Design Life-Cycle

Victoria Kobayashi

DES 40a

13 March 2013

Raw Materials for Blue Jeans

         Blue jeans consist of mostly cotton, and copper or zinc used for buttons, rivets and zippers. Jean companies around the world are looking to produce cotton in a more eco friendly way, especially with the climate changes making the price of cotton increase. Droughts and storms caused cotton crops to fail, so companies have been looking for new or different resources. Levi Strauss came out with Waste<Less, an eco friendly line of denim jeans, that makes jeans from recycled plastic bottles that are in an abundance. This revolutionary idea has only furthered the American brand’s success as a jean producer, especially with the trend of everyone moving towards eco friendly practices to better the environment.

Levi Strauss is a denim company that released an eco line on October 16, 2012 (Berfield). Waste<Less, the eco line, consisted of jeans that were made from eight recycled plastic bottles (Berfield). The vice president, Michael Kobori, says how Levis is committed to making an impact through social and environmental sustainability (Zissu 1). Cotton is the main raw material, where 95% of products are made of it, and 110 countries produce it (Leonard). Cone denim then produces much of Levi’s fabric in North Carolina and Mexico (Berfield). Levi’s keeps most production domestic in order to keep an eye on production practices which eliminate working environments like sweat shops to ensure worker’s are well taken care of and there is no use of child labor.

China is the largest cotton producer and cotton importer in the world that has grown immensely. In 1949, China only produced 440,000 tons of cotton, however in 2007 their production went up to 35.5 million bales making up 29.74% of cotton production in the world. In the US: Texas, Georgia, Mississippi, California, Arkansas, North Carolina and Louisiana are the leading cotton-producing states making up 80% of total US cotton production. Pakistan is the fourth ranked cotton producer in the world and the third largest exporter. In Pakistan, 1.3 million farmers cover 15% of airable area in the country growing cotton, which contributes to 10% of the country’s GDP (Cotton Producers Around the World).

        Levi’s joined the Better Cotton Initiative in 2009, which is a nonprofit dedicated to improving sustainable-agricultural techniques (Zissu 1). Levi’s has given around $600,000 to the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) since 2009 to implement this practice amongst other sustainable practices (Kaufman 1). Kobori said the Better Cotton Initiative’s cotton farms in India and Pakistan reduced their chemical and water use by a third in making Better Cotton. Levi’s began using Better Cotton in their spring 2012 products. The goal is to use blended cotton in all their products, and shift the way cotton is produced around the world (Zissu). The Better Cotton Initiative helps farmers by: assistance with identifying critical growth periods of their cotton crop to ensure they use adequate water, teaching them how to use mulches, reduce pesticide usage, address water and soil health, and improve farmer labor standards (Levi’s Rethinking Traditional Process Water). Levi’s BCI membership has helped with Levi’s reaching their goal of becoming more sustainable, and was big help to implement a more effective cotton growing strategy that would be good for the consumers, workers, and environment alike.

The Better Cotton Initiative claims to use 70% less pesticides in their Better Cotton. The BCI is focusing on reducing costs for farming rather than creating premium goods that attract high buyers. The BCI assists a company’s supply chain up until the cotton goes to the gin, the company is then responsible for matters going forward such as production and applying finishes. A company must meet minimum production criteria and set up a yearly plan to meet production principles in order to be a member of the BCI. In 2010, the BCI had 65,000 farmers participating in the startup phase generating 30,000 tons of seed cotton. The start up phase focused mainly on Brazil, India, Pakistan, and West & Central Africa, making efforts to speed up BCI practices. The BCI created the Better Cotton Fast Track Program (BCFTP) in order to speed up the implementation of their practices (Descriptions of Production).

         Levi Strauss began combating climate change by implementing programs teaching irrigation and rainwater-capturing techniques to farmers in India, Pakistan, Brazil, and West and Central Africa. Although Levi’s only uses one percent of the world’s annual cotton crop, cotton is an essential raw material for Levis since it makes up 95% of total raw materials (Kaufman 1). Levis felt the threat when fields in Pakistan flooded and China’s fields had a drought making cotton a very expensive raw material. Seeing these weather changes and how it has affected cotton farms has made a push for implementing BCI’s practices.

So we see that sustainability is not just a positive for the environment, but also for financial reasons to keep the company in business as well. The Better Cotton Initiative reported that Indian farmers who adopted new water control techniques reduced their water and pesticide use by 32% and their profit increased by 20% (Kaufman 1). Levis also plans to engage directly with contractors and farmers in doing business with raw materials suppliers. Getting more involved with the business side of functions will also help to decrease initial costs for raw materials by creating long term relationships with reliable cotton producers.

         Levi’s largest mill supplier in Mexico operates one of the largest water waste treatment plants. The Mexico facility has technology that recycles 75% of water and direct it to other processes such as to restrooms (Levi Strauss: Fabric Mills). It’s important to create sustainable and waste reducing facilities because water shortages caused by climate change can have a huge impact on a company staying in business. Cotton becomes too expensive and not as readily available when there is less water (Kaufman 1).

The CEO Water Mandate has helped Levi’s find partners trying to achieve the same water sustainability goals. Levi’s is involved with the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC)’s Responsible Sourcing Initiative is working with Chinese mills in Central and South China to achieve cost efficiency and operational efficiency (CEO Water Mandate Communication on Progress 2011). China is the world’s largest cotton producer, so this can lead to better cotton prices overall.

The Waste<Less line consists of jeans made of 20% recycled plastic, which is extremely convenient with the lack of resources and rising cotton prices (Berfield). Recycled plastic is sorted by color, cleaned, and made into flakes which can be stretched or extruded into fiber (Berfield). The fiber is spun into yarn which is tightly woven into cotton, however these fibers are not as strong as virgin fibers (Berfield). The benefit to using recycled bottles as a resource is that they are cost neutral because they are a reliable material and in abundance. This eco line has saved over 360 million liters of water (Berfield).

         The Water<Less line of jeans they began selling at retail for 50 to 130 dollars (Zissu). These were created after conducting a life-cycle assessment on 501s and Dockers, which revealed the largest waste occurs after the jeans leave the factory and are in the consumers possession, so they are urging consumers to wash their jeans less. Despite Levis efforts to use organic raw materials a lot of water is used out of the company’s control when it comes to their products. Once the consumer purchases a good, it is under their control how they care for the item, like washing and drying them.

         Levi’s plans on using less water and fewer pesticides in their cotton production practices. However, Levi’s considered organic cotton is too expensive and was discontinued by Levi’s in 2008. Organic cotton is farmed without using toxic pesticides or fertilizers, sewage, and genetic engineering. They used untreated seeds, organic fertilizers, and rotate crops in order to keep soil healthy with little or without irrigation systems (Descriptions of Production). They do manual weed control by physically getting rid of them and perform pest control by using beneficial garden creatures and “trap crops” for pest control (Descriptions of Production).

They set a goal of using a 20% blend cotton by 2015 (Berfield). This shows they care about materials their products are made out of and how they are acquired. They have reduced water consumption by 28% (Levi’s Rethinking Traditional Process Water). However, Levi’s sets itself apart by using less water, and having an attractive finish other companies do not achieve.

  Some of Levi’s materials come from animals, but Levi Strauss & Co. aims to be careful when sourcing animal materials and protecting animal health and welfare. The company obeys “The Five Freedoms for Animal Welfare” defined by the Farm Animal Council Welfare, they prevent the use of animal derived products and materials from endangered species (Levi Strauss & Co.: Animal Welfare Policy). This prevents the usage of fur. It supports wool fiber sourced and certified from non-mulesed sheep. Levi’s keeps the design of their jeans simple without these embellishments and classic, and expresses care for the environment and animals humans coexist with on earth.

Levi’s was the first company in the jean industry to establish a Restricted Substances List that provides a list of chemicals they don’t allow to be used in the making of their products because of the impact it can make on the environment and workers (Chemicals). It’s important to note that Levi’s cares about the chemicals and substances they use in making their products because it also shows that they care about the impact their products make on the environment. Sustainability not only saves them money, but is also gives a positive picture to consumers around the world, making the well known brand even more well known.

Jeans often go through a dyeing process to get their color by the use of synthetic indigo dyes. Indigo is a better wool and silk dye, however still widely used for cotton jeans. They also use reactives, directs, sulfurs, naphthols and vat, type dyes that require only one application to get the desired color (Indigo Dyeing Problems). The natural dye comes from several species of plant, however all present day indigo is synthetic (Indigo).

Lastly, jeans require copper or zinc to make up buttons, zippers, and rivets. May 20, 1873, Strauss received a US patent for using copper rivets in order to strengthen the pockets of work pants, and began production in San Francisco (Jeans). Prior to 1942, Levi’s jeans contained an extra rivet at the crotch to keep all the main seams together, however they took this out because it would often heat up and be uncomfortable for the wearer, especially since jeans are meant for work and leisure wear. During the 1990s denim began incorporating lycra to create a more body conscious fit, and has a 50% popularity with consumers under 60 years old (Jeans).

Jeans are then sewn and finishes are added once the cotton blended fabric is woven. Levi’s especially has been successful at creating a nice finish while incorporating eco friendly practices. They also add consumer care tags to jeans to educate consumers on how to care for their product by washing their jeans only once a month, hang dry them, and to shake them out between wears so they do not collect odors and dirt. Levi’s success in going green should set an example for other jean brands when combatting issues related to climate change and sustainability. They frequently urge consumers to donate their jeans to Goodwill instead of throwing them away and ending up in landfills.

References

"Cotton/Raw Materials." Levi Strauss. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. <http://www.levistrauss.com/sustainability/product/cottonraw-materials>.

"Cotton Producers Around the World." Project Cotton. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://cotton.missouri.edu/InOurLives-ProducersWorld.html>.

"Denim." Jeans. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://facweb.cs.depaul.edu/sgrais/jeans.htm>.

"Descriptions of Production Programs: Organic, Fair Trade, Cotton Made in Africa, and the Better Cotton Initiative." International Cotton Advisory Committee. N.p., 3 Feb. 2011. Web. 3 Mar. 2013. <http://www.icac.org/delegates/sc_notices/sc_meeting_509/509at3.pdf>.

"Indigo." CS DePaul. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://facweb.cs.depaul.edu/sgrais/indigo.htm>.

"Indigo Dyeing : Problems And Potential–Part 4." Denim and Jeans. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013. <http://www.denimsandjeans.com/denim/manufacturing-process/indigo-dyeing-problems-and-potentialpart-4/>.

"Mission Statement." CEO Water Mandate RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Mar. 2013. <http://ceowatermandate.org/about/mission-statement/>.

"Organic Cotton." Initiatives for Sustainable Cotton:. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Mar. 2013. <http://www.sustainable-cotton.net/en/initiatives/organic-cotton/>.

"The CEO Water Mandate." N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Mar. 2013. <http://ceowatermandate.org/files/Ceo_water_mandate.pdf>.

"The Many Faces of Cotton." Nice Fashion. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.nicefashion.org/en/consumer-guide/raw-materials/bomull.html>.

"Water." Levi Strauss. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.levistrauss.com/sustainability/planet/water>.

Berfield, Susan. "Levi's Goes Green With Waste." Businessweek.com. N.p., 18 Oct. 2012. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-18/levis-goes-green-with-waste-less-jeans#p2>.

Leonard, Amy. "Cotton. And Climate Change." LS&Co. Unzipped. N.p., 25 May 2010. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.levistrauss.com/blogs/cotton-and-climate-change>.

Thorpe, Lorna. "Levi Strauss & Co." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/levi-rethinking-traditional-process-water>.

Ryo Kasagi

DES40A

Cogdell

Embodied Ener-jeans

When purchasing a pair of denim jeans, many will often consider a few points before finalizing their decision. Consumers will often debate between which brands to buy, how the fabric looks, whether it fits, and of course: what it says on the price tag. These are normal things to think about as a consumer, but let’s observe the pair of jeans from a different perspective – that of a designer conscious of a concept called “embodied energy”. 

Embodied energy is essentially the total amount of energy used in the “life-cycle” of a product, in this case a pair of jeans. As defined by Professor Ann Savageau of the UC Davis Design Department, embodied energy is “all the energy needed to produce, sell, care for and dispose of a given product…from cradle-to-grave.” It can be divided up into five sections: extraction of raw materials, processing, transportation/distribution, use/maintenance and recycle/disposal. When all these parts of a larger process are considered, the real value of denim jeans drastically changes. Most of the time, the prices undermine the ecological and energy “footprints” of such an everyday product. Due to its influential, cultural impact in fashion and its durability in use, millions of pairs of blue jeans have been produced and sold worldwide. This means that heavy amounts of energy have been invested in producing such a high quantity of jeans. With the increasing depletion of fossil fuels and the growing concern for renewable sources of energy, it becomes important to understand and assess the energy impact of industrially produced jeans. Through research of the processes, efficiencies and flaws of the system, it becomes clear that even a generic pair of jeans requires complex practices and intensive uses of energy.

Embodied energy, as a whole is a difficult topic to research, considering the numerous stages of “life” that a pair of jeans goes through. The current industrial processes of producing jeans, and the industrial system as a whole has compartmentalized the processes on a global scale, making it difficult to determine the overall energy of a product.  As noted in “Eco-Chic: A Fashion Paradox” by Sandy Black, a basic process of producing Lee Cooper Jeans is listed below:

Just the manufacturing stage of jeans alone circumnavigates the world, showing how international, and large, the process has become. Combine that with the energies involved in distribution, maintenance and disposal and it becomes clear that a single pair of jeans requires ridiculous amounts of energy. It also becomes important to understand that because it has become a global process, there will be differences in the specific phases of embodied energy, and thus differences in levels of energy. Certain factors that will affect energy levels are technological sophistication, budget and the amount of labor available. These distinctions will affect how much animate, human labor is used versus the use of inanimate powered machines, which use more energy but provide better output and efficiency. There will also be discrepancies in the efficiencies of producing secondary energies such as electricity, and also in the efficiency of inanimate, fossil fuel-driven machinery. Considering the numerous amounts of differences within each system of embodied energy, an overall study of the most basic, commercially standard pair of jeans would be the best way in getting an overall sense of its embodied energy.

One standardized program that exists in calculating the embodied energy of a product is the LCIA, the Lifecycle Impact Assessment. The LCIA tries to quantify data and compare different methods and energy consumptions, which take place when a product comes into existence (essentially, the sections that make up embodied energy). It is currently “the most exacting and accurate framework for assessing the environmental impact and embodied energy of products [and] services.” (Savageau) Such quantitative assessments allow a designer to easily consider certain processes over another before executing production. A great example that applies directly to the topic of jeans is the Lifecycle Impact Assessment that was done by Levi’s Jeans in 2006.

Levi’s wanted to assess their environmental and energy effects in their production of their popular Levi’s 501, medium stonewashed jeans (Levi’s). First, the entire “life” of a pair of jeans was mapped out, in order to clearly identify the factors that needed to be researched. The results of analyzing their entire investment in the Levi’s 501 jeans resulted in the diagram in Figure 1. This diagram can essentially be considered the embodied energy, listing the extraction, processing, manufacturing, distributing, and even transporting of the physical parts throughout the entire process.  From then, further investigation went into each specific process, resulting in quantitative analyses of energy uses. As seen in Figure 2, the entire, cradle-to-grave consumption of energy was put into an easy-to read pie chart. As seen in the results, the LCA informed the company that, “the energy-use impact was highest at the consumer-use phase (58%).” The energy in the consumer use of jeans, calculated at 226.6 mega-joules, was almost three times as much as the second highest process of energy consumption, which was in the handling of fabric (84.9 mega-joules). From this analysis, the next step conducted by Levi’s was in figuring out the optimum form of washing their product, and trying to find a way to reduce the amount of consumer energy used in maintenance of the 501 Jeans (figures 3 and 4).

This specific LCA report highlights one important fact about embodied energy: it requires the designer to know the ENTIRE process from start to finish, and even requires the designer to consider the uses of energies that are outside of their control, and more in the hands of the consumer. When embodied energy is considered even before production begins, it puts more responsibility on the designer to be aware of the end result, and to design with “the end” in mind. If the designers of the Levi’s 501 Jeans had understood the concept of embodied energy previous to the assessment, they would have created jeans that needed less maintenance and less energy used by the consumer. Understanding the embodied energy of a product allows for designers to research better alternatives, and truly understand the energy impact, and energy potential they have. As seen in figure 5, the total energy use in creating a single pair of Levi’s 501, stonewashed jeans is compared to other activities requiring the same energy. The significance of the 400.1 mega-joules of energy used in producing a pair of jeans becomes more significant when we understand that it is the same as “watching TV on a plasma screen for 318 hours,” or “powering a computer for 556 hours, which is equivalent to 70 work days…” (Levi’s) Rather than simply focusing on jeans alone, recognizing its place in the multitude of other products produced in the world allows for a better understanding of its energy effects on a global scale.

The types of energies that contribute to the embodied energy of jeans can be divided into three overarching energy foundations: indirect, direct, and embedded energies (Weinheimer).  These three categories will be the foundation of which the rest of the paper will utilize in assessing the embodied energy of a pair of commercial, industry-standard jeans that are available to the largest amount of consumers.

Indirect energy is the energy used in creating the multiple parts that will be used in creating a pair of jeans. It is considered “indirect” because it is energy that is not used on the jeans itself, but rather for the physical existence of the product. The most basic “ingredients” in creating a pair of jeans is 100% cotton, dyed with synthetic indigo to give it its signature look. From there, it can be held together through polyester threads, metal rivets, and a zipper. Indirect energy is used in creating all these essential, fundamental parts.

Most abundantly used in the extraction stages of embodied energy, indirect energy is used in such examples as: the creation of fertilizers and pesticides for cotton; the chemical energy involved in the growing of cotton; creation and processing of synthetic indigo dye; and the energy involved in the extraction, refinement, and molding of metals for zippers and rivets (Westminster). Energy is used in the production of pesticides and herbicides for cotton, and are oftentimes “petro chemically-generated nitrogen fertilizers…”(Savageau).” Made through the input of fossil fuels and industrial production, the very first steps of denim production already begin at very high levels of energy input. For example, just in the production of cotton alone, “energy consumption…varies greatly at the farm level based on irrigation systems, crop selection [inorganic vs. organic], and management decisions.” (Weinheimer) But considering the overall extraction of necessary materials, industrial countries will tend to use inanimate prime movers consisting of heavily fossil-fuel dependent machinery and electrical energy in obtaining resources.  Less industrialized countries will still use fossil-fuel dependent machinery, but they may rely more on animate, human labor simply because of accessibility to technology due to finance. Examples of these discrepancies are: the spraying of fields with pesticides by bi-plane or using human labor with the assistance of shoulder-strap fertilizer pumps (Weinheimer); or the harvesting of cotton with farm machinery versus picking the cotton fibers by hand. Regardless of whether a method is more industrially advanced or not, it is guaranteed that high amounts of energy will be invested in ensuring a large supply of materials for a worldwide denim market.

Once the materials are extracted and available for production, direct energy is invested in the actual handling of the materials. Direct energy involves “the inputs and outputs dealing directly with [the] product,” (Levi’s) and is involved throughout a majority of the activities involved in the production of jeans. Looking back to figure 5 of the energy chart of Levi’s 501 jeans, direct energy is used in the Use, End of Life, Cut/Sew/Finish, and Logistics/Retail of the product. Out of the total 400.2 mega-joules of embodied energy it takes for a pair of jeans, 297.6 mega-joules or almost 75% is direct energy being put into the jeans. Such examples of the activities involving direct energy are the garment manufacturing, importing and exporting of the finished product, the sale of the jeans at retail outlets, and the continual maintenance and washing of the jeans. Considering the global scale of the industry, it is important to consider the labor and workforce of the factories worldwide. The mammoth factory in Shenzhen, China alone has a workforce of 430,000 people (Savageau). Imagine each working with an industrial sewing machine, and working almost eight hours a day continually creating jeans. With workers being able to sew a pair of pants on an average of thirty minutes (Zheng), workers in such factories could make at least 16 pairs of pants in one day’s work. Multiplying that by 430,000 workers amounts to 6,880,000 pairs of pants in a single day. Knowing that the Cut/Sew/Finish process of a single pair of Levi’s Jeans takes 40.8 mega joules (Levi’s), the entire energy involved in just a factory’s production output in a single day totals up to 280,704,000 mega joules. It’s unbelievable. Add to that the amount of energy involved in transportation of the entire process – between factories, from country to country; from factory to stores; even from retail outlet to the consumer’s house (Westminster) - it becomes clear why direct energy is the highest contributor of energy to the total, embodied energy in a pair of jeans.

Lastly, the final form of energy is embedded energy, which is the input used in creating, maintaining and utilizing all of the industrial machinery involved in production (Weinheimer.) Embedded energy can be considered the “foundation energy” because of the industry’s heavy, almost absolute reliance on machinery. The global industry of jean production would not be possible without the input of embedded energy, especially in the form of fossil fuels and electrical energy, but also in the forms of research and innovation. The energy, time, and research that has been invested in creating the infrastructure for creating products such as jeans started in the 19th century during the Industrial Revolution, and has continually advanced up until where we are today. Improvements in embedded energy have allowed for such qualities such as: worldwide transportation through modern cargo ships equipped with the latest navigation technology; threading machines that can create thousands of yards worth of thread; industrial sewing machines that allow for faster production; and improvements in dying technology for more richly colored denim. Besides the actual functions that have been achieved through embedded energy, efficiency in all areas has also improved. Without embedded energy, indirect and direct energies would be negatively affected and the values for the total embodied energy of jeans would be drastically less efficient.

Through analyses of indirect, direct and embedded energies, a better overall picture of the embodied energy of jeans can be developed. This is beneficial for the designer because it allows him or her a larger perspective into the creative process and ultimate production. Rather than simply seeing the pair of jeans as a product existing for a certain period, a designer conscious of embodied energy understands that a product does not just appear and disappear. Rather, it takes the collection of international cooperation and intricate, various forms of energies that are constantly applied up until the jeans are physically nonexistent. Although research showed that the current production of jeans is unsustainable and almost not worth the amount of energy it takes, the results were a necessary, inconvenient truth that had to be faced and understood. As future designers that will one day be responsible for the creation of society’s products, we have the privilege to control how much energy will be used because we are responsible for the planning of the aesthetics, the materials and the methods of production. Along with what William McDonough and Michael Braungart in “Cradle to Cradle” promote as the importance of recognizing the  “triple bottom line” of equity, economy and ecology, it is also imperative that designers understand the importance of energy in the systems of the world.

 Works Cited

{cke_protected_18}1.     Black, Sandy. Eco-Chic: The Fashion Paradox.: Black Dog, 2011. Print.

{cke_protected_19}2.     Savageau, Ann. Embodied Energy Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCA). PDF.

{cke_protected_20}3.     Savageau, Ann. Sustainability and Social Equity. PDF

{cke_protected_21}4.     Levi Strauss & Co. A Product Lifecycle Approach to Sustainability; Levi Strauss & Co.N.p.: n.p., Mar. 2009. PDF.

{cke_protected_22}5.     Weinheimer Et Al. Energy Analysis of Cotton Production on the Southern High Plains of Texas. Nashville, Tennessee: 2008 Beltwide Cotton Conferences, 8 Jan. 2008. PDF.

{cke_protected_23}6.     Westminster, Transport Studies Group. Energy Consumption in the UK Jeans Supply Chain. Nashville, Tennessee: University of Westminster, Mar. 2005. PDF.

{cke_protected_24}7.     A Product Lifecycle Approach to Sustainability. Digital image. Levi Strauss & Co. Web. 7 Mar. 2013.

{cke_protected_25}8.     Levi's 501 Jeans - Energy Use. Digital image. Levi Strauss & Co. Web. 7 Mar. 2013.

{cke_protected_26}9.     {cke_protected_1}Consumer Care - Reducing Energy Use Impact. Digital image. Levi Strauss & Co. Web. 7 Mar. 2013.

{cke_protected_27}10.   {cke_protected_2}Number of Washes - Energy Use Impact. Digital image. Levi Strauss & Co.  Web. 7 Mar. 2013.

{cke_protected_28}11.   {cke_protected_3}Product Lifecycle Impact of Studied Levi's 501 Jean. Digital image. Levi Strauss & Co. Web. 7 Mar. 2013

Dennis Liu

DES 40A

Research Paper

What a Waste

            As Andrea walks into American Eagle Outfitters, she sees an array of bright, colorful jeans and automatically starts going through in her head which pair would best match what she has in her closet. Should she get the slim fit or the skinny? How about the blue or the white one?  After trying on a few different cuts and colors, Andrea goes up to the register and purchases her favorite new pair of jeans. Not once did she think about what kind of materials go into her jeans: Are they cotton or polyester? How much water does it take to grow the materials? Nor did she think about the manufacturing process that went into the new pair of jeans she just bought: the dyeing, the distressing, and the chemicals. However, Andrea is not the only one guilty; most people who may just be looking for a new pair of jeans to replace their old, worn out ones typically would never think about those issues when choosing their jeans. To understand just how much waste comes out of a seemingly innocent pair of jeans, one must go through its typical product life cycle.

            Jeans are usually constructed out of denim which, most of the time, is woven using cotton. Cotton, unfortunately, is the most heavily sprayed crop in the world and exemplifies the worst effects of chemically dependent agriculture. Even though cotton is only grown on three percent of the world’s farmland, it uses 23 percent of the world’s herbicides as well as 10 percent of the world’s pesticides (Savageau, 2012). Every year, the world’s cotton producers use about 2.6 billion dollars’ worth of pesticides and only one tenth of one percent actually lands on the intended pests (Panna, 2004). In California alone, cotton crops produce an average of 11 pounds of volatile organic compounds that go into the atmosphere every year (Savageau, 2012). In addition, cotton is also one of the leading crops in the consumption of water. On average, one cotton t-shirt uses about 2,700 liters of water, which is comparable to how much water an average person would consume over the span of three years. Cotton’s consumption of water represents 2.6 percent of the global water footprint; in 2008, Pakistan’s cotton crops used about 2,890 billion liters of water just to make products sold by Ikea, which is equivalent to the volume of drinking water consumed in Sweden over 176 years (Chapagain et al, 25). Most of the irrigation that goes into growing the cotton is unsustainable, and combined with the massive input of pesticides, the waste water that goes back into the environment is concentrated with these chemicals and therefore highly toxic.

            This lethal toxic discharge not only affects human health, but also the health of the environment. There are 300,000 illnesses related to this chemical waste in the U.S. each year; many are in our own Central Valley’s farm workers (Savageau, 2012). In addition, cotton is not regulated by the FDA, so the pesticide-laden cotton waste, such as the stalks, is fed to cattle without a second thought. In turn, the milk or the meat that people consume from the cattle fed with the pesticide-laden cotton waste are also full of pesticide related chemicals. Not only are the cattle that consume the cotton waste and the people who in turn consume the cattle affected, but the negative effects of the use of pesticides in cotton spreads to the rest of the environment as well. 67 million birds are killed by the pesticides used by cotton producers a year; in 1995, pesticide-contaminated runoff from the cotton fields killed at least 250,000 fish in Alabama (Panna, 2004). Unfortunately, the death counts do not stop here.

            The next stage of the jean’s life product cycle is taking the cotton from the field and into textile mills where it can be woven into denim, which in turn is constructed into a pair of jeans. The weaving itself is not much of a problem; however, it is the dyeing that goes into achieving the classic blue denim look that is problematic. The recent increase in the demand for textile products, such as jeans, and the proportionate increase in its production have made wastewater from the use of synthetic dyes in textile mills one of the leading sources of severe pollution problems today. According to the World Bank, there are 72 chemicals in our water that come from textile dyeing, the majority of which is from dyeing jeans. Of those 72 chemicals, 30 of them cannot be removed (Savageau, 2012). Massive quantities of wastewater from the dye process are often flushed into fresh water sources which also contain equally large quantities of heavy metals that are extremely toxic to any living organism. Some of these toxins include silicon dioxide, cadmium, lead, and mercury (Garg and Kaushik, 44). The metals and chemicals found in the discharged wastewater mostly come from the indigo dye that makes the denim blue.

Indigo is not soluble in water, therefore dyeing cloth with indigo requires chemical additives to make dyeing fabric with indigo achievable. Even though indigo itself is not hazardous, the additives that indigo is composed of are. Acetone, ethanol, and sodium hydrosulfate are additives in indigo that are all hazardous, flammable, toxic, and corrosive (Garg and Kaushik, 26). According to the American Chemical Society, a single pair of jeans requires 2,500 gallons of water and a pound of chemicals. Most of this water is dumped back into the closest water source because it was only used to wash the jeans in between the different steps of the dye process and because it is the cheapest method of getting rid of the used water. To achieve the popular faded, distressed look, the jeans are also washed with hypochlorites and pumice stones, which consume even more water (Savageau, 2013). Just as the production of the classic, denim blue jeans produce waste that is harmful to our environment, the continued production of other types of jeans also contribute to further production of waste.

            Another way to dye jeans is through the use of sulfur dyes, which makes it possible to achieve jeans in different colors, especially the popular black jean. However, in order to acquire the desired color, even more chemicals are necessary. Sulfur dyes, like indigo dyes, are water insoluble; therefore in order for the sulfur chemicals to break down and bond with the denim, sodium sulphide and acidified dichromates are added to the mixture, which are toxic and hazardous to handle (Aspland, 73). Some of the unwanted side effects in using these chemicals include the harmful residue that may be left in the fabric after production as well as chemicals that are left in the wastewater that are difficult to treat and harmful to the environment (Savageau, 2013). 200,000 tons of dyes are discharged as effluents every year due to the inefficiency of the dye process. Most of these effluents pass through conventional water treatment plants and stay in the environment due to their high stability to light, temperature, water, detergents, and chemicals (Chequer et al, 12). Another reason why the wastewater is not easily treatable is because the dyes are designed to resist biodegration, causing the dye and its chemical toxins to remain in the environment for a long time.

            Dye wastewater is not the only form of waste from the production and manufacturing of jeans; many of the other forms are a result of finishing the jeans. For example, to soften the jeans, a worker would often need to sand down the jeans in a process that results in blue dust that is a heavy irritant to the lungs (Savageau). Other finishes include water proofing, antistatic protection, soil resistant, and stain release- all of which requires extra chemicals to be added into the jeans (Chequer et al, 22). 

            However, no matter the form of waste that results from the manufacturing and processing of jeans, as with the waste from cotton, each form is equally environmentally and humanly hazardous. In 2008, dye workers in the United States were surveyed to be 40 times more likely to develop tumors, cancer, cerebrovascular disease, or lung disease than the general population (Aspland, 32). A scientist in India studied the mutagenicity of textile dyes in effluents, as well as the health of the dye workers. The scientist made sure the dyes were used in their raw form, and did not allow any purification because he wanted to test the potential danger of the dye in its actual usage. The results clearly indicated that most of the dyes were indeed highly mutagenic, or highly capable of chemically altering genetic material (Gark and Laushik, 11). In Xintang, China, also known as the “Jeans Capital of the World”, most of the dyed wastewater is poured into the Dong River, which eventually leads to the Pearl River Delta. What once was a prolific fishing region is now a lifeless void of a chemical mixture of dye and water.

            Interestingly, however, in a jean’s product life cycle the most water that is wasted is not during the growing of the cotton, nor during the production and manufacturing of the denim, but in fact during its consumer use. In 2007, Levi Strauss & Co. performed a lifecycle assessment on their own Levi’s 501 jeans. The surprising result was that 45 percent of the water used in the lifecycle of the Levi’s 501 jeans occurred during the wash-and-dry homecare done by the customer (Levi’s, 2010). A simple way to reduce this waste of water is to wash less often and line dry. One does not need to wash his/her jeans after every wear. According to Cory Warren, editor of Levi Strauss & Co., “you have to judge for yourself what’s appropriate.” If the day does not require strenuous activity that makes you sweat, “maybe you can wear them twice or more before they go back to the washing machine (Levi Strauss & Co., 2010).” Levi Strauss & Co. has also taken their own initiatives in trying to reduce water that would be wasted with their 2010 Levi’s Water<Less jeans. According to Erik Joule, Senior Vice President of Merchandising and Design of the Levi’s brand, during the production process, a typical 501 Levi’s jean would be “finished” in large washing machines that undergo three to ten washing cycles, which add up to 42 liters of water per washing machine. This collection reduces the water consumption by an average of 28 percent and even up to 96 percent for some of the new products in the line. Some examples as to how Levi Strauss & Co. has achieved this is by reducing the number of washing machine cycles by combining multiple wet cycle processes into a single wet process, incorporating ozone processing into the garment washing, and removing the water from the stone wash but still keeping the distressed denim aesthetic (Levi Strauss & Co., 2010).

            However, as jeans become worn out, their end of life stage in the product life cycle is typically in the landfills, as most other textiles end up in. In 2009, there was an estimate that 12.7 million tons of textile waste is sent to the United States landfills each year, 95 percent of which is recyclable (Savageau, 2013). Once again, Levi Strauss & Co. tried to tackle this issue with the release of their “A Care Tag for our Planet” in 2009, which was an initiative to educate consumers on how to clean their clothes with less environmental impact as well as encouraging them to donate used jeans to Goodwill rather than throwing them out (Levi Strauss & Co., 2010). However, this only prolongs the inevitable linear system product life cycle: when jeans are worn out and unwearable, the only place they can go is the landfill because the dyes are resistant to biodegration.  Following this note, it would seem as if in order to have the jeans become biodegradable, the dye process would have to be removed. On the other hand, if the dyeing were to be removed, jeans would only come in cotton’s natural colors, such as off-white and brown, instead of the iconic blue denim or the new array of colors that many people have come to love as alternate choices to add to their wardrobes.

            A recent breakthrough in fiber polymer science grants the possibility of completely taking out the dye process altogether. Using biomimicry, a Japanese company called Teijin Fibers Limited created the Morphotex, a fabric that takes inspiration from the wings of the Morpho butterfly. The Morpho butterfly’s wings consist of microscopic layers of protein that refract light in different ways. The color of the Morpho butterfly’s wings that we see is entirely due to the play of light and structure as opposed to the presence of pigments. The Morphotex recreates this phenomenon through the use of nanotechnology to combine a total of 61 polyester and nylon fibers in alternating layers. By manipulating the thickness of each layer which can range from 70 to 100 nanometers, different colors can be produced such as red, green, and violet. Because color is “innate”, there is no need to dye the Morphotex, which means water consumption and industrial waste is greatly reduced. Sadly, Teijin Fibers Limited has recently announced that they will no longer be manufacturing Morphotex (Chua, 2010).

            As an alternative to the traditional dyeing process, Colorep (a California-based sustainable technology company) has recently developed a new method of dyeing textiles. In 2009, the development of AirDye technology has made it possible to have dyeing be waterless, which phases out the typical discharge of hazardous dyed wastewater into the nearest source of water. In addition, AirDye can only be bonded with synthetic materials, which the company makes out of recycled PET bottles (Walker, 2009). This means that the use of cotton would be unnecessary. If cotton was no longer necessary for the jeans-making process, the toxic pesticide-concentrated water runoff would be eliminated, as well as the tremendous amount of water that goes into the production of cotton. The way that AirDye technology works is that it uses dispersed dyes that are applied to a paper carrier, which then makes use of heat to transfer the dye from the paper into the fibers of the textiles so the color bonds at a molecular level. Because the dye process is at this molecular level, the fabrics can be washed at any temperature without the fear of the dye running off. Another great benefit of the AirDye technology is that the paper is completely recyclable, and the dyes are inert. If the dyes are inert, no chemical additives are needed for a reaction and both the dye and the paper can return to their original state to be reused again (Walker, 2009). According to Costello Tagliapetra, who debuted in New York’s Fashion Week with a line entirely colored with AirDye, it is “not only a more responsible solution, but one that sacrifices nothing when it came to the look and feel of the fabric (Walker, 2009).”

             From the growing of cotton to the production of denim to the end of the jean’s product life cycle, the major component of emissions throughout the whole process is wastewater. Using alternatives to cotton as the fabric choice for jeans, such as hemp, would also greatly reduce the water and pesticide consumption. The most hazardous and quantitative of these emissions occurs during the dyeing of the denim. If the goal is to make jeans more sustainable, eliminating or reducing the discharged toxic wastewater from this segment of the jean’s product life cycle would be a huge step. As indicated by both the popularity of jeans and the mass production of waste that comes with it, even the most common luxuries enjoyed by the population can bring about immense consequences to the necessities of life that humanity depends on. Because jeans have become a staple in fashion due to its accessibility for all, it is essential that the waste reducing process begins with the product life cycle of the jean. For such a prolific piece in the consumer world, once the waste reducing process begins with the jean, the population and environment as a whole will be greatly improved upon.

Bibliography

Aspland, Richard J. Textile Dyeing & Coloration. N.p.: American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, 1997. Print.

Baumgartner, W. H. "Notes on Precipitation of Black Sulfur Dye Waste." By Willem Rudolfs. Vol. 23. N.p.: Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 1931. 906-08. Print.

Chapagain, A. K., A. Y. Hoekstra, H. H. G. Savenije, and Adhikari R. Gautam. The Water Footprint of Cotton Consumption. Delft: Unesco-IHE, 2005. Print.

Chequer, Farah, Gisele Rodrigues De Oliveira, Elisa Ferraz, Juliano Cardoso, Maria Zanoni, and Danielle Palma De Oliveira. Eco-Friendly Textile Dyeing and Finishing. N.p.: CCBY, 2010. Print.

Chua, Jasmin Malik. "“Morphotex” Dress Mimics Butterfly Wing Shimmer—Without Any Dyes." Ecouterre. Ecouterre, 16 July 2010. Web. 12 Mar. 2013. <http://www.ecouterre.com/morphotex-dress-mimics-butterfly-wing-shimmer-without-any-dyes/>.

Garg, V. K., and P. Kaushik. Influence of Textile Mill Wastewater Irrigation. Budapest: Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 2008. Print.

Levi Strauss & Co. "Water." Levi Strauss. Levi Strauss & Co., 2010. Web. 11 Mar. 2013. <http://www.levistrauss.com/sustainability/planet/water>.

Panna. "Problems with Conventional Cotton Production." Pesticide Action Network. Pesticide Action Network North America, 2004. Web. 11 Mar. 2013. <http://www.panna.org/resources/cotton>.

Savageau, Ann. “21st Century.” DES142a. UC Davis, Davis. December. 2012. Lecture.

Savageau, Ann. “Textile Dyes”. DES127a. UC Davis, Davis. February. 2013. Lecture.

Walker, Alissa. "AirDye's Ecological Dyeing Process Makes the Future of Textiles Bright."Fast Company. World Trade Center, 22 Sept. 2009. Web. 11 Mar. 2013. <http://www.fastcompany.com/1368576/airdyes-ecological-dyeing-process-makes-future-textiles-bright>.