ecofx : T-shirt


____ environmental impact of a t-shirt ____
Estimated carbon footprint, loss of natural habitat potential for one year, loss of plant and animal life potential for one year, and extinction potential, from making, packaging, shipping and/or using these products or services.

+ Except for CO2 emissions, estimates are based on Habitat, Life, Extinction Formulas v2 by the XOEarth Team. +
Estimates do not include the possible long-term ecological effects of climate change and persistent toxins.
Formulas use “human appropriated net primary production (HANPP)” to “CO2 emissions” correlation.
1 kg(kilogram) = 2.2 lb(pounds)   1 m^2(square meter) = 10.8 ft^2(square feet)
1 km(kilometers) = .62 mi(miles)   1 liter = .26 gallons

T-shirt (non-organic)

CO2 from Polo company [[#ref1]]
1,700 grams of fossil fuel, 450 grams of landfill waste

Product materials.

non-organic cotton
.25 kg
.63 lb

CO2 released to make this T-shirt.

4 kg
8.8 lb

Loss of natural habitat potential for one year to make this T-shirt.

3.1 m^2
33 ft^2

Loss of native plant and animal life potential for one year to make this T-shirt.

9.6 kg
21.12 lb

How many of these T-shirts made will trigger 1 potential species extinction.

48.8 million

A life cycle study of one T-shirt brand shows that the CO2 emissions from a T-shirt is about 4 kilograms (8.8 pounds) — including the growing of the cotton, manufacturing and wholesale distribution.www.polo-shirts .co .uk/read_news/ 1179797239/438003114/Polyester_vs._Cotton.html [dead link]
The loss of natural habitat potential for one year from the T-shirt is estimated to be 10.8 square meters (116 square feet).

Polyester vs. Cotton

Tuesday 22nd of May 2007 01:27:19 AM

Polyester vs. CottonIn a recent study conducted at the University of Cambridge by Julian Allwood, T-Shirts and other clothing made with synthetic fabrics may help reduce energy costs and minimise negative effects to the environment even more than clothing produced using organic cotton. Among the factors stated in the study, the amount of washing, the amount of time clothing was kept, and the amount of energy used in washing and drying garments were considered. “When you buy a 250-gram cotton T-shirt, you are “purchasing 1,700 grams of fossil fuel, depositing 450 grams of waste to landfill and emitting 4 kilograms of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,” said Allwood.
By purchasing clothing made from polyester and other synthetic fabrics, people will have to wash their clothing less and skip the dryer as these fabrics tend to dry faster than cotton ones. Also, synthetic fabrics have a longer wear life than natural fabrics that tend to loose their shape.

Even though clothing made using organic cotton may be better for the environment because it hasn’t been treated with harsh chemicals, it is costly to the environment in other ways. While discount superstores are offering clothing made of organic cotton, consumers should be aware that they might not be helping the environment as much as they could be.

Getting people to buy fewer T-Shirts and other clothing and buying synthetic fabrics is easier said than done. Some famous clothing designers like Stella McCartney and Linda Loudermilk have introduced clothing made from natural materials such as bamboo and seaweed. While these practices may decrease the damage to the environment, many consumers are tossing this clothing or over washing it, which ends up harming the environment in the long run. Finding a balance is necessary if people are to have a positive impact on the environment.

(c)Scott Snyder,

1. www.polo-shirts Polyester_vs._Cotton.html [dead link]


==External links==

[[category:Clothing]] [[category:Products]]



Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.