by c0mmutr

The Skynde from adidas by Stella McCartney:
The Eco Friendly Child of the Barricade V

Clothing and shoe production is damaging the planet too!

It seems that in the last few years, the environment has forced it’s way into most people’s consciousness from the sheer weight of bleak predictions about the implications of rapid global temperature rise.

The gas-guzzling motor car has been in the firing line for longer, but now there is a growing awareness that everything we buy has a greater or lesser effect on the well-being of the environment, our fellow human beings and animals.

The clothing and shoe industries have long escaped any negative scrutiny, but recently it’s become clear that their environmental impact is as damaging as any other. Many chemicals traditionally employed to treat and dye fabrics are carcinogenic and serious pollutants if allowed to escape to rivers and streams. This equally applies to the chemicals used to tan leather in shoe uppers and the petroleum based rubber used in the soles.

Consumerism and the move to the east

The problem has worsened with the gradual shift in production from the relatively controlled, (but costly), working environments in the West, to the low labor cost ‘sweat shops’ of some Asian countries. Here, human and animal resources can be exploited beyond the reach of the umbrella of compassionate and humanitarian health and safety legislation many of us take for granted.

The explosion in ‘consumerism’ in recent decades has fueled these changes as people, quite reasonably, want to enjoy the benefits of as many competitively priced products as possible. For example, if you’re a woman tennis player, and you see your favourite tennis player, Ana Ivanovic wearing adidas’ Barricade V women’s tennis shoe on television, and your friend at the tennis club buys a pair, you are naturally inclined to want to buy a pair for yourself, (at the best possible price), to keep up.

The enormous multi-national companies catering to this demand know that to stay in business they must compete in every area, not least price. They must be keenly aware of their rival’s like-for-like athletic shoe pricing.

The ‘Big Boys’ respond to heightened public awareness

However, with the sudden leap in the population’s awareness of ecological issues, ‘normal’ business considerations for these companies have subtly changed, as evidenced by the recent almost simultaneous declarations by the ‘big two’ sports apparel manufacturers, adidas and Nike, that they are ceasing to source leather and other raw materials from any country where any collateral damage has been done to the rain forests. There’s no point in designing, producing and marketing a fantastic sneaker at a great price, only to throw away many of these ‘positives’ by being associated with practises people now perceive as seriously detrimental to the planet and eventually even their own health and well-being.

]]>

To better align themselves with public opinion, both adidas and Nike now produce athletic shoes with eco-friendly considerations. The pressures have probably been slightly greater on adidas as it’s a German based company, and Germany has one of the most powerful green movements in the world. In fact Germany’s ‘Blue Angel’, formed in 1978 and composed of a group of 13 people representing diverse views across the media, industry, unions and the environment, was the world’s first body that attempted to label products and services according to their eco-friendly, (or otherwise), content.

‘Reuse a shoe’ to recycle, reform and replace

However, Nike were the first off the mark with their ‘Reuse a shoe’ program in 1993. They collect old worn-out athletic shoes to disassemble and then to recycle and reform into a material suitable for the construction of running tracks, court surfaces and playgrounds.

They also manufacture the ‘Trash Talk’ shoe composed of shop floor off-cuts, leather and synthetic leather compounds and shoe soles composed of reformed rubber from recycled old athletic shoes.

The Stan Smith Grun Shoe, (German for green), is one of adidas’ contributions to the growing demand for environmentally friendly shoes. It is a much greener version of an already successful mass-produced shoe.

How Green Can You Be?

Unfortunately, for any manufacturer aiming to be ‘totally’ eco friendly in their shoe production, the nature of the process is very complex and a wholly ‘green’ shoe is unrealistic for most, as the ‘natural’ alternatives would make the venture uneconomic. Many high volume shoes are produced with a combination of traditional raw materials with the more economically viable greener ones, which is a step in the right direction. (Excuse the pun).

A natural ‘by-product’ of concern for eco friendly shoe production is vegetarian or vegan shoes, as toxic leather treatments are replaced by less dangerous plant- based synthetic leathers. Indeed it could be argued that as ‘animal agriculture’ is the largest single contributor to global warming, these shoes are the only alternative to those serious about preventing it.

Certainly, farmed animals require a disproportionate amount of resources for the meat/leather that they produce compared to the plant alternatives, and the methane they readily produce is 23 times more efficient at storing the sun’s rays than carbon dioxide.

Panda Food, Lady Bugs and Rice Husks provide some answers!

There are a number of smaller shoe companies that by their very nature are able to create products with next to no environmental impact. They use materials such as tree-tapped rubber, (not chemical), bamboo, hemp and organic cotton.

Bamboo and hemp are fast growing hardy plants that don’t need careful nurturing or rich soils. Their natural fibers can be woven to produce materials that are hard wearing, water resistant yet breathable, lightweight and easy to clean. Organic cotton is produced without recourse to pesticides that eventually pollute many of the world’s watercourses. Organic cotton farmers use natural pest control methods like introducing Ladybugs to their crops!

Boston based environmentally conscious shoe company, ‘New Balance’ even add rice husks to their soles to reduce the rubber requirement, whilst similarly aware ‘Keen’ add natural cork. New Balance also score environmental ‘plus points’ for keeping shoe production wholly within the US despite probable cost advantages of production overseas.

Some Seriously Earth-Friendly Businesses

Some shoe manufacturers center their entire businesses around an environmental awareness. A few worthy of note include ‘Patagonia’ who give 1% of their income to help preserve and restore the environment. ‘Chaco’ purchase wind-powered green certificates to cover their entire yearly electrical usage, and ‘Toms’ donates a pair of shoes to a needy child for every pair bought from them!

All these companies seem to have core considerations that the earth must be protected, the people producing their products must be valued and cared for, and the end product must be built to last, to counteract the ‘use it up, throw it out’ culture that has prevailed lately.

It is vitally important that the trend towards earth-friendly consumption is not just a fad, and that some of the shortcomings of plant-based clothing and shoes can be overcome, like the difficulty in infusing strong colors in vegetable-based fabrics without recourse to nasty chemicals.

Even now eco friendly athletic shoe alternatives are mainly confined to sneakers and general use sports shoes, whereas specialized running, basketball or tennis shoes are still made the old way.

The mechanism of change, if it happens, will stem from informed individual decisions, which when taken en masse, will change buying patterns and reward companies brave and enlightened enough to give us the choices we want and need, to minimize the daily damage we are doing to our fragile planet.