This past Monday we wrote about China’s plans to close over 2,000 factories that the government deems either too polluting, or energy intensive. On Wednesday, Ecotextile News reported that even more textile facilities are closing.

In the southeast province of Shaoxing, one of China’s important textile hubs, government officials have ordered the number of dyeing houses be cut in half. Production of dyed goods will be reduced to roughly 10 billion meters this year, from 15.6 billion.

The focus on this region is due to their disproportionately high energy use and extrordinarly high chemical oxygen demand (COD) discharge compared to textile factories elsewhere in China. COD is a major case of water pollution.

Already 600 facilities belonging to about 20 companies have been closed because they were either operating illegally, or did not meet the environmental and energy standards.

China, it seems, has taken a very strict line against some polluting and energy intensive industries. The textile industry being both energy intensive, and highly polluting is consequently suffering many shutdowns.

We are pleased to see that the talk of shutting polluting facilities was not rhetoric on the part of the Chinese. It is vitally important to stem the tide of industrial pollution, and what better way to start than closing dye houses that used over 200 million tons of water last year to dye clothing.

Earlier this month the Chinese government ordered the closure of 2,087 manufacturing factories by September 30. While many media outlets are focusing on the energy use concerns that are a major factor in this drastic course of action, we want to draw your attention to the environmental issues, specifically around the Chinese textile industry.

Of the thousands of companies that will close, among them are textile dyeing and printing factories that were deemed either heavy polluters, energy wasters, or did not meet safety requirements. The water pollution crisis in China has been going on for some time and is well documented. Up to this point, environmental standards enforcement has been lax with some local officials even blocking cleanup efforts.

China’s economic growth stems in part from heavily polluting industries such as textiles. Water contamination has become so bad that in the first half of this year, 43.2 percent of the nation’s rivers were unfit for human contact–this according to Chinese government statistics reported recently in The Economist. It’s an alarming assessment. Think about that for a minute. The water is so bad in 43 percent of Chinese rivers that humans should not even touch it.

In addition, almost a quarter of all China’s surface water – meaning lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands–fell short of the nation’s standards for industrial use, according to data published by Reuters. Textile mills and dye houses are dumping so many toxic chemicals into the lakes and rivers that waterways are choked with algae.

The closure orders are aimed at eliminating the country’s worst polluters. Three government ministries have proposed taking an additional step by enacting an environmental tax on a trial basis. The tax would cover carbon dioxide emissions and water contamination–potentially increasing the price of Chinese goods. China does not want to add a tax that will impede growth, but at the same time, the country cannot grow if its water supply is unusable.

The central government in Beijing appears to be serious about reducing pollution and energy use. We’re confident that more regulations and enforcement are in store for Chinese manufacturing plants. So, if you’re relying on one of these polluting, inefficient factories to supply the textile for your company’s designs, it’s time to look for a more sustainable solution.

Photo credit: sheilaz413/ flickr

From the moment we entered the halls of the Salt Palace (the convention center in Salt Lake City, Utah) and saw a giant inflatable mammoth hanging from the ceiling, until the moment we ended our day with a beer courtesy of Teva, we knew this was a different kind of conference. Don’t be fooled though, work is definitely being done at the Outdoor Retailer show. Almost every brand in the industry had a booth at this summer’s event. Retailers as large as REI and as small as Mountain Tools were in attendance, with many buyers making the entire year’s purchase at the show. As this was our first time attending Outdoor Retailer, we wanted to give our overall impressions, highlight trends within the industry, and talk a bit about corporate sustainability.

We’ve written about some of the products earlier in the week. Here’s a recap:

Patagonia finally released the P26 hiking boot it created for the Backpack Magazine Zero Impact challenge. We had a chance to speak with company co-founder and president Demetri “Coup” Coupounas about GoLite’s sustainability efforts, and see the new Tier 1 backpacks made in part from recycled materials. After wandering over to Lafuma/Millet, we saw their recycled packs and eco-friendly un-dyed climbing rope. Then, up on the second level of the Merrell booth, we learned what happened to the company’s NADA concept–we’ll give you a hint, it isn’t gone.

cause no unnecessary harm

What we haven’t yet mentioned is that there were plenty of companies who either had no sustainability initiatives, or did not articulate any to us during our time at Outdoor Retailer. When we spoke with the marketing manager of one prominent outdoor company, we were stunned at how little this representative could tell us about his company’s sustainability efforts. As he was searching for something to talk about, he told us that (and we’re paraphrasing) companies are just expected to be sustainable these days.

Forgive us if we won’t make that assumption. Even among those companies with strong sustainability initiatives, there is doubt about consumer dedication to environmentalism. As Coupounas, told us, “The great mass of consumers does not want to sacrifice performance or pay more for sustainable.”

And that might be the real take-away from Outdoor Retailer: Companies don’t yet feel that the payoff is there to be as sustainable as possible. After all, they are in the business of selling outdoor products, not saving the planet.

Even Patagonia, widely believed by consumers to be one of the most sustainable outdoor companies has a mission statement that acknowledges the fact that the current method of production causes harm to the environment. Patagonia representative Jessica Clayton explained their philosophy, “Make the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, and use business to inspire and implement a solution to the environmental crisis.”

In Patagonia’s mission statement the “cause no unnecessary harm” part is present because in order to make a product, some harm has to happen. These are companies that make outdoor products (mostly great products that we enjoy using), and at the end of the day they’re trying to sell you a jacket, or a shoe, or backpack.

One of the issues preventing companies from implementing greater sustainability initiatives is cost. Many of these companies are publicly held, and are therefore beholden to investors, to meeting margins, and to increasing the share price.

“We’re all in this business because we love the outdoors. The challenge in front of us is how to run a business, and do right by the environment,” said Bill Inman of Merrell when asked why companies in the industry don’t do more to be sustainable.

Together, Inman and Coupounas have captured the general business sentiment on sustainability efforts not only within their own industry, but also in that of the greater business community. Companies feel that the realities of the marketplace are such that they cannot afford to produce completely sustainable products. There are very few brands with customers who are willing and able to pay a premium for, and value, 100 percent green gear.

low hanging fruit: recycled plastics

However, our overall impression is that companies are, by and large, embracing sustainability in both product development and corporate initiatives. Perhaps there is a realization, even if just peripherally, that extracting resources from the earth to produce goods that are quickly consumed then buried in landfills is not a business practice that can continue forever.

We’re encouraged by what seemed to be a widespread use of recycled polyester or nylon in products at many booths. Now that the quality of these recycled materials is equal to that of virgin, many companies are spending the extra money to incorporate them into their offerings. We fully expect this trend to continue, especially as the prices for these recycled materials decreases.

Of course, sustainability isn’t limited to carbon footprints or just about using recycled materials. We keep asking what about the water, what about the pollution from dyeing apparel? Only a few brands are taking this question into consideration. Of course, it’s something all of us in the industry should look at given that the textile industry is a major water user and polluter.

In January when we return to Salt Lake City for the winter iteration of Outdoor Retailer, we hope to sit with many of these same companies to discuss just how to produce the best quality apparel, and minimize its environmental impact. After all, what good is outdoor apparel if there’s nowhere left to use it.

A couple years ago, outdoor footwear and apparel company Merrell unveiled a jacket at the Outdoor Retailer show that it called NADA, short for “Not Any Dye Applied.” Being part of a company that’s concerned about water scarcity and pollution, we were impressed by Merrell’s effort to save water and reduce pollution with its dye-less jacket (we even wrote about it here). At this summer’s Outdoor Retailer, we were fortunate enough to spend time at Merrell’s two-level booth.

At first, we couldn’t find the new NADA jackets, and we were worried the company had phased out the concept. But a Merrell representative quickly reassured us. Instead of keeping the NADA jacket a unique offering, Merrell is now using un-dyed materials in its synthetic garments wherever they would have normally used white. That includes the white parts of multi-colored shirts, the Merrell representative told us. Sales of NADA products are growing, if only because it’s now integrated wherever there appears to be “white” synthetic material. And because Merrell is skipping the dye on all the material that would normally be dyed white, the company is ratcheting up the environmental savings at a time when water scarcity is a hot topic.

“I would love it if the whole industry used un-dyed materials for white products,” said Bill Inman, Merrell’s apparel business director.

Merrell has found a cost-effective way to achieve environmental savings with NADA. Even though the company’s typical customer is not as environmentally conscious as a buyer who gravitates toward brands such as Patagonia, Merrell is still searching for ways it can reduce its eco-footprint.

“We’re all in the business because we love the outdoors. The challenge in front of us is how to run a business, and do right by the environment,” Inman told us.

Beyond expanding NADA, Merrell is focused on luring more people outdoors. Recently, the company announced a partnership with the National Park Foundation that it hopes will inspire people to lead more active, outdoor lives. For spring 2011, Merrell designed organic cotton T-shirts that pay homage to the parks. The multi-colored tees are designed to be reminiscent of the old National Park postage stamps from the 1930s–though we’re sure no one reading this remembers putting one of those on an envelope.

While Merrell might not have the most robust environmental initiatives in the industry, its focus on the water that’s wasted and polluted while dyeing synthetic material “white” should stimulate an industry-wide conversation about link between water scarcity and apparel. Whether intentional or not, Merrell is bringing light to the environmental damage caused by dyeing clothing, and that’s an approach not many companies have taken. As we’re fond of saying, we need water for living, not for dyeing.

In our third post on the Outdoor Retailer show, we’re highlighting Lafuma Group and its latest products and sustainability efforts. The group oversees a handful of brands, including two on display at the show in Salt Lake City: Lafuma and Millet.

Lafuma is a long-time French producer of multi-purpose outdoor gear for hiking, camping, and miscellaneous other uses. Some years back, the company opened its North American headquarters in Colorado in the hopes of expanding its presence in the U.S. market. Millet is the group’s climbing brand, and it produces equipment, apparel, and accessories. Both companies had new products and initiatives to share with us.

Lisa Koker, marketing manager for Lafuma North America, told us about some of the company’s latest sustainability efforts. Its French headquarters recently added a new solar roof and an “eco-café” serving organic produce to employees. On the product front, the company is using recycled polyester and nylon in many of its new backpacks (a trend among companies we spoke with at Outdoor Retailer). Lafuma has been working on a product rating system called the Pure Leaf project, which is meant to gauge the environmental impact of a product – though it’s a more consumer-oriented initiative than the GoLite Index we wrote about in our last post.

Millet, like its sister brand Lafuma, also has created the Beyond 25 backpack, partially built with recycled material. Although the companies may have shared materials for pack production, Millet was displaying one product not found at the Lafuma booth – partially dyed climbing rope. Given their reduced environmental impact, partially dyed or un-dyed products aren’t as common as one might expect. There was only one other company we spoke with using un-dyed materials (we’ll cover that in our next post). A Millet representative told us the company tested a completely un-dyed version of the climbing rope, but that it had performed poorly in focus groups. The partially dyed rope, however, is still an improvement over a traditional rope, environmentally speaking.

“By not dyeing the rope we save 66 percent of the energy,” said Stephane Arnauld, export manager for Millet.

The company also operates a rope reclamation program in Europe, an initiative Millet may expand to the U.S. So far, 180,000 meters of rope have been collected. In addition, Millet produces three climbing products that are made from industrial waste (though they were not featured at Outdoor Retailer).

Millet representatives told us the company’s approach to sustainability is to focus on “low-impact” rather than on recycling. And while that may be true, we expected a bit more information on sustainability from representatives of a company that supposedly has a long history of environmentalism.

We took the time to review Lafuma Group’s 2009 sustainability report, and there is quite a bit of information about recycling old products and using recycled materials in new products. Under the “industry” section of the report, the company includes a breakdown of its internal carbon footprint assessment. Raw material and finished product purchasing accounted for 85 percent of emissions, while freight only represented 5.9 percent. With the vast majority of its carbon footprint represented by raw materials purchasing, we’re betting the company will increase its use of low-impact and recycled materials in the future. We’ll check back with company representatives in the future to see if that’s the case,