Let’s look at just three areas in which your fabric choice impacts you directly:
1. What are residual chemicals in the fabrics doing to you and the planet?
2. What are the process chemicals expelled in treatment water doing to us?
3. Why do certain fiber choices accelerate climate change?
RESIDUAL CHEMICALS IN THE FABRICS:
- It takes between 10% and 100% of the weight of the fabric in chemicals to produce that fabric. Producing enough fabric to cover ONE sofa uses 4 to 20 lbs. of chemicals – and the final fabric is about 27% synthetic chemicals by weight.
- In the mills, textile clippings must be handled like toxic waste, according to OSHA regulations (see Note below). The fabrics we bring into our homes contain chemicals which are outlawed in other products. Many fabrics sold in the USA are outlawed in China, Japan and the EU – because of the chemicals found in the fabrics.
- Chemicals which remain in the fabric are absorbed by our bodies: some chemicals outgas into the air; some are absorbed through our skin. Another way our bodies absorb these chemicals: over time, microscopic particles are abraded and fall into the dust in our homes where pets and crawling children breathe them in.
- Chemicals used routinely in textile processing – and found in the fabrics we live with – include those that bioaccumulate, persist in our environment and contribute to a host of human diseases. They include, but are not limited to, formaldehyde, benzene, lead, cadmium, mercury and chlorine, which are all used a lot.
- Why do we continue to allow fabrics into our lives that contain chemicals which have been demonstrated to affect us in many ways, from subtle to profound? Chemicals used in textile processing are contributing to the chemical onslaught which many feel has led to increases in a host of health issues: infertility, asthma, nervous disorders from depression and anxiety to brain tumors, immune system suppression and genetic alterations. Why are we taking a chance?
PROCESS CHEMICALS EXPELLED IN TREATMENT WATER:
- The textile industry is the #1 industrial polluter of water in the world.
- Vast quantities of water are returned to our ecosystem, untreated, filled with process chemicals – chemicals which circulate in the groundwater of our planet.
- Because these chemicals are released into the environment, they become available to living organisms (like us). That’s why PBDE’s (a fire retardant chemical widely used in the textile and electronics industries) are found in the blood of every animal in the world, from the Artic to the Amazon – in the most remote parts of the world, far from any industry. And the rate of increase for PBDE’s is rising exponentially.
- Disease rates correlated with chemical exposure are on the rise – You can send your children to private schools and provide the best medical care in the world, but you can’t protect them from chemical pollution.
- The U.S. textile industry is the 5th largest contributor to CO2 emissions, by industry, in the United States. (The production of the U.S. textile industry is mostly synthetics, and these egregious GHG emissions are largely from the production of synthetics.) Given the size of the U.S. textile industry, it seems a disproportionatly high percentage. Image what the textile industry contributes globally.
- Not only is the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions of concern regarding synthetics, but so is the quality: Nylon, for example, creates emissions of NO2, which is 300 times more damaging than CO2  and which, because of its long life (120 years) can reach the upper atmosphere and deplete the layer of stratospheric ozone, which is an important filter of UV radiation. Polyester production generates particulates, CO2, N2O, hydrocarbons, sulphur oxides and carbon monoxide, acetaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane (also potentially carcinogenic).
- The production of synthetics is heavily dependent on oil – it’s made from oil and it takes a lot to produce the fibers. The embodied energy in 1 KG of polyester is much greater than the embodied energy in 1 KG of many common building products, including steel, as shown in the chart here:
You, as a consumer, are very powerful. You have the power to change harmful production practices. Eco textiles exist and they give you a greener, healthier, fairtrade alternative. What will an eco textile do for you? You and the frogs and the world’s flora and fauna could live longer, and be healthier – and in a more just, sufficiently diversified, more beautiful world.
 Working Report No. 10,2002 from the Danish EPA. Danish experience: Best Available Techniques (BAT) in the clothing and textile industry, document prepared for the European IPPC Bureau and the TWG Textile. See also Voncina, B and Pintar, M, “Textile Waste Recycling”, University of Maribor, Slovenia, from the proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, September 2007
 Lacasse and Baumann, Textile Chemicals:, Environmental Data and Facts, Springer, New York, 2004, page 609.
NOTE: From: http://www.fibre2fashion.com/industry-article/3/297/safety-and-health-issues-in-the-textile-industry2.asp: OSHA requirements based on such studies as these:
A study conducted in USA revealed a correlation between the presence of cancer of the buccal cavity and pharynx and occupation in the textile industry. Another study revealed that textile workers were at high risk for developing cancer of the stomach while another study indicated a low degree of correlation between oesophageal cancer and working in the textile industry. Moreover, a high degree of colorectal cancer, thyroid cancer, testicular cancer and nasal cancer was observed among textile workers. Also, a relationship between the presence of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and working in the textile industry was observed.
 See, for example:
- “Killer Couches”, Sara Schedler, Friends of the Earth, www.foe.org
- “Dioxins and Dioxin-like Persistent Organic Pollutants in Textiles and Chemicals in the Textile Sector”, Bostjan Krizanec and Alenka Majcen Le Marechal, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Smetanova 17, SI-2000 Maribor, Slovenia; January 24, 2006
- “Potentials for exposure to industrial chemicals suspected of causing developmental neurotoxicity”, Philippe Grandjean, MD, PhD, Adjunct Professor and Marian Perez, MPH, Project Coordinator,
- “The Chemicals Within” , Anne Underwood, Newsweek, January 26, 2008
- Williams, Florence, “Toxic Breast Milk”, New York Times Magazine, January 9, 2005
 Cooper, Peter, “Clearer Communication”, Ecotextile News, May 2007
 Energy Information Administration, Form EIA:848, “2002 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey,” Form EIA-810, “Monthly Refinery Report” (for 2002) and Documentatioin for Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2003 (May 2005). http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb1204.html
 “Tesco carbon footprint study confirms organic farming is energy efficient, but excludes key climate benefit of organic farming, soil carbon”, Prism Webcast News, April 30, 2008, http://prismwebcastnews.com/2008/04/30/tesco-carbon-footprint-study-confirms-organic-farming%E2%80%99s-energy-efficiency-but-excludes-key-climate-benefit-of-organic-farming-%E2%80%93-soil-carbon/
 “Ecological Footprint and Water Analysis of Cotton, Hemp and Polyester”, by Cherrett et al, Stockholm Environment Institute
 Gruttner, Henrik, Handbook of Sustainable Textile Purchasing, EcoForum, Denmark, August 2006.