Is the current cultivation of cotton sustainable? I do not believe it is, but it is heading that way. Cotton is known to be a thirsty crop. According to the Sustainability of Cotton reading this week, it takes approximately 10,000-17,000 liters of water to produce 1 kg of cotton. That is a lot of water usage for a very small amount of product. The report talks about different ways to lower the amount of water usage for cotton cultivation. One of those ways is a type of irrigation system called drip irrigation. It is said to be one of the most efficient water usage systems out there with an efficiency percentage of 90-98%. This also goes along with a video on the Cotton, Inc. website called Cotton & Water: White, Blue and Green. It shows different forms of irrigation systems and talks about their efficiency. The video also concludes that drip irrigation is one of the most efficient ways to water cotton crops. The only problem with this drip system is the cost. Because of this cost, there is only a small percentage of these systems in use around the world. There are developments underway however to reduce the costs of this system considerably. According to the Sustainability of Cotton report, there are currently a range of low cost drip systems on the market for small-holders.
Along with many other factors in cotton cultivation including, fertilizer use, pests and diseases, pesticide use, defoliation, genetically modified cotton, etc; irrigation of the cotton crop is a major factor in its production and processing. I believe we are already headed in the right direction by addressing the different issues in the textile industry, starting with cotton. I just hope that we will be able to implement different changes into the industry before we are past the point where we can make a difference in the world.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Baby steps...
In my soon to be professional opinion, the question of natural vs. synthetic material use should be based on the end use of the client. While working at my internship this last summer, the question of natural vs. synthetic was brought up quite a bit. There are all sorts of products out there trying to become more eco-friendly, yet the issue the majority of them run into is actually durability. For example, if you have a wall-covering that will be used in a commercial office building, then it has to meet certain criteria in order to be used. It must be what we call a Type II material, which means it usually contains synthetic material and is therefore more durable. Natural materials (in this case Type I) tend to break down easier and must be replaced more often because they are not as durable as Type II materials.
Unfortunately there are a lot of clients that are looking for the cheapest materials they can get that will last a long time. One such material I came across during my internship was a flooring product called VCT. VCT stands for Vinyl Composition Tile. This product is often used in schools or educational type settings, because of its durability. It is even used in our own school. It is the main hallway flooring in the College of Human Sciences. It is used because it is cheap and will last for a very long time (as long as it is maintained properly). Unfortunately, it is composed of harmful materials that when broken down can harm the environment. They are composed of colored vinyl chips formed into solid sheets of varying thickness by heat and pressure and then cut into varying sizes. These tiles replaced asbestos tiles that were mainly used in the last 1970's and 1980's. If these VCT tiles are burned, they can release dioxins and other hazardous chemicals. Harmful additives such as phthalates and heavy metals can leach out of the roughly 1.5 million tons of vinyl discarded each year just in the United States alone.
Now imagine all of the other products out there that are similar in composition or materials. Considering that natural materials break down easier and are more friendly to the environment, then I would choose natural materials. I believe we who are just going into the industry need to help discover ways to make natural materials more durable. If we were able to help change the materials that we use and quit using the ones that are more harmful to the environment, then I believe we can start to make a change towards becoming a more environmentally friendly industry. It all starts with baby steps, but we having to be willing to take those first steps to get the ball rolling.
Unfortunately there are a lot of clients that are looking for the cheapest materials they can get that will last a long time. One such material I came across during my internship was a flooring product called VCT. VCT stands for Vinyl Composition Tile. This product is often used in schools or educational type settings, because of its durability. It is even used in our own school. It is the main hallway flooring in the College of Human Sciences. It is used because it is cheap and will last for a very long time (as long as it is maintained properly). Unfortunately, it is composed of harmful materials that when broken down can harm the environment. They are composed of colored vinyl chips formed into solid sheets of varying thickness by heat and pressure and then cut into varying sizes. These tiles replaced asbestos tiles that were mainly used in the last 1970's and 1980's. If these VCT tiles are burned, they can release dioxins and other hazardous chemicals. Harmful additives such as phthalates and heavy metals can leach out of the roughly 1.5 million tons of vinyl discarded each year just in the United States alone.
Now imagine all of the other products out there that are similar in composition or materials. Considering that natural materials break down easier and are more friendly to the environment, then I would choose natural materials. I believe we who are just going into the industry need to help discover ways to make natural materials more durable. If we were able to help change the materials that we use and quit using the ones that are more harmful to the environment, then I believe we can start to make a change towards becoming a more environmentally friendly industry. It all starts with baby steps, but we having to be willing to take those first steps to get the ball rolling.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Are we there yet???
Are we there yet??? A phrase often used by children, can also be used in the sense of our world being able to function more sustainably. I believe we are not quite there yet, but are getting closer every day to becoming more sustainable in our practices. In our reading this week, we learned about the effects of the textile industry's production process on our environment and possible solutions to correct these problems. The recommendations made by this weeks Fashioning Sustainability (FS) report can contribute to potential changes listed in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) reading from last week.
One of the recommendations from the report was to raise awareness amongst key textile industry players. This goes back to the promising intervention in the MEA that improving communication and the education of people is essential to achieving environmental sustainability. If people were more aware of their actions and the effects those actions can have on the environment, then we could be just one step closer to improving both the production process and the world in which we live.
Another recommendation was to make supply chains transparent. If brands and retailers were able to trace the origins of their stock then the industry would be able to enforce higher production standards. In the MEA it talks about increasing transparency and the accountability of government and private-sector performance on decisions that have an impact on ecosystems. The practices of factories or farmers can greatly effect their ecosystem by, for example, the use of hazardous pesticides on cotton fields, or child labor and poor working conditions in factories. The use of hazardous pesticides can cause harmful chemicals to seep into the soil and drinking water or by having poor working conditions, it can effect the health and well being of the community the factory is located in. So by making the supply chain more transparent, we can hopefully prevent the use of harmful pesticides or poor working conditions in the places where our textile stock is made.
The final recommendation to be covered I believe relates closely with the other two. By training and supporting the people along the supply chain, we can encourage them to convert to more sustainable practices. Giving them the time, encouragement, and incentives to change their practices should make a big difference in the industry and will hopefully cause a domino affect in other areas as well. The MEA talks about using relevant forms of knowledge and information in assessments and decision-making. Practitioners already practicing sustainability can help to train and support people who are needing to change their ways but are unsure of where to start or how to do so. These practitioners can give those people tips on how they were able to achieve sustainability and the best ways to start.
By taking these recommendations and implementing them into the textile industry, we should be on our way to becoming more sustainable and improving our planet. Then we can start telling ourselves that we are almost there instead of asking if we are there yet.
One of the recommendations from the report was to raise awareness amongst key textile industry players. This goes back to the promising intervention in the MEA that improving communication and the education of people is essential to achieving environmental sustainability. If people were more aware of their actions and the effects those actions can have on the environment, then we could be just one step closer to improving both the production process and the world in which we live.
Another recommendation was to make supply chains transparent. If brands and retailers were able to trace the origins of their stock then the industry would be able to enforce higher production standards. In the MEA it talks about increasing transparency and the accountability of government and private-sector performance on decisions that have an impact on ecosystems. The practices of factories or farmers can greatly effect their ecosystem by, for example, the use of hazardous pesticides on cotton fields, or child labor and poor working conditions in factories. The use of hazardous pesticides can cause harmful chemicals to seep into the soil and drinking water or by having poor working conditions, it can effect the health and well being of the community the factory is located in. So by making the supply chain more transparent, we can hopefully prevent the use of harmful pesticides or poor working conditions in the places where our textile stock is made.
The final recommendation to be covered I believe relates closely with the other two. By training and supporting the people along the supply chain, we can encourage them to convert to more sustainable practices. Giving them the time, encouragement, and incentives to change their practices should make a big difference in the industry and will hopefully cause a domino affect in other areas as well. The MEA talks about using relevant forms of knowledge and information in assessments and decision-making. Practitioners already practicing sustainability can help to train and support people who are needing to change their ways but are unsure of where to start or how to do so. These practitioners can give those people tips on how they were able to achieve sustainability and the best ways to start.
By taking these recommendations and implementing them into the textile industry, we should be on our way to becoming more sustainable and improving our planet. Then we can start telling ourselves that we are almost there instead of asking if we are there yet.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Is there an ecological crisis upon us?
The topic of global warming has been an increasingly debated one over the past several decades. Despite scientific evidence that the causes of global warming are human related, there are still people out there who are skeptical.
This week I read about natural resource depletion and it effects on people and the environment, as well as, theories of the extinction of the population of Easter Island in the southeast corner of the Polynesian triangle. According to the Easter Island theory, the cause of the sudden decline in population was due to the depletion of natural resources. In my second reading, there was evidence of natural resource depletion greatly effecting the world's population and climate.
I believe that global warming is closely related to the effects of natural resource depletion. Despite a tremendous amount of evidence proving the causes of global warming, there are still skeptics. One of their arguments against global warming is that our world's most reliable temperature data show no signs of a global warming trend. According to the American Policy Roundtable's website they feel that, "satellite readings of temperatures in the lower troposphere (an area scientists predict would immediately reflect any global warming) show no warming since readings began 23 years ago. These readings are accurate to within 0.01 degrees C, and are consistent with data from weather balloons. Only land-based temperature stations show a warming trend, and these stations do not cover the entire globe, are often contaminated by heat generated by nearby urban development, and are subject to human error" (American Policy Roundtable, 2007).
It may be true that these temperature gauges show no sign of global warming, but in my opinion, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence in other areas of the world that can prove that global warming is a direct effect of natural resource depletion. These issues need to be addressed quickly so that future generations do not suffer the consequences of current human behavior.
This week I read about natural resource depletion and it effects on people and the environment, as well as, theories of the extinction of the population of Easter Island in the southeast corner of the Polynesian triangle. According to the Easter Island theory, the cause of the sudden decline in population was due to the depletion of natural resources. In my second reading, there was evidence of natural resource depletion greatly effecting the world's population and climate.
I believe that global warming is closely related to the effects of natural resource depletion. Despite a tremendous amount of evidence proving the causes of global warming, there are still skeptics. One of their arguments against global warming is that our world's most reliable temperature data show no signs of a global warming trend. According to the American Policy Roundtable's website they feel that, "satellite readings of temperatures in the lower troposphere (an area scientists predict would immediately reflect any global warming) show no warming since readings began 23 years ago. These readings are accurate to within 0.01 degrees C, and are consistent with data from weather balloons. Only land-based temperature stations show a warming trend, and these stations do not cover the entire globe, are often contaminated by heat generated by nearby urban development, and are subject to human error" (American Policy Roundtable, 2007).
It may be true that these temperature gauges show no sign of global warming, but in my opinion, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence in other areas of the world that can prove that global warming is a direct effect of natural resource depletion. These issues need to be addressed quickly so that future generations do not suffer the consequences of current human behavior.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)