Posted by Neil Gordon on Tue, Feb 02, 2010 @ 07:07 AM
Although no one is certain of exactly when and where cotton cloth originated, archeologists do know that people were weaving cotton fiber into fabric as long as 4,000 years ago in India and Central and South America. By 1500 A.D, the plant was cultivated throughout the warmer regions of the Americas, Eurasia and Africa.
Until the late 18th century, cotton was grown, harvested, ginned, spun and woven by hand, with only the wealthy able to afford to buy it. Two significant inventions change this: the water-powered spinning machine and the cotton gin. The cotton gin, a hand-cranked device that strips the plant's fibers from its seeds, enabled a worker to clean not one but 50 pounds a day. After these two inventions, the U.S. became the world's foremost supplier of cotton fiber.
India led the manufacture of cotton cloth prior to the advent of the Industrial Age, when England became the market leader. Eventually, Indian mills purchased new machinery, regaining control of the marketplace. But as volume and profits grew, the workers suffered. Gandhi brought world attention to the plight of Indian textile workers in 1918 when he staged a fast that ultimately led to the independence of India.
For nearly 4,000 years, cotton was grown organically. But with the development of pesticides and chemical fertilizers during WWII, this changed. By the late 1950s, only 10 years after their introduction, cotton, like so many other agricultural products, was grown and harvested with the use of pesticides, the most famous of which was DDT.
Despite early warning signs of the damage these chemicals cause, today insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and chemical fertilizers are applied to cotton throughout its growing cycle.
We find it ironic that the term "conventionally grown" refers to this type of growing and harvesting, which has only been in practice for 50 years, versus the preceding 4,000 years of organic growing and harvesting.
It is distressing to learn that a plant so pure and beautiful, and basic to daily life now requires:
- 25% of all insecticides used are used on cotton
- 200 chemicals might be applied to a single plant in one season in the U.S. This translates to 1/3 of a pound of chemicals per pound of cotton fiber
If all cotton were grown organically, the use of insecticides worldwide would be reduced by 25%. We, at Coyuchi, are working towards this end.
Coyuchi uses only 100% certified organic cotton in our bedding and has been recognized for our efforts, receiving the United Nations Second Annual Fashion Industry Award for Environmental Excellence.
Every fiber of cotton we spin is produced in accordance with the standards of the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM). To be certified as organic cotton, the following requirements have to be met:
- Seeds must be non-genetically engineered.
- Insects should be controlled by methods that stimulate what occurs in the natural environment where good bugs eat bad bugs.
- Emphasis must be placed on keeping plants healthy. Health plants are more resistant to infestation.
- Chemical fertilizers or inputs, such as herbicides or other pesticides, cannot be used.
- Fields are weeded by hand.
• Farming communities are healthy.
Growing cotton organically reduces costs and increases revenues for the farmers who grow it. It also improves soil fertility and porosity, so less water is required. And finally, provides an agricultural ecosystem that produces healthy food.
Organic cotton is grown rotationally and alongside maize, sesame, sorghum and chilies, and inter-cropped with nitrogen-fixing plans such as lentils and chickpeas. Some of these plants serve as barriers that repel pests. Others, such as maize and sorghum, attract beneficial insets. Soil fertility is managed with the application of manure, compost and earthworm castings, in addition to rotating the crops, supplementing the rotation with oil cakes, and using other biodynamic preparations.
In addition to exclusively using certified organically grown cotton, we openly disclose our certifiers because we believe it is the right way to do business.
The cotton is certified by Control Union Certifiers and EcoCert International according to the European regulation standards (EEC 2092/91).
First, we gin the cotton which is the process of removing the seeds from the plant. The seeds account for 2/3 of the weight of raw cotton. 354,000 pounds of cotton seed result in 118,000 of lint.
Net, the lint is spun. Approximately 30 percent of the lint is composed of short fibers called noile. The noile is removed during the combing process and used to make organic cotton batting and for stuffing mattresses.
From our 118,000 pounds of combed cotton, we make approximately 83,000 pounds of yarn. From this yarn, we are able to make 8,000 sheet sets, 4,000 towel sets, 1,200 jacquard blankets, 1,000 robes and a small amount of knit fabric for baby clothing.
All our fabrics are processed with an amylase enzyme removes the wheat starch sizing. Fabric is scoured with biodegradable soap and caustic soda.? White, bleached fabrics are whitened using hydrogen peroxide.
Dyed fabrics are colored with low-impact fiber reactive dyes. These require less water, heat and dye material than other commonly-used cotton dyes. There is less residual color left in the rinse water due to the high bonding coefficient between the dye material and the cotton fiber.
Sanforizing, pre-shrinking, is a mechanical process that uses steam and rubber pads and rollers. It involves no chemicals.
The cotton we produce in India is not only certified organic, but it is also fair trade certified (by FloCert in Germany).
When it comes to people's morning coffee, many of us choose to drink fair-trade coffee. Although cotton bedding is nearly as ubiquitous, fair-trade cotton is not. It should be and we are doing what we can to bring this about.
We have been working with the Chetna Project in India, an organization devoted to growing fair trade and certified organic cotton.
Begun in 2004, with only 400 farmers as members, Chetna has grown to now over 3,000 members and has a strong presence in four states in India.
The Chetna Project empowers and improves the lives of marginalized peasant farmers who cultivate cotton on a small scale. All Chetna-produced cotton is not only certified as organic, but also fair trade, a distinction that benefits the farmers in a number of ways:
- Fair trade organic cotton sells for about 70% more than conventional cotton
- Child labor is non-existent and workers are paid a fair wage
- Farmers' organization are democratic and transparent
- Community development is encouraged through health, education and revolving
credit projects.
- Agricultural education and training is on-going
- Groups have access to better markets and can often sell direct to manufacturers,
eliminating middlemen
- Farmers become partners in the business, so they are no longer dependent
on traders
- Fair trade practices strictly prohibit the use of genetically modified organisms
(GMOs), which promoting integrated farm management systems that improve soil
fertility.
- Fair-trade cotton is grown without harmful agrochemicals using environmentally
sustainable farming methods that protect people's health and preserve valuable
ecosystems.
Although no one is certain of exactly when and where cotton cloth originated, archeologists do know that people were weaving cotton fiber into fabric as long as 4,000 years ago in India and Central and South America. By 1500 A.D, the plant was cultivated throughout the warmer regions of the Americas, Eurasia and Africa.
http://www.dwfcontract.com/fabrics/green-organic-and-sustainable-fabrics/
Posted by Neil Gordon on Sat, Jan 30, 2010 @ 07:21 AM
You can have an immense impact on lightening your environmental footprint by the textile choices you make.
Why
The textile industry is a gigantic industry - and it is gigantically polluting. The textile industry uses copious amounts of two things: water and chemicals. It is the number one industrial polluter of water in the world[1].
Water is used at every stage in fabric manufacturing: to dissolve chemicals to be used in one step, then to wash and rinse out those same chemicals to be ready for the next step. It takes between 10% and 100% of the weight of the fabric in chemicals to produce that fabric[2]. The production of the fabric covering your sofa required between 4 and 20 pounds of chemicals. The chemically infused effluent - saturated with dyes, de-foamers, detergents, bleaches, optical brighteners, equalizers and many other chemicals - is often released into the local river, where it enters the groundwater, drinking water, the habitat of flora and fauna, and our food chain. As Gene Lisa has said, "There is not a 'no peeing' part of the swimming pool." We're all downstream.
And many of these chemicals remain in the fabric that you bring into your room to outgas into your air, or be absorbed through your skin. Over time, with use, we abrade tiny particles of the fabric that we then ingest or inhale. One yard of organic cotton fabric conventionally processed into fabric contains 75% organic cotton fibers and 25% chemicals, many of which are proven toxic to humans and animals[3].
The Toxics Release Inventory (2006) of the US EPA reports that over 33,000,000 lbs. of toxic chemicals were released by US textile mills in 2005[4]: that's 33,000,000 lbs of just the chemicals classified as "toxic" by the not very aggressive US government - and those are the toxic chemicals released in the US alone. The US textile industry is small compared to other countries. Imagine what the Chinese mills are doing. There is a joke in China that the Chinese can tell what colors are in fashion in the West by the color of their local rivers. What is not a joke is that those polluted waters are dead: no fish, no frogs, no life. In India alone textile effluent averages around 425,000,000 gallons per day, largely untreated[5].
The October 25, 2008 edition of the Seattle Post Intelligencer lamented the demise, in just one year, of seven of the 83 Orca Whales still migrating to the Puget Sound. Two of the seven were child bearing age females, a class with normally extremely low mortality. Scientists speculate, that, in part, the whales are dyeing because they are starving and, when they rely on their own blubber, industrial chemicals stored in their blubber become available to them in toxic doses.
A whole list of the most commonly used chemicals in fabric production are linked to human health problems that vary from annoying to profound. Why did cancer rates skyrocket in the late Twentieth Century and continue high in the Twenty-First? Asthma, allergies, ADHD and dementia rates have doubled in the past twenty years[6]; one in every 150 children are now diagnosed as autistic.[7] Male sperm counts have decreased 1.5% per year for the past fifty years in developed countries[8]. For an as yet unknown reason industrial chemicals concentrate in the Arctic Circle. There are many villages above the arctic circle where no boys have been born for over a decade[9].
Are these rates of disease and the corresponding rise in the use of industrial chemicals a coincidence? Are our increased rates of disease dues to better diagnosis? Possibly. But if you think they are the main culprits, your opinion is not shared by a goodly number of scientists.
Many scientists believe that the chemical pollution has replaced bacteria and viruses as the major cause of human illness. We don't have to debate which source is primary; especially because, with the rise of super bugs, it's a silly debate. The point remains that industrial pollution is a major cause of human illness - and it is a cause we can take concrete actions to stem.
What are some of the chemicals that you may choose to try to avoid in fabric? Phthalates are so toxic that they have been banned in the European Union since 2005. They have recently been banned in the State of California in children's toys. But they are in the majority (90%, not 51%) of textile inks. So parents careful not to bring toxic toys into their homes for their children can be nevertheless and unknowingly putting their kids to sleep on sheets full of phthalates.
If you find the why of going green in fabric choices compelling, the next question is "How can I go green?" You may want to choose fabrics that are safe to use and safe to produce. What to do? We list here six concrete steps you can take to go green in your fabric choices. We will explain each very important point in greater detail so that you can arm yourself with the knowledge you need to green your textile choices and be good stewards of the earth and of your client's health.
1. Choose fabrics that are "organic fabrics" not simply fabric made from organic fibers.
2. If organic fabrics are not available, insist on organic fibers , and pay attention to the type of fiber used in the fabric. Buy "bast" or other more eco-friendly fibers, not cotton or synthetics.
3. Try to minimize your purchase of fabrics which are blends of natural and synthetic fibers (i.e., cotton and polyester), or blends of two or more different synthetic fibers (polyester and acrylic). Never use PVC, polyvinyl chloride, for anything, but never as a finish or fiber in fabric.
4. Search for a fabric or product that is certified by any third party, independent textile certification agency.
5. Pay attention to the carbon footprint of the fabrics you buy.
6. Keep yourself educated on the progress of the eco-textile community
The How
1. Choose fabrics that are "organic fabrics" not simply fabric made from organic fibers.
There is a big difference between an organic cotton T-shirt and an organic T-shirt. What is the difference? The fiber, organic cotton, used to make the fabric may have been raised with regard to health and safety of the planet and people; but the production of the fabric made from that cotton was not. There are many steps in the production of fabric AFTER the fiber stage. Textile production steps can include carding, retting, scouring, bleaching, spinning, weaving, dyeing, printing, and finishing. These steps use a lot of two things: chemicals and water. It bears repeating: One yard of organic cotton fabric conventionally processed into fabric contains 73% organic cotton fibers and 27% chemicals, many of which are proven toxic to humans and animals[10].
As we stated previously, water is used at every stage in fabric manufacturing: to dissolve chemicals to be used in one step, then to wash and rinse out those same chemicals to be ready for the next step. It takes between 10% and 100% of the weight of the fabric in chemicals to produce that fabric. The production of the fabric covering your sofa required between 4 and 20 pounds of chemicals. The chemically infused effluent - saturated with dyes, de-foamers, detergents, bleaches, optical brighteners, equalizers and many other chemicals - is often released into the local river, where it enters the groundwater, drinking water, the habitat of flora and fauna, and our food chain. As Gene Lisa has said, "There is not a 'no peeing' part of the swimming pool." We're all downstream.
What is an "organic fabric" ? An organic fabric is a fabric that is produced using no known or suspected toxic chemicals (toxic to the earth, humans or animals) at any stage of the production process: from fiber to finished fabric. The major textile production steps include fiber raising, extracting or extrusion; fiber preparation; spinning; weaving; dyeing; printing; and finishing. Sub steps can include bleaching, brightening, sizing, de-sizing, de-foaming, brightening and countless others. The GOTS, or Global Organic Textile Standard, which forbids the use of any known or suspected toxic substance in each step of the textile production process, also requires water treatment (because even benign chemicals released into the eco-system will degrade the local eco-system and threaten the life of all that depend on it). It also covers fundamental social justice issues (no child labor, no slave labor, certain minimal working conditions); and addresses in a preliminary way carbon footprint concerns. Currently GOTS covers only the production of fabrics made with a minimum of 90% natural or cellulosic fibers. (See Appendix A for an explanation of natural, cellulosic and synthetic fibers.) It does not include synthetics. For guidance on the use of synthetics, look to Cradle to Cradle as a certifier right now. (Although synthetics are a very poor choice because of their dismal carbon footprint.)
2. If organic fabrics are not available, insist on organic fibers , and pay attention to the type of fiber used in the fabric. Buy "bast" or other more eco-friendly fibers, not cotton or synthetics.
Do look for organic textiles, but the certification is brand new, so don't expect to find much in the very near future. In the absence of a GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard); SMART (which uses GOTS criteria) or Cradle to Cradle certified fabric as a practical choice, pay attention to the fiber used in any textile you buy.
It may surprise you that using "natural " fibers is not necessarily an environmentally friendly choice. Just because a fiber is "natural' - that is, from plant or animal origin - does not mean that it is a good eco choice. Each of the fiber types have many associated issues of concern. We'll cover briefly the major areas of concern by fiber type.
Currently, conventionally raised cotton (versus organic cotton) and synthetic fibers (those made from petroleum) are the world's most popular fibers by far. They are also the worst choices.
Cotton: Conventional and Organic
Currently cotton is the world's most popular natural fiber - accounting for 80% of all natural fibers used in the world - and the world's worst environmental and health choice. The cultivation of cotton is such a thorough environmental and health disaster as to be almost unbelievable. Conventional cotton must be drenched with chemicals: conventional cotton cultivation accounts for 25% of all the pesticides used globally.[11] These chemicals pollute the groundwater and enter the food chain. Many of the chemicals used on cotton are listed among the most hazardous pollutants by the Environmental Protection Agency. Conventionally grown cotton is so full of pesticides that in California farmers can no longer legally use the leftover leaves and stems to feed their livestock. Cotton cultivation also demands vast quantities of water, resulting in soil salinization, aquifer depletion and desertification of large tracts of entire countries. It is true that in certain growing areas, especially in California, the chemical tonnage required to grow the new GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) conventional cotton has been decreased by more than half. This is indeed less bad. But it is not good. The decreased chemical inputs - still high and still toxic - must be evaluated in terms of new and troubling problems brought on by the use of genetically modified crops.
Although the cultivation of organic cotton largely solves the problems associated with the use of chemicals, organic cotton is still classified as one of the top "thirsty" crops by Oxfam, leading to the same problems of soil salinization, aquifer depletion and desertification.
Therefore, care should be taken to insure that the organic cotton is raised in a region with sufficient annual rainfall or other natural sources of water that can support the cultivation of this thirsty crop.
Bast Fibers: Linen, hemp, ramie, and abaca
For every natural fiber fabric and also for most cellulosic fibers, care should be taken to insure that the plant was raised organically. (See Appendix A for an explanation of natural, cellulosic and synthetic fibers. Glass and metal fiber types also exist, but we will not address those fiber types.) Enough has been said in other sources about the importance of organic agriculture. We will not repeat those facts and issues here. We will address other important and largely unrecognized environmental issues. These issues include fiber preparation and end of life issues. Fiber preparation is the step of cleaning and preparing the fibers for spinning.
In bast fiber plants, the fibers that are spun into yarn come from the stalk of these plants, not from the flower as in cotton. As the stalks are more resistant to insect infestation than the flower, these plants can be raised with little or no chemical inputs like pesticides. They also require comparatively little water; provide relatively high yields per acre; and offer a host of superior performance characteristics such as natural mold and mildew resistance; ultraviolet light resistance, etc.
The fiber preparation step for bast fibers, which is called "retting," can be an environmental disaster, so great care should be taken in addressing this issue. Bast fibers must be separated from the natural lignins and glues in the stalk. This is what retting is - the separation of the fibers to be spun into yarn from the natural glues in the stalk of the plant. Retting can be accomplished in one of three ways: chemical, water or dew retting. Chemical retting is not preferred as the primary chemical retting agents such as EDTA are not benign. Chemical retting would also require careful water treatment. Water retting sounds benign, but unfortunately is not. Retting bast fibers in water but without the addition of chemicals changes the ph of the water used. If this more acidic or basic water is returned to the local eco-system untreated, it will harm aquatic life and amphibians, and the entire eco-system. Water treatment is supremely important where water retting is used. It is also currently not usually in place. Dew retting means leaving the stalks out in the elements to break down the lignins with the assistance of time and weather. This is the environmentally preferred method. Water retting is also acceptable if there is water treatment in place. Without a third party certification, ask how your bast fiber fabrics are retted.
When choosing a natural fiber, try to avoid buying anything made with conventional cotton. This may be hard at his date. But, if you have a choice, linen, hemp, bamboo, abaca, wool, or any other natural fiber are good additions to the world's textile choices, and much better eco choices than conventionally raised cotton.
Silk
People often ask if silk can be raised organically. Yes, absolutely, although it is exceedingly hard to find. Feeding the silk worms organic food is not a trivial eco choice.
The fiber preparation stage of silk is called scouring. Silk is lusterless, stiff and harsh until it is scoured, which removes the outer gelatinous layer of matter from the silk filament. Here again, unless the silk is scoured in an environmentally friendly manner, it is not a good eco-choice. The silk scouring water can be laden with chemicals, and must be treated. Even if chemicals are not used, and only soaps are used, the water must be treated before being released into the local eco-system to avoid potentially disastrous results for the local flora and fauna.
The most common scouring chemical in India, a major source for silk, is perchloroethylene, or perc, the dry cleaning fluid. Perc's toxic profile is not benign. The National Toxicology Program has designated it as "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen." The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has designated perc as a "probable human carcinogen." Because of the mobility of PCE in groundwater, its toxicity at low levels, and its density (which causes it to sink below the water table), cleanup activities tend to be especially difficult, inefficient, and, mostly, unsuccessful.
Here again, scouring chemicals are dissolved and used in solution so that vast quantities of water are used in silk scouring, so that water treatment is a primary concern.
So, if silk scouring is performed either with or without chemicals and if that untreated water is returned to the local eco-system untreated, as it usually is, it is a step to be assiduously avoided.
Wool
The scouring of wool is one of the most toxic steps in fabric production. Wool is a particularly difficult fiber to clean and prepare for spinning and, therefore, multiple chemicals and pesticides are used for the scouring of wool. There is absolutely nothing environmentally benign about the scouring of wool. Care must be taken to assure that the scouring water is cleaned and not returned untreated to the eco-system. This step is not usually attended to.
Wool fiber is usually also de-scaled and shrink proofed. De-scaling wool modifies the scales on the wool fibers to prevent shrinkage and to reduce itchiness. This step usually involves application of organochlorines followed by application of some sort of synthetic polymer. Organochlorines are a class of chemicals with a toxic profile to be assiduously avoided.
The use of polymers on wool yarn is also to be avoided.
There are also numerous animal husbandry and land use issues (pasture management) which are important environmental issues unique to wool. One of the animal husbandry issues (Consumers of organic wool presumably desire a product from animals treated humanely) unique to sheep is the practice of mulesing. Sheep who are raised in certain climates (much of Australia) are susceptible to a condition called "fly-strike." What is fly-strike? A certain type of fly, blow flies, are attracted to and lay eggs on sheep's' back legs when the sheep are less than clean. When the flies hatch, these maggots burrow in any slightly raw or inflamed area and literally eat their victim alive. To control this condition, fly strike, herders "mules" the sheep, which means cutting away large swaths of their skin. Since mulesing is traditionally done without anesthetics, it is considered inhumane. Several large stores in Europe, including Marks and Spencer and H&M, refuse to use wool from sheep that are mulesed.
Synthetics
Synthetics are made from petroleum, a non-renewable resource. Synthetics have achieved a green credentials because some synthetics can theoretically be recycled in a technical nutrient loop.
The only synthetics that can be recycled currently are polyester and two types of nylon (although this attempt at recycling is in its infancy). Polyester is the world's most popular fiber, accounting for 70% of the fiber used in yarn.
There are substantial environmental concerns with the recycling of polyester right now. Most polyester contains antimony which is not a benign chemical - it is a likely carcinogen, among other issues[12]. Recycling polyester releases encapsulated antimony, thus creating antimony trioxide, which has a toxicity profile less sanguine even than antimony's. If your green desire is to help stem the use of industrial chemicals and their pollution of the earth - and of people - this is a step you would choose to avoid. Thanks to the cradle to cradle people, antimony free polyester does exist. Antimony free polyester fabrics are available. Unfortunately, although antimony free polyester - that is, non-toxic polyester (and there is controversy about whether the antimony is a threat to humans during use and before end of life) - does exist, there is no viable program for recycling it and keeping it segregated from other types of polyester right now. In fact, there is no viable program for the recycling of polyester fabrics of any kind right now. The only polyester that is currently being recycled is the polyester in PET bottles. The bottles are being turned into fabric. At end of life there is no large and viable program to recycle polyester fabric. There have been numerous attempts, but none have proven economically viable to date. This will change if the market (you) demands it and will pay for it. But it is an open question if this is the optimal path to pursue. The idea of the greenness of recycling polyester took hold before the importance of carbon footprint questions. In a life cycle analysis of the carbon footprint of fabric types, natural fiber fabrics will strongly outperform recycled polyesters. Why? Because the collection of the fabric at end of life and transportation of said fabric to the recycling centers requires energy; and the chemical recycling of polyester (the only way to up cycle polyester and make sure that the recycled product is as valuable as the previous incarnation of said polyester.)
The real concern about the viability of recycling polyester, however, is the carbon footprint of the recycling. The idea of the desirability of polyester recycling - that it could be a good answer to the concerns about the massive use of this non-renewable resource - were conceived before carbon footprint arose as a paramount concern. And recycling polyester consumes large amounts of energy, both to transport the polyester to the recycling plants, which are currently mostly in Asia; and to melt the fabric and re-polymerize the material for re-use.
There are two methods of recycling polyester: mechanical and chemical. Only chemical recycling can (and this is still theory and not practice at this stage) can produce a next product incarnation that is of the same quality as the parent poly stock. But there are numerous barriers to the eco viability of chemical polyester recycling: first it requires the use of additional non benign chemicals.
Recycling polyester chemically requires reheating the polymers to high temperatures, requiring energy; and the transportation of the fabric or fibers in reclamation requires much energy for transportation, .although there have been numerous attempts at poly and nylon recycling in the US, none have survived to become economically viable. Most recycling plants are in Asia.
People often are confused by thinking that polyester is a good choice by reminding themselves that polyester is recycled or recyclable. First the toxicity of the recycled of polyester makes it much less than an optimal solution. The only polyester that that is recycled currently is regular polyester, the recycling of which releases antimony and is a "recapitulation of toxic event" as the MBDC folks put it. The only polyester that should be recycled is antimony free polyester, which is not currently recycled. (There are good intentions but no concrete reclamation program plans.)
Currently, end of life issues for all synthetics except for polyester and nylon is straight to the landfill. All the recyled polyester fabric on the market today is recycled from Pet bottles, not from previous fabrics. And this recycled polyester fabric is, at end of life, on its way to the landfill to contribute to global warming. Its recyclabilty currently means only that it made one pit stop between the oil field and the landfill. Not a strong eco statement. And even for polyester, our cradle to cradle dream of a technical nutrient that can be infinitely recycled is currently wholly theory and definitely not reality, making "recyclable' polyester and even recycled polyester among the most anemic of green fabric choices.
If you must choose a synthetic fiber, insist on antimony-free polyester. But try to steer clear of any synthetics. There has not been much research on making wool and bast fiber blends as durable as most commercial fabric applications require. These fibers hold promise for replacing synthetics and their inexpensive price and durability.
Wood and Bamboo
Wood and the majority of bamboo fiber is turned into fiber filaments through the viscose process. This is a pulp and paper-like process which involves pulping the wood or bamboo, soaking it in sodium hydroxide and other harsh chemicals, extruding the resulting filaments and blasting the filaments with sulfuric acid to harden them into fibers. You can see that this process is potential serious water and air polluter. Be sure, if you use viscose yarns, to check to see if the viscose process is closed loop. The closed loop process recaptures and recycles water, and minimizes - although it does not eliminate - sulfuric acid air pollution.
Some natural bamboo fiber exists on the market, although it is rare.
Care should be taken to inquire as to the sustainability of the harvesting methods for the wood and the bamboo. Bamboo is under such intense pressure as a resource now that bamboo stands should be certified by FSC to assure that Panda habitat is not impacted, among other issues.
3. Try to minimize your purchase of fabrics which are blends of natural and synthetic fibers (i.e., cotton and polyester), or blends of two or more different synthetic fibers (polyester and acrylic).
Why? Because there is no hope of recycling these fabrics right now. At end of life, these fiber blends go directly to the landfill to degrade and exacerbate global warming. End of life issues are of prime importance among the eco considerations when choosing a fabric.
Blends of two or more natural fibers are OK if they are in an organic FABRIC because that means the fabric is compostable at end of life (the optimal end of life solution - far above recyclability of synthetics). Please note that, if the fabric is NOT an organic fabric and is just made of organic fiber, chances are that it is infused with chemicals that prevent you from composting the fabric at end of life.
The primacy of end of life issues:
Let end of life issues be a serious guide for you. At end of life, can you take the fabric off your sofa, compost it and grow tomatoes from it? Unless it is a 100% natural fiber, a 100% organic fiber and processed organically, that is, unless it is an organic fabric, you cannot.
By composting your fabric and thus diverting organic matter away from the waste stream the production of methane gas and leachate formulation in landfill sites is avoided, thus reducing global warming.
As well as diverting waste away from landfill, what is seen as rubbish by many can be transformed into a valuable resource. Making your own compost creates a free source of soil conditioner and nutrients for the garden, with very little effort.
4. Search for a fabric or product that is certified by any third party, independent textile certification agency.
There are lots of different competing textile certifications right now, so the scene is currently confusing. The only ones in use in the USA currently that are sufficiently comprehensive are:
- 1. GOTS (The Global Organic Textile Standard)
- 2. SMART, Sustainable Materials Rating Technology, which uses the GOTS standards
3. Cradle to Cradle
So you can decide for yourselves what comprehensive is, this is our framework on establishing comprehensive and therefore usefulness of the certification standard. We look at green claims for a fabric in four categories:
- Production of the fabric is not toxic or in any way degrades the environment
- Production and use of the fabric is not a threat to human or animal health (#1 and #2 are different considerations. You can have a fabric that is safe for humans to use, but whose production was an ecological disaster.)
- Carbon Footprint considerations
- Social justice issues, such as no child labor, no slave labor, certain basic workplace conditions are fulfilled such as having breaks, having less than 10 hour work days, having water and bathrooms available, etc.
The three certifications, GOTS, SMART and Cradle to Cradle do address all four of these concerns, although their caron footprint considerations are weak.
Unfortunately two of the more widely embraced fabric certifications do not address these four categories. Green Guard, only addresses a small part of #2 : air pollution and the out gassing of toxic VOCs, Volatile Organic Compounds. Interior designers and architects use this standard far more widely than any other, however, because a fabric which is Green Guard certified can accrue Indoor Air Quality points for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification.
Care must be taken to widen the knowledge base and issues of concern for all products specified by responsible professional architects and interior designers. Green Guard is so weak as a guide to correcting environmental issues with a product that it is only marginally useful; and should be abandoned for one of the stronger certifications.
Oeko-Tex 100 is a standard that has gained some acceptance. Unfortunately Oeko-Tex 100 addresses only category #2, human and animal health concerns from using the fabric. It does not address or require any action to ameliorate any issue in any of the other three categories.
But there is a subtlety here: Much of the pioneering of "green" is being done by small companies who cannot afford to certify all of their products immediately. In the absence of certifications, ask questions and, mostly, ask for data.
Also take care to insure that the certification scheme you are relying on for judging the green attributes of the product you are buying is a third party certifications. A large number of self-serving certification schemes developed and promoted by industry trade associations are not intended to promote progress in reducing the toxicity of the process or product or its carbon footprint. Here again, ask for the data and the criteria.
One thing to be careful of: There are many organizations which certify the fiber used in the fabric. Do NOT be confused. Fabric companies can and do prominently display the logo of the certifier of the fiber. Do not confuse this with the certifier of the fabric. Just to make things especially complicated, all of the fabric certifiers also certify just the fiber step. The organic cotton used in the yarn - which is used in the fabric - might be certified organic cotton. But if each one of the subsequent production steps to produce the fabric - fiber prep, spinning, weaving, dyeing, finishing - are not conducted in accordance with organic textile standards, it is NOT an organic fabric. The fiber can be certified by any one of a myriad of organizations. The third party certifiers include: IMO, Control Union, Organic Trade Association, the Soil Association, KRAV, and Oregon Tilth are some of the better known.
Only a few organizations certify organic fabric. But there are enough of them to be confusing. Ask for the GOTS certifications at each step. You are looking for GOTS certification on the final fabric.
You must pay attention to the certification on the finished fabric, not on any one of the many steps in the production process. Even GOTS certifies step by step starting with spinning. You can have certified organic cotton fiber that is spun into yarn, but not in a safe, organic manner (meaning no consideration as to chemicals used, and the disposition of those chemicals, water treatment, air treatment; the energy used in the spinning - is it renewable or fossil fuel, etc, the treatment of the workers, other social justice issues like assurances of no child and o slave labor). SO you can have organic fiber spun into conventional yarn. It still claims that it is organic cotton yarn, which is true, but it is NOT organic yarn. Big difference. Very Confusing. Don't be confused. This is true at each step of the production process. A fabric can be dyed to GOTS certification, but it not be an organic fabric because they did not use organic fiber and organic yarn. Although having any of the steps organic is a great leap forward, the optimal choice by far - by really really far - is GOTS certification at each step.
5. Pay attention to the carbon footprint of the fabrics you buy. Bast fibers, such as hemp, linen and abaca; and natural bamboo fiber (NOT bamboo viscose necessarily) are fiercely carbon positive choices. If the natural fibers are raised organically or sustainably, and especially using the no till method, this is a further carbon positive fact. Demand carbon footprint lifecycle analyses. These analyses can be so surprising as to be counter-intuitive. For instance, British consumers are better off, carbon footprint wise, to buy roses imported from distant Ghana than to buy roses grown in near-by Belgium...[13] So ask questions about the energy source and use of spinners, mills and dyers and finishing houses, as well as water use, cultivation and harvesting methods, quantity and type of fertilizer, type of transportation, land use. And beware of the statement of good intentions. A favorite greenwashing tactic is to have a luscious green policy statement prominently displayed and advertised. But an empirical examination -that is, a comparison of a company's product set to their intentions - can reveal a chasm between offerings and intentions.
6. Keep yourself educated on the progress of the eco-textile community. It is small now but passionate, and much progress can be made if you support the movement. Many new techniques are possible such as using ultrasound for dyeing, thereby eliminating the use of water entirely; and drying fabrics using radio frequencies rather than ovens, saving energy. So continue to keep yourself educated. Refer to links on the Sustainable Furnishings Council web-site, or the
O Ecotextiles website, for developments. Look for the Sustainable Furnishings Council exemplary membership status in furniture you buy. Oops - can't say this last sentence yet!
7. Demand organic textiles. Tell manufacturers and stores what you want and will buy. Yes, it's complicated and irritating - and ecotextiles are really hard to find - and they are also more expensive right now (mostly because of low volume but also because of the slower production speeds in production without chemicals). But eco consciousness in textiles is major progress in reclaiming our stewardship of the earth, and in preventing preventable human misery. If you, the consumer, demand or support the efforts, more progress can be made - and rapidly.
Patty Grossman
Leigh Anne Van Dusen
O Ecotextiles, Inc.
http://www.oecotextiles.com/
Short List of do's and don'ts:
When choosing a natural fiber, try to avoid buying anything made with conventional cotton. This may be hard at his date. But, if you have a choice, linen, hemp, bamboo, abaca, wool, or any other natural fiber are good additions to the world's textile choices, and much better eco choices than conventionally raised cotton.
If you must choose a synthetic fiber, insist on antimony-free polyester. (Antimony is used in the production of most polyester, and it is a nasty toxic chemical at end of life; and possibly during use.)
[14] Organic cotton is a better choice than conventional cotton. Do not buy anything made from conventionally raised cotton if you can possibly do this. Linen, bamboo, hemp and abaca are good additions to the world's fiber choices.
For bamboo fabrics, look for the FSC (Forestry Stewardship Council) certification.
Short-term exposure to high levels of perchloroethylene can affect the central nervous system, and cause unconsciousness and death.
Perchloroethylene is listed as a substance "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen" in the Eleventh Report on Carcinogens published by the National Toxicology Program because long-term exposure to perchloroethylene can cause leukemia and cancer of the skin, colon, lung, larynx, bladder, and urogenital tract.
Long-term exposure may also damage the central nervous system, liver, and kidneys; it can also cause respiratory failure, memory loss, confusion, and dry and cracked skin. If you are pregnant, long-term exposure to perchloroethylene may damage a developing fetus.
Short-term exposure to high levels of perchloroethylene can cause buildup of fluid in the lungs, eye and respiratory irritation, severe shortness of breath, sweating, nausea, vomiting, headache, dizziness, sleepiness, confusion, difficulty speaking and walking, and lightheadedness.
Short-term exposure to low levels of perchloroethylene can cause dizziness, inebriation, sleepiness, and irritated eyes, nose, mouth, throat, and respiratory tract. Direct contact with perchloroethylene liquid or vapor can irritate and burn the skin, eyes, most, and throat.
If you have a disease of the heart, liver, kidneys, or lungs, you will be more susceptible to the health effects of perchloroethylene.
If you think your health has been affected by exposure to perchloroethylene, contact your health care professional.
http://www.dwfcontract.com/fabrics/green-organic-and-sustainable-fabrics/
Posted by Neil Gordon on Sat, Jan 30, 2010 @ 07:09 AM
Written by Patty and Leigh Anne of O ECOTEXTILES http://oecotextiles.com/index.php
http://www.dwfcontract.com/Drapery--Upholstery-Workroom/
In last week's post I explained that polyurethane foam (polyfoam) has a plethora of problems associated with it:
- The chemicals used to manufacture the foam have been formally identified as carcinogens; and the flame retardant chemicals added to almost all foams increase the chemical toxicity. These chemicals evaporate (VOCs) and pollute our indoor air and dust;
- It does not decompose in the landfill; the recycling claim only perpetuates the continued use of hazardous chemicals;
- It is dependent on a non-renewable resource: crude oil.
When untreated foam is ignited, it burns extremely fast. Ignited polyurethane foam sofas can reach temperatures over 1400 degrees Fahrenheit within minutes. Making it even more deadly is the toxic gas produced by burning polyurethane foam - hydrogen cyanide gas. Hydrogen cyanide itself is so toxic that it was used by the Aum Shinrikyo terrorists who attacked Tokyo's subway system in 1995, and in Nazi death camps during World War II. The gas was also implicated in the 2003 Rhode Island nightclub fire that killed 100 people, including Great White guitarist Ty Longley, and injured more than 200 others. Tellingly, a witness to that fire, television news cameraman Brian Butler, told interviewers that "It had to be two minutes, tops, before the whole place was black smoke." Just one breath of superheated toxic gas can incapacitate a person, preventing escape from a burning structure.
Polyfoam is so flammable (called "solid gasoline" by fire experts) - burning so hot and emitting such toxic fumes while burning - that even the National Association of State Fire Marshals (NASFM) recommends that it be placed within Class 9 (an unusual but clearly hazardous material) because they are concerned about the safety of firemen and other first responders.
According to the federal government's National Institute of Standards and Technology, polyurethane foam in furniture is responsible for 30 percent of U.S. deaths from fires each year.
Polyurethane foam was introduced as a cushion component in furniture in 1957 - only a bit more than 50 years ago - and quickly replaced latex, excelsior, cotton batting, horsehair and wool because it was CHEAP! Imagine - polyfoam cushions at $2 vs. natural latex at $7 or $8. Price made all the difference.
But today - not long after jumping on the bandwagon - we have concerns about polyurethane: in addition to all the problems mentioned above there is concern about its carbon footprint. 
So now we see ads for a new miracle product: a bio based foam made from soybeans, which is highly touted as "A leap forward in foam technology, conserving increasingly scarce oil resources while substituting more sustainable options," as one product brochure describes it. Companies and media releases claim that using soy in polyurethane foam production results in fewer greenhouse gas emissions, requires less energy, and could significantly reduce reliance on petroleum. Many companies are jumping on the bandwagon, advertising their green program of using foam cushions with "20% bio based foam" (everybody knows we have to start somewhere and that's a start, right?). As Len Laycock, CEO of Upholstery Arts, says - who wouldn't sleep sounder with such promising news? I have again leaned heavily on Mr. Laycock's articles on poly and soy foam, "Killing You Softly", for this post.
As with so many over hyped ‘green' claims, it's the things they don't say that matter most. While these claims contain grains of truth, they are a far cry from the whole truth. So called 'soy foam' is hardly the dreamy green product that manufacturers and suppliers want people to believe.
To begin, let's look at why they claim soy foam is green:
- it's made from soybeans, a renewable resource
- it reduces our dependence on fossil fuels by both reducing the amount of fossil fuel needed for the feedstock and by reducing the energy requirements needed to produce the foam.
Are these viable claims?
It's made from soybeans, a renewable resource: This claim is undeniably true. But what they don't tell you is that this product, marketed as soy or bio-based, contains very little soy. In fact, it is more accurate to call it ‘polyurethane based foam with a touch of soy added for marketing purposes'. For example, a product marketed as "20% soy based" may sound impressive, but what this typically means is that only 20 % of the polyol portion of the foam is derived from soy. Given that polyurethane foam is made by combining two main ingredients-a polyol and an isocyanate-in approximately equal parts, "20% soy based" translates to a mere 10% of the foam's total volume. In this example the product remains 90% polyurethane foam and by any reasonable measure cannot legitimately be described as ‘based' on soy. If you go to Starbucks and buy a 20 oz coffee and add 2-3 soy milk/creamers to it, does it become "soy-based" coffee?
It reduces our dependence on fossil fuels: According to Cargill, a multi-national producer of agricultural and industrial products, including BiOH polyol (the "soy" portion of "soy foam"), the soy based portion of so called ‘soy foam' ranges from 5% up to a theoretical 40% of polyurethane foam formulations. This means that while suppliers may claim that ‘bio foams' are based on renewable materials such as soy, in reality a whopping 90 to 95%, and sometimes more of the product consists of the same old petro-chemical based brew of toxic chemicals. This is no ‘leap forward in foam technology'.
It is true that the energy needed to produce soy-based foam is, according to Cargill, who manufactures the soy polyol, less that that needed to produce the polyurethane foam. But the way they report the difference is certainly difficult to decipher: soy based polyols use 23% less energy to produce than petroleum based polyols, according to Cargill's LCA. But the formula for the foam uses only 20% soy based polyols, so by my crude calculations (20% of 50%...) the energy savings of 20% soy based foam would require only 4.6% less energy than that used to make the petroleum based foam. But hey, that's still a savings and every little bit helps get us closer to a self sustaining economy and is friendlier to the planet.
But the real problem with advertising soy based foam as a new, miracle green product is that the foam, whether soy based or not, remains a "greenhouse gas spewing pretroleum product and a witches brew of carcinogenic and neurotoxic chemicals", according to Len Laycock.
My concern with the use of soy is not its carbon footprint but rather the introduction of a whole new universe of concerns such as pesticide use, genetically modifed crops, appropriation of food stocks and deforestation. Most soy crops are now GMO: according to the USDA, over 91% of all soy crops in the US are now GMO; in 2007, 58.6% of all soybeans worldwide were GMO. If you don't think that's a big deal, please read our posts on these issues (9.23.09 and 9.29.09). The debate still rages today. Greenpeace did an expose ("Eating Up The Amazon") on what they consider to be a driving force behind Amazon rainforest destruction - Cargill's race to establish soy plantations in Brazil. You can read the Greenpeace report here, and Cargill's rejoinder here.
An interesting aside: There is an article featured on CNNMoney.com about the rise of what they call Soylandia - the enormous swath of soy producing lands in Brazil (almost unknown to Americans) which dominates the global soy trade. Sure opened my eyes to some associated soy issues.
In "Killing You Softly", another sinister side of soy based foam marketing is brought to light:
"Pretending to offer a ‘soy based' foam allows these corporations to cloak themselves in a green blanket and masquerade as environmentally responsible corporations when in practice they are not. By highlighting small petroleum savings, they conveniently distract the public from the fact that this product's manufacture and use continues to threaten human health and poses serious disposal problems. Aside from replacing a small portion of petroleum polyols, the production of polyurethane based foams with soy added continues to rely heavily on ‘the workhorse of the polyurethane foam industry', cancer causing toluene diisocyanate (TDI). So it remains ‘business as usual ‘ for polyurethane manufacturers.
Despite what polyurethane foam and furniture companies imply , soy foam is not biodegradable either. Buried in the footnotes on their website, Cargill quietly acknowledges that, "foams made with BiOH polyols are not more biodegradable than traditional petroleum-based cushioning". Those ever so carefully phrased words are an admission that all polyurethane foams, with or without soy added, simply cannot biodegrade. And so they will languish in our garbage dumps, leach into our water, and find their way into the soft tissue of young children, contaminating and compromising life long after their intended use.
The current marketing of polyurethane foam and furniture made with ‘soy foam' is merely a page out the tobacco industry's current ‘greenwashing' play book. Like a subliminal message, the polyurethane foam and furniture industries are using the soothing words and images of the environmental movement to distract people from the known negative health and environmental impacts of polyurethane foam manufacture, use and disposal.
Cigarettes that are organic (pesticide-free), completely biodegradable, and manufactured using renewable tobacco, still cause cancer and countless deaths. Polyurethane foam made with small amounts of soy derived materials still exposes human beings to toxic, carcinogenic materials, still relies on oil production, and still poisons life.
While bio-based technologies may offer promise for creating greener, cradle-to-cradle materials, tonight the only people sitting pretty or sleeping well on polyurethane foam that contains soy are the senior executives and shareholders of the companies benefiting from its sale. As for the rest of humankind and all the living things over which we have stewardship, we've been soy scammed!"
http://www.dwfcontract.com/Drapery--Upholstery-Workroom/