Environmental Justice Essay

The movie Gandhi directed by Richard Attenborough showcases Gandhi supporting and creating homespun fabrics. According to the film, his reasoning is almost purely economic. However, spinning, dyeing, or sewing your own clothing has many positive environmental effects as well.

The modern process of manufacturing textiles is highly pollutant. ”According to the 1995 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data, 339 textile facilities reporting SIC 22, released (to the air, water, or land) and transferred (shipped off-site or discharged to sewers) a total of 25 million pounds of toxic chemicals during calendar year 1995” (epa.gov). Dyeing fabric uses excess water, and dye fixatives end up in sewers that leak into rivers. Cloth is bleached using dioxin-producing chlorine compounds. Artificial fibers such as nylon, polyester, and rayon tend to be non-biodegradable and are treated with harsh chemicals (Goodchoices.org). However, natural fibers use pesticides which are also harmful to workers, livestock, and the soil. According to the USDA, cotton crops account for about one-quarter of all pesticides in the United States. The Pesticide Action Network is fighting against the use of pesticides by informing about and supporting the Organic Cotton movement (panna.org). Buying and using organic cotton and other sustainable materials cuts down on pollution and waste.

According to the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste, 68 pounds of clothing and textiles are thrown away by the average American every year. That’s about 4% of the total solid waste in the United States (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). The Technical Textile Markets report that the demand for man-made fibers has nearly doubled in the last fifteen years. In her article “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry” Luz Claudio attributes this rise to the fashion agency’s ever-increasing output and society’s consumerist view of “disposable clothing” (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

Looking back to the 19th century view on textiles, reuse and recycling was an important factor in everyday life. Clothes were sewn, handed down, handed down again, ripped apart and sewn into something else, then quilted or turned to rags. How then, has our 21st century society come to this point? Dr. Susan Strasser discusses this answer, along with many other now “disposable” items in her book Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash.

Reusing was not as common during the early 1900s, but women still remembered, and kept alive, their mothers’ and grandmothers’ traditions. However, when World War Two rolled around, items around the house and neighborhood that might have been reused were sent to scrap drives to benefit the war effort. Dr. Strasser states, “Paradoxically, the very emphasis on scrap reinforced not the traditional stewardship of objects but the newer habits of throwing things away.” After the war ended, people wanted to spend, and many had forgotten the 19th century ideals of reuse.

The 1950s was an age of disposal. Pre-packaged food and manufactured clothing began to greatly outweigh their handmade counterparts (Strasser). From this point on, our modern perspective has changed drastically from our recycling roots, and we continue to waste more than ever.

There is a New England proverb, “Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.” Using this as a guide, society should take on a new role. Making your own clothing from sustainable fabrics cuts down on manufacturing pollution and material transportation. Selecting locally grown materials, or buying handmade from local venders contributes as well. Shopping thriftily and altering clothing reduces waste. Upcycling clothing into fabric lowers demand for new material. And finally, creating anything for yourself provides satisfaction.