by Cherie Birkner

We need to talk. About sharing facts. While fake news is a real phenomenon of the Internet, fact checking has been a key priority in our work. Naming and linking to reliable sources has been an absolute must since day one of the Sustainable Fashion Matterz platform. When I first put together our Fashion Facts page in 2017 I started by Googling facts I had often come across on Instagram in search of their original source. For example, “it takes 7,000 liters of water to produce one pair of jeans”. Then I would find numerous blogs or small businesses, of which only some linked to a further source. In this particular case, the original source I found behind the stated fact was a Greenpeace paper from 2015. At the time, this seemed to be a well established and credible organization to me, and therefore enough for me to list and share the information on Sustainable Fashion Matterz.

Today, I choose to write this article because I was reminded to always check sources, even if I’ve listed them in the past. And I want to ask you to do the same. When you read facts on carbon emissions, water usage, or other ecological data, I strongly recommend viewing these as indicators, NOT as universal truths. Why? Because on a large scale, we’re dealing with a broad spectrum of how ecological or destructive one fiber, such as cotton, can be produced. Where am I coming from you ask? On World Water Day I reshared our #WATERMATTERZ campaign as well as the key campaign “fact” which states that 2,700l water = 1 new t-shirt = 870 second hand t-shirts…. In the following days I started asking myself a key question:

DOES 2,700L WATER = 1 T-SHIRT = FAKE NEWS?

I sourced the fact that “2,700l water = 1 new t-shirt” / 7,000l of water are needed for a pair of jeans” from the World Wildlife Foundation and this video from National Geographic. How this results to the same water usage for 870 second hand shirts can be read here. What does “=” & “needed” even mean? For me it was clear: this is water which is polluted through the use of pesticides (in the cotton growing process), and water which has been contaminated with chemicals in the dying and treatment process of the fabric. But here is where it is time to check myself: this was not actually stated in the paper from Greenpeace (1 jeans need 7000l water). The  paper claims that “One pair of jeans need 7,000l of water to be produced. And for dying, printing and washing of textiles hundreds of dangerous chemicals are used”. So two pieces of information placed right next to one another which suggested a correlation, despite not clearly stating what water usage means. The report of itself provides no further sources. So had I shared false information?

Recently, Veronica Bates Kassatly released an article on Apparel Insider digging deep into where the high water usage and pollution claims such as 2,700l water per t-shirt come from: Essentially, a promotional campaign launched in 2009 commissioned by Colorep, Inc. with the purpose to make polyester appear as a more sustainable fiber than cotton. Colorep had developed a new technology for waterless fabric printing that only worked on polyester. At the time “nobody thought of plastic fibers as sustainable”, so as part of the promotional campaign claims on a newly launched blog about this AirDEye technology were making cotton seem like the less sustainable choice with “facts” for which no source was ever given. Nonetheless, the statements spread all the way to platforms such as World Bank, WWF, Fashion Revolution and finally to Sustainable Fashion Matterz, where I had relied on the above named sources to be valid enough to share.

To give an insight on the “real” numbers surrounding cotton production the Apparel Insider article states: “data from the ICAC Cotton Data Book 2020 suggests it takes on average 1,214 liters of irrigation water to produce one kilogram of lint.” This takes us closer to 120l of water per t-shirt, which is just about 5% of what we were initially working with . Unfortunately, the Cotton Data Book costs $ 500, so I do not have detailed insights into the numbers… and while we are at it: a book “suggesting” something is not the same as the book actually making a statement.

HOW MANY LITERS OF WATER DOES IT TAKE TO PRODUCE A T-SHIRT?

There are so many factors which can affect how much water is needed, and how much of that water is actually polluted in the production. Not every cotton farm uses pesticides, in some regions the main water source is rain, now should we consider that “water use”? Some factories, like yousstex, recycle water & use filtration processes which prevent any of the water they use from being polluted. Is this considered water usage? On the other hand we also have factories like Grasim’s largest manufacturing unit, Nagda which is known to discard toxic chemical-infused water directly into its surrounding environment. Source ARTE documentary Fast Fashion - die dunkele Seite der Mode from 1:09. In the photo below you can see water outside of a tannery in Egypt. There are so many components which affect the usage of water that go beyond material, organic, or pesticide grown. For example: what type of irrigation system is being used, where is the water coming from, what chemicals are used in the dyeing and finishing process? Are these natural dyes like avocado seeds, light chemicals or highly toxic ones?

As you can see in our #WATERMATTERZ video, only a few drops of dark liquid can turn an entire aquarium black. So even an amount of 120l of water being used in a way in which it is intoxicating and released into nature can have a far larger impact than on “just” 120l of water.

Now I would love to have an easy answer to how much water is actually needed/polluted for our clothes, but the truth is: there is no one size fits all answer. If, on a consumer level, we want to reduce our own fashion water footprint, the safest route is to go for pre-owned, second hand, vintage, upcycled or redesigned fashion before buying new things. Find a list of resale platforms in our article how to run a revolving closet. Also check out platforms such as Avocado Store, Good on You as well as our editorials & brand listing to find brands which go the extra mile to produce responsibly.

WHAT NOW, CAN I STILL SHARE FACTS?

There are things which are actual facts, such as Cambodia's GDP in 2015 being lower than Inditex’s (incl Zara) turnover in 2015. Then there are statements like “the fashion industry is the second most polluting industry” which boils down to a real he-said-she-said situation as you can read up on in Alden Wicker’s article where she takes the statement apart and explains how “We Have No Idea How Bad Fashion Actually Is for the Environment. But it’s definitely not good”.

So where do we go from here? I want to continue to learn and share information, yet am increasingly aware that the fashion sector lacks enough and credible research. Studies rarely reflect reality justly and in most cases there are a whole lot of variables to any conclusion. At the same time it is so obviously wrong that a pair of newly bought jeans smelling of chlorine which sheds color just can’t be healthy for me, the person who has the material running through their fingertips at the sewing machine all day or for the environment. Whether it is through the use of pesticides in the cotton growing process, the use of toxic chemical dyes in the production, washing laundry or when unwanted textiles ending up in landfill, the ingredients used to produce most clothes are unhealthy and destructive throughout their life. Period. So maybe it’s not that people should stop sharing information but firstly check sources! And secondly, share the fact (höhö) that there is variation to most studies.

CONCLUSION

Facts are great to make a point and to give a statement credibility. But in times of misleading headlines and opinions drifting apart more and more, let’s remind ourselves to maintain a mindset of nuance and critical thinking even if what we come across conveniently plays into our cards. It’s important. Currently, I am working on an updated version of the fact page, weaving out old posts on Social Media platforms where the sources are no longer online. Moving forward, I will be including the exact source URL in fact shareables for social media and additionally include reminders to check facts even if we share them! If you have posts coming to mind which you have shared and now you are not so sure any more how correct these are don’t be afraid to inform your followers/readers/listeners. After all we are only human and there is always more to learn (or unlearn) no matter how much of an “expert” you are. And that’s a fact ;)