –Katrina Rodabaugh, Make Thrift Mend20
Photo by EVG Kowalievska on Pexels.
Additional Resources:
sustainyourstyle.org is a website dedicated to helping people understand and make sustainable decisions related to fashion.
fashionrevolution.org is a group that campaigns “for a clean, safe, fair, transparent and accountable fashion industry.”
Video, TEDx Talk, “I Broke Up With Fast Fashion and You Should Too,” Gabriella Smith, April 10, 2019.
Here are a few conscious brands and related articles:
Eileen Fisher: Eileen Fisher produces 25% in the US and has living wages as part of its code of conduct.21 Their Renew program is a take-back and resell program. “Three-fourths of [the] garments are reconditioned with treatments like overdyeing with pomegranate or safflower to camouflage stains and embroidering with traditional Japanese Boro and sashiko stitching, which can hide, or highlight, tears and moth holes.”22*
Article, “The Pain of Progress: Our Renew Program Reaches 2 Million Garments,” by Kris Herndon, Eileen Fisher Journal, April 10, 2023.
Patagonia is a company that follows high standards for production, labor, employment, and environmental concerns. The company also buys, repairs, and resells its own brand of clothing and accessories.*
Reformation: They are actively working toward a living wage for its Los Angeles workers. 23 Their “goal is to source 100% of our fabrics from recycled, regenerative, or renewable materials by 2025.”*
Elizabeth Suzann: This is a Nashville-based slow fashion brand that uses responsible materials and pays double the minimum wage in Tennessee.24*
Article, ” 99 Sustainable Fashion Brands By Budget (2023),” The Good Trade, October 3, 2023.
Article, “How To Thrift-Flip Your Wedding Dress,” canvasbridal.com, accessed January 6, 2024.
Renting Clothing:
Article, “Thinking About Fashion Rentals? Consider These 7 Services,” by Alexis Bennett Parker, Vogue, January 12, 2023.
If you’ve been reading articles from my series about the clothing industry, then you probably want to know more about what you can do about fashion waste. The short answer is that first, you can take good care of the clothes you have by laundering them well and repairing them. Second, stop buying too much clothing – even when it’s a great deal! Try to buy only the pieces you really love and that fit well. Don’t just buy something because you found it on the clearance rack.
Globally, we have to stop the overproduction of clothing and fast fashion.
As Elizabeth L. Cline noted, in America, we spend more money on restaurants than we do on clothes. We don’t see any reason to spend more on fashion because of the availability of cheap clothes. “As any economist will tell you, cheaper prices stimulate consumption. And the current low rate of fashion has spurred a shopping free-for-all, where we are buying and hoarding roughly 20 billion garments per year as a nation…If we could only give up our clothing deals and steals, we might just see that there are far more fortifying, not to mention more flattering, ways of getting dressed.”4
“The most sustainable clothes are the ones already in your closet.” -Katrina Rodabaugh, Make Thrift Mend5
Photo by rawpixel.com form PxHere.
Wash Your Clothes Less
Washing our clothes less makes them last much longer. It also reduces the number of microfibers, that is, microscopic pieces of plastic from synthetic clothing, that enter our water systems. You can wear some articles several times before you launder them unless you sweat or spill something on them. You can freshen your clothes without washing them, by hanging them in the bathroom during a shower or hanging them outside. Read “Make Your Clothes Last Longer with Good Laundry Habits” for laundry tips.
“Americans in particular overwash their clothing and rely on machine washing instead of steaming or airing out their clothes, which shortens the life span of what we wear.” -Elizabeth L. Cline, The Concious Closet6
Photo by Alex Baber on Unsplash.
Mending
“When you take the time and effort to repair or improve a garment, you will value it and, more importantly, enjoy wearing it.” -Zoe Edwards, Mend It, Wear It, Love It!7
Mending can extend the life of your clothing and keep them out of the landfill. Learning basic sewing and embroidery is worth the effort because you can save money and protect the environment.
In her book, The Conscious Closet, Elizabeth L. Cline offered an entire chapter on how to perform basic repairs and instructions on several types of stitches without sewing skills or a sewing machine. A few common repairs include missing buttons, seam splits, loose stitching, applying patches, and darning socks. You can find tutorials for all of these in her book. Often you can find tutorials online for free, as well.
Cline also recommended using a fabric shaver to remove pills,8 which are the little bobbles of loose fibers that build up on your clothes. Sophie Benson, author of Sustainable Wardrobe, wrote that you can also reuse an old razor to remove pills. Just avoid pulling them off with your fingers because that can cause damage to the fabric.9
This is the fabric shaver I use and I’ve been happy with the results. This is not a paid promotion or affiliate product.
Tip: You can even find sewing materials and notions – and even sewing machines – at thrift stores and second-hand shops. You don’t necessarily have to pay retail for those things.
“Wear visibly mended clothes proudly. Visible mending is a great conversation starter, and a visibly mended garment is the perfect uniform for the reluctant activist because it does the heavy lifting for you. Whenever you wear something visibly mended and chat with someone about it, you’re raising awareness that mending is possible, it can be creative and colourful, and caring for our clothes is an important thing to do.” -Erin Lewis-Fitzgerald, Modern Mending10
Photo by Barbara Krysztofiak on Unsplash.
“In repairing our clothes, we send a message. With each stitch we declare, ‘I value the people who made this, I value the natural resources that went into making it and I value the version of myself that chose it.’ ” -Sophie Benson, Sustainable Wardrobe11
Hire A Tailor
If you don’t want to learn basic sewing or don’t have the time, you can take your items to a tailor. This costs more but still extends the life of the clothing you already own. Sophie Benson wrote, “Both alterations and repairs should very much be seen as part and parcel of the maintenance of our clothes. Any action that keeps your clothes in wearable condition is classed as maintenance, and this includes things like lowering hems, taking in or letting out waistbands, altering silhouettes and replacing linings. You might be surprised what a tailor can do.”12
“Through mending we slow down consumption, extend the life of our garments, and increase resilience and technical skill…As we mend our textiles we work on an individual scale to mend overconsumption, fast fashion, and the unethical treatment of people and the planet.” -Katrina Rodabaugh, Make Thrift Mend13
Reuse Old Clothes
You can reuse clothes for repair projects and even refashion them. You can also just find a way to reuse them around the house. “This is the way humans ‘recycled’ worn clothes for ages. Scrap denim is ideal for mending and patching…Cotton t-shirts make great cleaning cloths and rags. And worn or stained items and scuffed-up shoes are great to wear for yard work or other outdoor activities.”14
You can cut off the sleeves of a long-sleeved shirt and make a tank top, or make jeans into shorts. This is especially true for children’s clothing! Other clothes can be repurposed into bags, dog toys, or pillows. Use your imagination! The internet abounds with inspirational ideas!
“Slow fashion is…saving up to buy fewer pieces of higher quality and keeping them for longer (or forever!); it’s shopping secondhand; it’s repairing instead of throwing away; it’s brands making to order to reduce waste; it’s local or small batch production; it’s personal style not trends; it’s releases once or twice per year instead of every week. It’s our way out of this mess.” -Sophie Benson, Sustainable Wardrobe15
Wear Clothes Longer
This is the goal: To wear your existing clothing longer.
If you take good care of your clothes through good laundering and simple mending, your clothes will last a lot longer. This will save you money and time, and it is better for the environment. “According to Greenpeace, wearing your clothes for at least two years will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 24 percent.”16 We can all make a big impact when it comes to clothing.
“Mending, repairing, and caring for our clothes is the essence of sustainable fashion.” -Elizabeth L. Cline, The Conscious Closet17
I hope this helps! Feel free to leave me a comment about your ideas for caring for or repairing clothing. Thank you for reading, please share and subscribe!
Additional Resources:
Website of Erin Lewis-Fitzgerald, author of Modern Mending.
Reuse shop, FabScrap, “FABSCRAP diverts thousands of pounds of commercial textile waste from landfills every week. These pre-consumer materials are often in perfect condition.”
Photo by Sean Freese on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY 2.0 DEED).
If you read my article on replacing toxic fabric softener and dryer sheets, then it won’t surprise you that commercial laundry detergents also often contain harmful, toxic ingredients. The chemicals and fragrances are harmful to the human body as well as the environment. Additionally, many detergents come in some form of plastic container, whether it’s a bottle, plastic bag, or “pod.”
Homemade or DIY laundry detergents sound like a great alternative, but in practice, I have not found that to be the case. My conclusion is that while I cannot recommend a specific brand or set of ingredients, I can tell you what to avoid. Following are my findings.
DIY Laundry Detergents
Photo by Kim F on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC 2.0 DEED).
The photo above is not my own but still a familiar scene. I have tried many homemade DIY laundry detergent recipes from bloggers, authors, and environmentalists. Most homemade laundry detergents combine baking soda, washing soda, and/or borax, as well as a cleaning agent, typically grated bar soap. I even tried buying laundry bar soap that you dissolve in water and then use as a liquid detergent. But all had poor results. Our clothes either had an odor or what looked like grease stains on them. Our clothing, towels, and sheets just weren’t getting…clean.
Laundry bar. Photo by Marie Cullis.
The laundry bar dissolving in a reused white bucket. Photo by Marie Cullis.
Then I discovered that soap residue can actually trap dirt and oils in textiles. Kathryn Kellogg, author of 101 Ways To Go Zero Waste, advises against DIY laundry detergents. “Most homemade laundry detergent is really laundry soap, which can clog your washing machine, void the warranty, and ruin your clothes.”5 The soap doesn’t come out because modern washing machine agitators are not as tough on clothing as older machines were. According to Kellogg, a true laundry detergent does not contain fats and oils.6
Soap Nuts
Photo by Khadija Dawn Carryl on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED).
Soapnuts, which are actually berries, are the fruit of the Sapindus Mukorossi tree, which grows in India and Nepal. The husks, or shell, of the fruit “contains plant saponin, a completely natural and gentle soap that has been used for centuries to clean skin and clothes. Saponin works as a surfactant, breaking the surface tension of the water and creating a lather that lifts dirt and grease…this is just one example of how nature offers many solutions for…plastic-free living,” wrote Sanda Ann Harris, author of Say Goodbye To Plastic: A Survival Guide for Plastic-Free Living.7Soapnuts are compostable after use, so they create no waste.
I tried these, excitedly! I followed instructions from myplasticfreelife.com that said to boil the soapnuts into a liquid, and then use the liquid as laundry detergent.
Soapnuts cooking in a pot. Photo by Marie Cullis.
I also tried putting them straight into the washing machine. But they didn’t work great all of the time, and I often had to rewash my clothes. Kathryn Kellogg wrote that she also does not recommend soap nuts. “Both of these items contain saponin or soap. The soap will cause buildup on fabric, preventing it from being absorbent, and the residue can cause skin irritation. Historically, people used soap to clean their clothes, but they washed their clothes by hand. The agitation process was harsh enough for the soap to wash clean. Our modern machines aren’t as rigorous so the soap clings to the fabric.”9
Photo by Pixel Drip on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY 2.0 DEED).
Commercial Laundry Detergents
Over the years I have tried all manner of commercial laundry detergents, both powdered and liquid. Powders don’t seem to dissolve well unless I use hot water, and I wash almost everything in cold water. Liquids work better, but their quality runs the gamut. I still don’t have a single brand that I can recommend or that I even buy consistently. But I can tell you what to avoid in detergents.
Plastic Bottles
Photo by nicholasrobb1989 on Pixabay.
Almost all liquid detergents come in plastic bottles. Also, liquid laundry detergents are 60 to 90 percent water! This means we are shipping huge amounts of water in plastic jugs all across the country, which creates more carbon emissions. This seems wasteful!
Worse, even though most laundry jugs are ‘recyclable,’ they don’t often actually get recycled. Humans have only recycled 9% of plastics ever created. Brands like Seventh Generation use 80% recycled plastic in their bottles. While they are also recyclable, there’s no guarantee the bottle will get recycled. It’s best practice to stay away from bottles if you can.
In Part 11 of my Packaging Series, you can read about brands that use different types of packaging, and even some that offer refillable options.
Toxic Ingredients
There are lots of chemicals in most commercial laundry detergents. Those scents are a combination of hundreds of chemicals, many that scientists have linked to illness and disease. Multiple studies in the last two decades have found that dozens of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were found in scented laundry products, but those ingredients weren’t listed on the product labels. They are often listed as “fragrance,” allegedly because companies want to keep proprietary trade secrets to themselves and away from the competition. We are simply pawns stuck in the middle of that.17 Worse, mixing different “fragrances,” aka chemical compositions, can create a synergistic effect, which happens when two or more create a greater health effect than the sum of the individual effect.19
Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels.
Phthalates
These are in the fragrances of detergents, so you’ll believe your clothes are clean because they smell good. They are a class of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, meaning they interfere with our hormone systems and fertility. They are associated with rashes, asthma, allergies, learning and behavioral difficulties in children, and an increased risk of cancer. These are not regulated because companies use the term “fragrance” in the ingredients list under the guise of propriety.
Surfactants
Many laundry detergents use surfactants like petroleum distillate or naphtha because they boost the cleaning power of laundry detergents. However, they can cause respiratory problems, eye and skin irritation, nervous system problems, hormone disruption, and sometimes cancer. Many are also toxic to aquatic life. Other surfactants include quaternium-15, diethanolamine, nonlphenol ethoxylate, and linear alkyl benzene sulfonates.20
Phenol is one more surfactant that can cause irritation to the skin, eyes, nose, throat, and nervous system. “Severe exposure can cause liver and/or kidney damage, skin burns, tremor, convulsions, and twitching.”21
The European Union (EU) and Canada banned Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs), but they are allowed in the U.S. These are also endocrine disruptors and may cause cancer. They can lead to extreme aquatic toxicity in the environment.
1,4-dioxane
This is a known human carcinogen and neurotoxin that is always present in trace amounts when ethoxylated surfactants are used because 1,4-dioxane is a byproduct. “1,4-dioxane is never listed on labels because it’s not an intentionally added ingredient, but there are some easy tricks to avoid it. Ethoxylated surfactants usually follow a few naming conventions. If the ingredient ends in “-eth”, such as laureth-6 or sodium laureth sulfate (SLES), ceteareth or steareth, it’s ethoxylated.”22Sodium lauryl sulfate is another one to steer clear of. 1,4-dioxane is also a common water contaminant.
Phosphates & EDTA
Manufacturers use Phosphates and EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) “to make detergents more effective in hard water, and to help prevent dirt from settling back on clothes when they’re washing.” These chemicals cause environmental damage, especially in waterways. They also cause algae blooms that damage ecosystems.23 Phosphate-free products are important to help reduce eutrophication, a process that causes algae to grow uncontrollably and cause the death of all life in bodies of water.
Others
Companies use Formaldehyde as a low-cost preservative and antibacterial agent. It can irritate the eyes and lungs and is a suspected carcinogen.24
Dyes cause allergies and rashes, almost all are endocrine disruptors, and many are carcinogens.25
Benzyl acetate is toxic to skin, the nervous system, the kidneys,26 and has been linked to pancreatic cancer.
Dichlorobenzene is a water contaminant and has a highly toxic effect on aquatic life. They are carcinogenic and toxic to the liver, kidneys, and nervous system.
Laundry Pods
Photo by Erik Binggeser on Unsplash.
Laundry detergent pods are purely convenience items. They contain concentrated amounts of detergent encapsulated in a “dissolvable” pod made of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA or PVOH). PVA is a synthetic, petroleum-based polymeric plastic. When marketers say it “dissolves” in water, they mean that the plastic breaks down into smaller plastic particles, called microplastics. The microplastics are discharged as part of the wastewater, then enter our water systems, and eventually end up in our bodies.
“Dissolvable” detergent sheets
I tried laundry detergent eco sheets because they are indeed free of huge plastic bottles. While I’ve always been leery of laundry pods because they feel like plastic, I assumed these were different. However, I discovered that these also contain PVA (polyvinyl alcohol).
Again, PVA is a plastic, and while it is designed to dissolve, that doesn’t mean it disappears. A study cited by the company Blueland “suggests that over 75% of PVA persists in our waterways and our soil after it dissolves in laundry and dishwashing machines, flows through wastewater and ultimately back into our environment.”27
In fact, in November 2022, Blueland, the Plastic Pollution Coalition, and a large group of other nonprofit organizations filed a petition with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to readdress PVA and its effects. “This petition requests that the EPA conduct requisite human and environmental health and safety testing for Polyvinyl Alcohol, also known as PVA or PVOH as it is used in consumer-packaged goods, with particular attention to the use of PVA in laundry and dishwasher detergent pods and sheets. The petition also requests that until such testing is completed, the EPA remove polyvinyl alcohol from its Safer Choice Program in order to curb plastic pollution.”28 Unfortunately, the EPA denied those requests.29
Avoid any laundry pods or dissolvable sheets that contain polyvinyl alcohol (PVA).
Image by taraghb from Pixabay.
Powdered Detergents
Meliora powdered detergents, shipped plastic-free! Photo by Marie Cullis.
In general, I have trouble getting our clothes clean with laundry powder in our washing machine. I’m not sure if this is because I wash everything in cold water, or if we have hard water, or just an old washing machine. So when I do wash something in warm or hot water, I use Meliora laundry powder. I also use this laundry powder for all of my handwashing. I ordered the refillable containers on my first order, and the refills arrive in a recyclable brown paper bag. These products do not contain toxic ingredients or fragrances, and the company lists all of their ingredients on the packaging and its website. I recommend this brand (I do not get paid to write that nor am I an affiliate of the company).
Protecting Your Health & the Environment
While this may all seem overcomplicated, it doesn’t have to be. Just do your best. Steering clear of toxic ingredients and avoiding plastic are the goals. Avoid using chlorine bleach and “brighteners” as these are strong chemicals that are toxic to humans and the environment. Find a solution that works for you and stick with that. Sometimes it takes a while.
Ever wonder what the names of different synthetic fabrics mean? Polyester, fleece, Spandex the list goes on. Over the years synthetic fabrics have come a long way in appearance, texture, and wearability. They can be very durable, although most fast fashion producers tend to make them cheaply with minimal thread count and stitching. Most synthetic fabrics are made from plastic fibers, which are made from oil, which comes from fossil fuels. Synthetic materials use about 342 million barrels of petroleum annually.
Unfortunately, the true problem is the fact that we are overproducing clothing in the Western world. There is so much clothing that all of the humans on the planet can’t even use it all.
Today we’ll review the most common types of synthetics used in fast fashion and textile production. If you want a refresher on natural fabrics, read Part 3 and Part 4.
Polyester
Invented in 1941, polyester is plastic fabric. It requires a lot of energy to make, uses fossil fuels, and uses carcinogenic substances to produce. “It is made by refining crude oil or natural gas, breaking it into chemicals, and creating a polymer that is extruded and spun into fibers.” The polymer, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), is the same PET in a plastic bottle. Its petroleum base makes polyester flammable, so fabrics made from it must be treated with anti-flammable chemicals that are often toxic. China produces more than 75% of the world’s polyester fabric. These fabrics do not biodegrade and only a very small amount of them are recycled worldwide.1
“Polyester, the cheapest and most popular of fabrics, is petroleum based; nearly seventy million barrels of crude are required to make the virgin polyester used for textiles each year.” -Dana Thomas, Fashionopolis2
Polyester also affects climate change. “MIT calculated that the global impact of producing polyester alone was somewhere between 706 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, or about what 185 coal-fired power plants emit in a year.”24 We should stop production of this material for the most part, because the global impacts just aren’t worth it. There’s already enough on the planet to recycle and reuse. We don’t need any new polyester fabric.
“Producing polyester releases two to three times more carbon emissions than cotton, and polyester does not break down in the ocean.”26
Photo by v2osk on Unsplash.
Fleece
Most fleece is a type of polyester, so its origin is also plastic (and oil). Because it is breathable, fast-drying, and allows moisture to evaporate it is used in sportswear and winter wear. It’s also what those $4 cozy, fluffy, fleece blankets sold at large box stores are made from.
Although it is a vegan alternative to wool, fleece is a poor environmental choice because it sheds microfibers quickly while laundering. More on that toward the end of this article.
Photo by Tania Melnyczuk on Unsplash.
Spandex (also called Lycra and Elastane)
Spandex is also called Lycra (a DuPont brand name), or Elastane. It was invented in 1959 and is prized for its elasticity. It is often combined with other fabrics to make apparel stretchy. Spandex is used mainly in athletic wear, swimsuits, yoga pants, skinny jeans, underwear, bras, and socks.
Companies make this fabric from a polyurethane base combined with other chemicals. While Spandex is not plastic, it still does not biodegrade in the environment. While not sourced from oil, the chemicals used in the production of spandex/elastane are potentially toxic to workers and perhaps even people who wear it.
Swimsuits are often made from spandex, nylon, or a blend. Photo by Malik Skydsgaard on Unsplash.
Nylon
Companies use Nylon, originally invented by DuPont, to make tights, stockings, sportswear, yoga pants, and other form-fitting clothing items. It is a polymer-based fabric (meaning plastic) made from a component of crude oil, hexamethylenediamine. It is energy-intensive and uses large quantities of water for cooling the nylon fabric fibers. That “water often carries pollutants into the hydrosphere surrounding manufacturing locations. In the production of adipic acid, which is the secondary constituent part of most types of nylon fabric, nitrous oxide is released into the atmosphere, and this is considered to be 300 times worse for the environment than CO2.”30 But it often makes strong, water-resistant fabrics.
Plastics
Some companies produce clothing made from straight plastic. One example is polyvinyl chloride (PVC), a high-strength thermoplastic material. Companies use PVC to produce transparent shoe heels, vinyl raincoats, synthetic leather, and many fashion accessories like handbags, belts, and shoes.31These materials often cannot be reused and are discarded. PVC is a known carcinogen, off-gasses for its entire lifetime, and it leaches toxins when it gets into the soil (landfill) or water (ocean).
Vegan or faux leather is sometimes made from polyurethane (PU). It was invented in Nazi Germany in 1937, and one of its uses was for mustard gas-resistant garments.32 As for toxicity, it depends on what chemicals were applied to the polyurethane in question, but most online sources indicate that PU is fairly safe.
PVC skirt from Shein.
Acrylic
Acrylic, invented in 1950, mimics wool. It is lightweight, warm, and soft. Companies use it in place of wool or blend it with wool or cashmere in order to reduce production costs. Producers make acrylic from the polymer polyacrylonitrile, which is a fossil fuel-chemical combination. Acrylic fabric pills easily and, like many synthetics, is highly flammable. The EPA found that inhaling polyacrylonitrile gives workers many health problems and may even be carcinogenic.33
Sweater made from acrylic.
“Imagine a pair of yoga pants, or a fleece…try to imagine what they’re made of. It’s oil. They’re made of oil. Whether it’s polyester, fleece, spandex, elastane, nylon, or acrylic, our clothing is made, more and more, of crude oil that is turned into polymers…More than 60 percent of all of our textile fibers are now man-made synthetics, derived from oil.” -Tatiana Schlossberg34
Viscose Rayon
Viscose rayon is usually made from bamboo and eucalyptus. While those are plants, producers use so many heavy chemical treatments that most consider viscose rayon a synthetic. Companies market this fabric as “natural” and “sustainable” because bamboo, especially, grows quickly. But that is just greenwashing.
Companies sell viscose rayon under several names, such as bamboo, eucalyptus, modal, Lyocell, and Tencel. Producers make the fabric by “chemically dissolving wood from eucalyptus, beech, or bamboo trees,” and then reforming the chemical pulp into a fiber. Bamboo is a tough fiber and the chemical treatment is how they make it soft. These fabrics are a cheaper alternative to silk and cotton. But they have a huge environmental impact because they require a lot of energy and “has a higher global-warming impact than the manufacture of polyester and cotton.”35
Environmental Impact
Viscose rayon production uses large volumes of hazardous chemicals, including large amounts of bleach, sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and carbon disulfide. The latter is “a neurologically toxic chemical that has a long history of causing insanity in exposed workers.”36 It can also cause reproductive problems. Further, the pulp mills sometimes release those chemicals into the environment. Many of the processing mills for rayon are in China, India, and southeastern Asian countries. 37
“The chemical usage to produce [viscose rayon] is so intense that it shouldn’t be considered natural at all.” -Tatiana Schlossberg38
This category of fabrics is a leading cause of deforestation, which is contributing to climate change and endangering wildlife. Manufacturers cut down between 120 million and 150 million trees annually to make clothing. Some of those trees are in endangered rainforests or ancient forests. Besides that, manufacturers also waste more than half of each tree during production.39
Better Types of Viscose Rayon
Look for the lyocell brand name of Lenzing Tencel, which is more sustainable than other fabrics in this category. “Tencel lyocell fabrics are cellulose fibers made from sustainably sourced wood pulp that is produced in a closed-loop system where the materials used are recycled with minimal waste and low emissions.” Tencel is biodegradable and requires less energy and water than cotton production.40
You can also seek out brands that partner with Canopy, the Forest Stewardship Council, or have Oeko-Tex safe-chemistry certifications (see Additional Resources below).41
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has warned and/or fined many companies to stop falsely labeling rayon products as bamboo. Those companies include Amazon, Macy’s, Target, Walmart, and Leon Max, but there are more that participate in this practice. Marketing rayon as environmentally friendly is greenwashing at its worst; advertising it as bamboo is an outright lie and illegal.
Photo by Andreea Pop on Unsplash.
Synthetic Fabrics Shed Microplastics
Synthetic textiles are becoming more and more commonplace, especially as fast fashion continues to grow. Unfortunately, these synthetic fabrics often shed small plastic fibers known as microfibers or microplastics. Just by laundering our clothing, microplastics are entering and polluting our waterways. This is because water treatment facilities cannot remove them, so the fibers persist, and enter the ocean, the food chain, and eventually human bodies. “According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, there are 1.5 million tons of small pieces of what are known as microplastics entering the ocean each year, and as much as 34.8 percent of that pollution is coming from synthetic textiles.”42 It’s time to turn off the tap.
“What I actually want to say about synthetic fibers is that they are everywhere – not just in all of our clothes, but literally everywhere: rivers, lakes, oceans, agricultural fields, mountaintops, glaciers. Everywhere. Synthetic fibers, actually, may be one of the most abundant, widespread, and stubborn forms of pollution that we have inadvertently created.” -Tatiana Schlossberg43
Photo by Kate Ware on Flickr, Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC 2.0).
Solutions
“It requires extensive amounts of energy to create textiles from plastic, which also releases petroleum and volatile particulate matter into the atmosphere.” -Leah Thomas,The Intersectional Environmentalist44
Most of the time, the clothing you buy is going to be a blend of either natural and synthetic fibers or a blend of synthetics. Chenille, for example, is usually a blend of fibers, including cotton, silk, rayon, and wool. Microfiber fabric is often a combination of polyester and nylon. Synthetics are so common today that we mostly overlook the fabric type listed on the tag. “Most consumers buy synthetics without even noticing. Polyester and nylon together make up almost 60 percent of all textiles manufactured globally, while cotton has shrunk to a quarter of the fiber market.”45
Today synthetics are better looking and more comfortable than in previous decades. And they are cheap! The cheapest fabrics to produce are polyester, nylon, acrylic, and conventional viscose rayon. The production of cotton and high-performing viscose rayon (modal and lyocell) costs a little more. Leather, silk, linen, high-quality cotton, cashmere, and wool are much more expensive than synthetics, so fashion designers use them less and less.46 But many synthetics used in clothing production are manufactured or treated with toxic and carcinogenic substances.47
Choose biodegradable plant-based fibers, such as cotton, linen, hemp, and wool over synthetics. Or animal-based fibers such as wool and silk. “It’s very hard to completely eradicate plastics from our lives, but we can reduce them significantly by choosing biodegradable fibers when available….biodegradable new materials, recycled fabrics, or secondhand textiles. Remember, there is no perfect sustainable lifestyle.”48
Corporations need to do better and stop producing cheap, fast fashion. As consumers, we can buy second-hand clothing. When we do need to buy new, we can choose to buy higher quality items. Since those types of articles are more expensive, we will automatically reduce the amount of clothing we buy. Corporations will pay attention if we buy less of something. If we all try to be more intentional with our clothing purchases, we can make a difference.
Thank you for reading, please share and subscribe!
Additional Resources:
Website, Forest Stewardship Council, the leader in sustainable forestry. Their purpose is “nurturing responsible forestry so forests and people can thrive. ”
Website, Canopy. People cut down 3.4 billion trees annually to make paper packaging and fabrics such as rayon and viscose. “Many of these trees come from the world’s most Ancient and Endangered Forests, integral for life on Earth.” This organization partners with brands to change that. Just ten suppliers produce seventy-five percent of all rayon. After fashion designer Stella McCartney partnered with Canopy, nine of those suppliers pledged that they would stop logging in rainforests.49
Website, Oeko-Tex, rigorously tests and certifies every component of the product, from the fabric to the thread and accessories, against a list of up to 350 toxic chemicals.
Article, “Microfibers & Textiles,” 5Gyres, accessed September 24, 2023.
Happy Earth Day! This is a day of recognition and a day to celebrate our beautiful home and habitat.
But as I always say, Earth Day should be every day.
This year, 2023, feels heavier, though. There’s so much going on and so much division that climate change and environmental issues often feel like back-burner issues.
It’s hard to think about buying plastic-free items and aiming for zero-waste when the price of groceries is so high.
While the average price of groceries rose 11.4% in the last year, it is expected to rise another 8.6% this year. But for some items, staples such as bread, eggs, milk, butter, and flour – the inflation rates are even higher. “The average price of white bread was about 22 percent higher in January than it was two years ago, and flour is up almost 21 percent. Butter cost 31 percent more.”31 Milk went up about 15% between 2021 and 2022.32 “The average price for all types of eggs ballooned 60% in 2022” because of an outbreak of bird flu.35
But some of the other costs have been simply to increase the wealth of corporations, CEOs, and shareholders. They are seeing record profits and receiving record dividends and bonuses. All at our expense. According to Oxfam, a global organization that fights inequality to end poverty and injustice, 62 new billionaires were created during the pandemic. They have exacerbated problems like labor shortages and supply chain disruptions to justify inflation. But the majority of food companies still managed to see record profits.36
Photo by me, April 8, 2023.
In the last 5 years, costs have increased overall by about twenty percent. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statics Consumer Price Index inflation calculator indicates that $100.00 in February 2018 has the same buying power of just over $120.00 in February 2023.37 Inflation has increased an average of 20% over the last 5 years. Most of us have not seen an increase in wages or benefits.
It’s difficult to see the value in cleaning up trash in one community when you see environmental racism and injustice in another.
My family participated in a Keep the Tennessee River Beautiful trash clean-up event in April 2023. It felt really good to go out and do something good. But all around our own city and in countries across the globe, there are people living amongst massive amounts of trash, toxic waste sites, and pollution. Why aren’t we doing more to help?
I remind myself that many of us are trying. Unfortunately, the people with the most wealth are often the same people exploiting those that have the least. And climate change affects some of the poorest communities in the world even though they have the smallest carbon footprint.
We just have to keep getting out there and doing what we can. Keep trying, learning, and especially voting!
It’s easy to shift your focus away from climate change when you are worried about the safety of your child at school.
I really don’t like to write about political issues on my website (other than things related to the environment and climate change, but those really shouldn’t be political issues, anyway). But this is a real fear for many parents, myself included. Firearms are the leading cause of death for children in the U.S.
The March 2023 Nashville school shooting, tragic and sad, should never have happened. The same week as that shooting, my son’s school in Chattanooga was put on a “secure hold” because of an intruder. The school seemed to have handled it swiftly and correctly, but they didn’t notify the parents until after the whole incident was over. The intruder was unarmed, but I nevertheless cried out of fear. I remain fearful every day I bring him to school. This daily anxiety is taking its toll.
How am I supposed to worry about climate change right now, when I’m worried about my child surviving the day?
Photo by Fateme Alaie on Unsplash.
The answer is that I have to at least try.
“The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago. The second best time to plant a tree is now.” -Proverb
We all have to try.
Together.
We can do better.
“I don’t think we want to just scrape by as a species, surviving with a degraded natural world, suffering ecosystem and societal collapse, and mass human suffering on a scale that dwarfs anything we’ve experienced as a species. I think we all want to see what we’re capable of, and make this world of ours the best it can be.” -Rob Stewart38
Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay.
We must keep learning.
“When you know better, you do better.” -Maya Angelou
We have to do the right things, even when our leaders don’t.
“Choose what is right, not what is easy.” -Yoda
We have to give what we can, whether that’s time, energy, or money.
“The surest path to contentment is generosity. Giving forces us to recognize all we possess and all we have to offer. It allows us to find fulfillment and purpose in helping others.” -Joshua Becker, becomingminimalist.com
We must teach our children to do better than we have.
“I’m still convinced it’s a good old world, really, but I do think we have screwed it up. It’s highly obvious with the ocean filling with plastic; it didn’t get there by itself. Thinking that climate change is a hoax is another screw-up, one that I hope we can still fix for our children and our children’s children.” -Paul McCartney39
We need to value the people and the environment around us. Let’s help each other.
“Fighting for something other than your own wealth, working for someone else’s happiness, saving species, pulling people out of poverty, conserving instead of wasting – this is what really matters.” -Rob Stewart40
Photo by Elena Mozhvilo on Unsplash.
I leave you with a heavy heart this Earth Day. But I think the best thing we can do to celebrate today is to get outdoors and be in nature. Spend time taking in the elements and the beauty of nature. Hug a tree. Hug the person next to you. Spread kindness and love.
“Our task must be to free ourselves… by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and its beauty.” -Albert Einstein
