Consumerism's Green Cost: Towards Sustainable Habits
Modern consumerism heavily strains Earth's resources, creating vast waste and pollution. The shift towards sustainable consumption faces challenges like greenwashing.
Topics: environment, individual and values, media
Example
The fast fashion industry shows consumerism's environmental cost. The UN Environment Programme estimates that fashion produces between 2 and 8 per cent of global carbon emissions, that textile dyeing is the second-largest polluter of water worldwide, and that the number of times a garment is worn fell by about 36 per cent in 15 years. A 2020 scientific review estimated that the industry creates about 92 million tonnes of textile waste a year.
Key facts
- UNEP estimates the fashion industry produces between 2 and 8 per cent of global carbon emissions.
- UNEP says textile dyeing is the second-largest polluter of water globally and garment use fell about 36 per cent in 15 years.
- A 2020 review in Nature Reviews Earth and Environment estimated fashion creates about 92 million tonnes of textile waste a year.
Limitations
- Estimates of fashion's share of emissions range from about 2% to 10% depending on method, so use a range and name the source rather than one precise figure.
Evaluations
environment evaluation
Support
Clothes worn fewer times before being thrown away mean more production for the same use, which multiplies emissions, water pollution and waste.
Counterargument
Fashion's share of emissions is smaller than energy, transport or food, so focusing on clothes may distract from bigger sources.
Rebuttal
A few per cent of global emissions is still comparable to a large country's total, and fashion also pollutes water, so it is worth tackling alongside bigger sectors.
Additional support
Much textile waste is shipped to countries such as Ghana and Chile, where it ends up in dumps, moving the cost of consumption onto poorer places.
individual and values evaluation
Support
Each purchase is a small choice, and buying fewer, longer-lasting clothes is one of the few climate actions fully within a consumer's control.
Counterargument
Cheap clothing lets low-income families dress their children affordably, so blaming individual shoppers can be unfair.
Rebuttal
The heavier responsibility lies with brands that design clothes to go out of style quickly; rules on durability and take-back schemes target them.
Additional support
Second-hand and repair markets have grown, showing that some consumers do change habits when alternatives are easy.
media evaluation
Support
Social media trends and influencer 'haul' videos speed up fashion cycles, encouraging people to buy more and wear items fewer times.
Counterargument
The same platforms spread campaigns against fast fashion and promote thrifting, so media pushes in both directions.
Rebuttal
Advertising budgets of large brands still outweigh activist content, so the net media effect likely favours more consumption.
Additional support
Widely shared figures such as 'fashion causes 10% of emissions' show how media can repeat a number long after experts have questioned it.
Sources
- UN Environment Programme (2018-11-12): Putting the brakes on fast fashion
- Nature Reviews Earth and Environment (2020-04-07): The environmental price of fast fashion (Niinimaki et al.)
- Science Feedback: The clothing industry produces 3 to 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions