The fashion industry is facing many challenges, but one of the most pressing issues is water usage.  The textile industry is the third largest consumer and polluter of the world’s water. Water consumption is a huge problem for growing fibers such as the ever-thirsty cotton plant, with nearly 400 gallons of water required to produce just one cotton t-shirt.

Waste water is conceivably an even bigger issue than consumption. Toxic chemicals produced from dyeing textiles, along with other chemicals such as those used to produce synthetics, are contributing to a major crisis in pollution of fresh water, affecting the health of a number of species, including humans.  (Read The Consequences of Chemicals, Future Fashion White Papers).

Heavy metals such as chromium and cadmium, which are used to make bright and vibrant dyes, pose a threat wherever they appear in a product lifestyle, particularly the use of the dye in dye wastewater. Air Dye is a revolutionary technology that dyes textiles without using any water. Not only are they reducing the overall amount of water required to produce a garment, but this technology also prevents toxic chemicals from entering our ecosystems.

Some manufacturers work in closed-loop production, which means that the waste or effluent produced is treated and re-used, reducing the amount of toxic waste normally disposed of into the ecosystem.  The company Lenzing is a great example, with their fabrics modal and  tencel, made from a wood pulp much like bamboo (which has yet to be manufactured in a closed-loop environment).

But so much attention has been given to the energy, chemicals and water that go into making a garment that what many people don’t realize is the majority of the environmental damage comes once a garment has been purchased. The energy and water required to wash a garment has far more devastating effects than the growing of the raw materials and the manufacturing of the textiles. Surprising? Not really when you consider that the average piece of clothing lasts three years, and is laundered hundreds of times in its lifetime.

The average North American household washes 400 loads of laundry per year. This accumulated number of washes requires 13,500 gallons of water to complete, and is equivalent to how much water it takes to fill a standard above-ground pool!

The first steps towards recovering from our water addiction begin with wearing our clothes several times before washing. But once we get to a full laundry basket that is truly in need of a wash, there are a few basic tips to help you get started on eco-friendly and budget-smart laundering habits.

1) Wash your clothes in cold water: An interesting fact – using only hot water for washing your clothes uses more electricity in a year than leaving the refrigerator door open 24 hours a day for an entire year. Cold water is the best alternative, as it not only reduces fabric shrinkage, but it allows colors to remain vibrant. So your clothes will fit and last longer AND you’ll reduce your carbon emissions by 500 pounds a year!

2) Wash full loads: Washing machines are most efficient when operating at capacity. Take advantage of your washing machine’s full potential and load it up. Your budget will thank you for it.

3) Use the right amount and type of detergent: When doing a load of laundry do you use the cap size as an indicator of the amount of detergent you should use? If so, odds are you are using way too much laundry detergent than what is actually needed. The amount you use should reflect the guiding lines on the inside of the cap. Here’s a great article on Treehugger with more information.

Another helpful hint is to look for phosphate-free detergents. Phosphates are the leading chemical agent in algal blooms and a major cause of aquatic ecosystem depletion. Also, instead of fabric softeners, try using white vinegar in the rinse cycle. The acid vinegar will neutralize the basic detergents and as a result will help keep your clothes looking clean.

4) Consider an Energy-Star rated washer: Gone are the days of scrubbing our laundry by hand down at the lake. If you’re in the market to replace your washing machine, consider a more cost effective one. An Energy-Star or front-loading washing machine can save thousands of liters of water a year and be 30 – 85% more energy efficient.

Image above from Costello Tagilapietra’s 2009 show at Mercedes Benz Fashion Week featuring Air Dye technology.

Related posts: Nifty Eco-Friendly Laundry Tricks Worth Trying
Eco Laundry Drying Secrets Revealed
Squeeze Em’ Into Any Teeny Tiny Space Laundry Racks
10 Myths About Dry Cleaning
Dry Clean Only? An Eco Expert Tells Us When It’s Safe to Ignore Labels

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the FDA’s approval of the birth control pill. The pill was first envisioned by family planning crusader Margaret Sanger as a remedy to the debilitating cycle of perpetual pregnancy for married women. Sanger’s own mother died at the age of 50 after 18 pregnancies; at her funeral Sanger famously confronted her father, telling him, “You caused this. Mother is dead from having too many children.”

The pill was intended to proffer women control over their reproductive destinies. But its secondary impact was just as important: women entered the workforce. Before the pill, less than 20 percent of women with a child under 18 worked outside the home. By the end of the last century, that number skyrocketed to 70 percent. Though many women still find themselves choosing between a career and a family, the pill allowed women to better calibrate these decisions. What followed, of course, was a major upheaval in the way we view men and women and their societal roles. Today, we’re still adjusting to that delicious shakedown.

For all the benefits of the pill, the iconic contraceptive has reaped its fair share of criticism. Like the condom, the pill, which is taken by more than 100 million women worldwide, has come under fire for having an iffy environmental track record. In a recent post on Grist.org, Lisa Hymas rolls her eyes at the media’s love note to the pill on its 50th anniversary.

“We’re still agog over a pill that Margaret Sanger dreamed up in 1912 – one that we have to take every single day, one that messes with our hormones, one that has unpleasant side effects for many women, one that contaminates our water supplies.”

Indeed, the pill is widely credited with diminishing certain fish populations. Estrogen, excreted in the urine of pill users, enters waterways where it is consumed by fish. In one Canadian and U.S. government experiment, male winnows exposed to trace amounts of estrogen became feminized. Their testicular development stopped and they began making eggs instead. Unable to reproduce, the fish population in the experiment died out within two years.

In addition to its impact on wildlife, the pill’s estrogen runoff may adversely affect humans, particularly in developing countries where waste water is more commonly recycled for human consumption.

Hymas’ call for a greener pill, a more accessible pill, and even a pill for men, deserves to be seconded. But let’s not forget that the pill has been a major boon for the environment in one regard. If you think the earth is overpopulated now, imagine what things would look like without the contraceptive. And for that reason, we toast the pill on its 50th anniversary.

Image: Phoney Nickle

St. Patricks’ Day this week turned cities green literally – from landmarks to libations. But how green have major metro areas around the U.S. been throughout the year? The American Cities Business Journal group has released a new study on the matter.

Their inaugural Green Cities Index examined 43 U.S. cities, and ranked them based on 20 criteria encompassing residents’ environmental behavior, cities’ use or abuse of land and water, and presence of a variety of environment related projects and industries. The Green Cities Index 2010 survey results have been hot in the blogosphere ever since, with bloggers and residents bragging or bummed about their scores.

Portland topped the Green Cities Index 2010, with San Francisco in a close second place, Honolulu at third followed by Austin and Boston. The new study’s rankings fell in line with related studies by the Natural Resources Defense Council, and by Popular Science. But not exactly.

Surprising Strengths

Green Cities Index 2010 gave areas lacking environmental credibility overall some surprising points. Houston, one of the most traffic-choked cities in the U.S., held the top spot for Energy Star rated facilities, saving it from a much lower score.

Meanwhile, Albany ranked in the top ten on this list, though traditional manufacturing plants have caused severe pollution there for years. The city’s high score was influenced by Albany’s top score for “green jobs.”

At least the presence of more green jobs per capita in the area indicates the promise of a sea change.

It ain’t easy being green…

How important are green aspects of a city to the quality of life there? We think entirely important. That’s why we’re surprised that Green Cities Index 2010 chart topper Portland did not rank so highly in a separate happiness survey, the Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index which was released last month. The happiness study examined 162 cities, and Portland came in at 59. (That compares indirectly to 16th place on a 43-city list like Green Cities.)

Greensboro, North Carolina which came in dead last on the Green Cities Index, with the worst ranking for sprawl and its result, carbon emissions per capita, ranked 97th on the well-being index, which would put it at about 25th on a list of 43.

While there’s no apples-to-apples comparison between the studies, it’s worth asking: why aren’t the greenest cities always the happiest? Where does your city rank, and how happy are you?

Basic reading:

“A few hundred miles up the Ohio River from Cincinnati, Pittsburgh sits as a shining example of sustainability. After decades of working to clean its smoky skies and polluted waterways, the Steel City also has become a model for green building and sustainable design…” – A news feature discussing the reasons why Cincinnati Business Journal decided to launch its Green Cities Index

“Nine of the 10 cities that fare best on ‘life evaluation,’ assessments of life now and expectations in five years, boast a major university, a big military installation or a state Capitol – institutions that presumably provide some insulation from recession.” – A news feature breaking down a Gallup study of how happy people are in American cities, via USA Today

“If you want to be good to the environment, stay away from it…” From a 2009 study on Suburban vs. City living by Edward L. Glaeser

“No Northwest city is yet close to the destination of sustainability: carbon neutrality; widely shared prosperity; stable populations in strong communities; educational and economic opportunity for all; hyper-efficient use of natural resources; zero-pollution industries; and low-stuff, high-satisfaction lives.” – a different assessment of green cities from the Vancouver, B.C. news site, The Tyee

Further Resources:

News from OregonLive.com about the lack of trees in an otherwise green city, Portland: “Green Portland Isn’t Green Enough”

An Environmental Protection Agency air quality report

For contrast, a news report on air quality in Islamabad

A Greenbang.com story about London’s aim to imitate Copenhagen, Europe’s greenest city

A blog post calling for public transit support in Nashville, and referencing its low ranking on Green Cities Index 2010

Image Credit: Keith Skelton

This is the latest installment of EcoMeme, a column featuring eco news, tech and trends by EcoSalon writer and columnist Lora Kolodny.

Color me hydrated! Yes, these appealing fruit shades enlivening the sleek water bottles are part of KOR Water’s new Thirst for Givingâ„¢  program.

Each color is tied to a different non-profit identified by KOR as part of this environmental mission – and clever marketing campaign.

KOR will donate 1% of annual sales to organizations doing exceptional work related to the causes that KOR supports: ocean and watershed protection, the global water crisis and container recycling.

“KOR’s mission is to celebrate and protect water,” said KOR founder and CEO Eric Barnes.  “The Thirst for Givingâ„¢ Program is our way of bringing more awareness to issues that deeply impact the future of water on our planet.”

The KOR One Hydration Vessel is now available in four shades, each one representing a specific water-related cause: Blue (Ocean Protection); Fuchsia (Global Water Crisis); Green (Watershed Protection); and Orange (Container Recycling).

The Four Non-Profits selected are:

• Ocean Protection: The Algalita Marine Research Foundation
• Global Water Crisis: Blue Planet Run
• Watershed Protection:  The Wetlands Initiative
• Container Recycling: Container Recycling Institute

The Fountain Valley, Calif. company invites retailers to become partners and sell the bottles at their stores. Meantime, you can locate one of the vendors already selling the bottles ($30 at REI) by visiting the KOR Website. If the bottles take off, it could mean helpful dollars for the targeted causes, since the bottles are on the pricey side.

Consumers who have tried the bottle, made of Eastman Tritanâ„¢ copolyester, have found it to be durable with a good grip. Its design includes a hinged lid that can be opened with one hand, which comes in handy for sports like biking, and a soft rubber base with a glasslike clarity for seeing what you are drinking (we are what we drink?). The sleek design won the National Georgraphic Adventure Best of Adventure Gear Award for 2009.

Imagine your village’s water supply was about to be contaminated by nuclear waste from a nearby dump and the federal government simply offered to put a fence around it. If you were the Hopi Nation, you’d sue.

In the 1950s, the Bureau of Indian Affairs created an unlined, unrestricted dump a few miles from a uranium mill on Navajo and Hopi land. Everything from uranium tailings to medical waste has been dumped there over the decades. The dump was closed – covered over with sand and dirt – in 1997 and the Hopi and Navajo people have been fighting for a cleanup ever since.

Studies have confirmed that groundwater near the dump contains levels of uranium, arsenic, chromium and more that far exceed what is considered safe. What’s the “safe” level of uranium, anyway? And after years of watching government agencies hem and haw over the issues (yes, even offering to simply build a fence around the dump), the Hopi Nation is fed up. They plan to take serious legal action.

And they’re not just suing as a matter of principle, but because a uranium-contaminated water plume is headed directly for the Hopi water supply. Drinking water is a precious commodity, especially in the Arizonan high desert, and it was governmental mismanagement that led to the problem in the first place.

It’s hard to believe that anyone could sue the government itself and succeed, but with President Obama’s more sensitive leadership, maybe this major law suit (which includes the Department of Energy, Department of Defense and the Environmental Protection Agency) will make the United States government pay better attention to the real and ongoing saga of Native American affairs.

Move over, melamine; your infamy as a contaminant in Chinese infant formula is being pushed aside by one that’s made in the USA. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has found some samples of American brands of infant formula (although they won’t divulge which) are contaminated with perchlorates – which come from rocket fuel.

How, one has to wonder, are perchlorates getting into the formula many people are feeding to their newborn babies? Improper disposal on military bases, rocket test sites and chemical plants can allow perchlorates, which affect the thyroid, to leach into drinking water. That means these chemicals may be harming you, too. So far, the EPA hasn’t set a “safe” limit for perchlorates in drinking water, but I hope this issue will force the agency to take a closer look and regulate.

Image: Alessandro Perilli

Seventeen-year-old budding scientist Smitha Ramakrishna found out the artificial sweetener sucralose, marketed as Splenda, might be invisible to the bathroom scale – but can pose a hefty danger to fish and other living creatures because it accumulates in the water supply after people excrete it. Pretty sweet discovery for someone who hasn’t finished high school yet!

Scientific American profiled the teenager as one of 40 finalists in the 2009 Intel Science Talent Search who gathered in Washington, DC, for the final judging rounds this week.

While she didn’t make the top 10, she still won a lap top computer and $5,000 for her talent, as well as  recognition for her devotion to water safety and conservation.

Ramakrishna, a senior at Corona del Sol High School in Chandler, Arizona, was granted permission to study sucralose at Arizona State University – looking into various modern treatments such as bacterial digestion used in wastewater treatment plants.

She discovered sucralose was able to resist most treatments, breaking down into biodegradable molecules with extensive time and concentration of titanium oxide and ultraviolent light. Yet, her research showed few treatment plants bother with these methods. As a result, almost all the sucralose consumed winds up in the ecosystem.

Despite the controversies surrounding it, Splenda is wildly popular for weight control and is added to many brands of treats, sodas and cereals to satisfy the nation’s sweet tooth. In fact, one diabetic who is allergic to Splenda blogged that this finding explains why she continues to have reactions even though she tries to avoid the sweetener. “It turns up in everything,” she complained.

Ramakrishna became interested in water issues on a family trip to India when she was only 12. Her parents took her to an orphanage, where she says she was shocked by the poverty – the lack of tables and chairs for eating, for instance – but what struck her most is that these children didn’t even have access to clean water.

She tells Scientific American that upon her return home she founded AWAKE, an organization dedicated to water conservation (including the golf courses of Arizona) and education. Apparently, her cause has already made a dent, helping to get clean water to 3,000 kids in India through reverse osmosis and rainwater harvesting projects.

As far as the breakthrough study that made her a finalist, the young scientist says, “It’s opened a whole new door.” She plans to study the impact on fish when she attends college, perhaps at A.S.U. where her research continues.

Meantime, the student taking the top $100,000 prize in the Intel competition is Eric Larson, 17, of Eugene, Oregon, for his research project classifying mathematical objects called fusion categories. Eric’s work describes these in certain dimensions for the first time. More than 1,600 high school seniors from around the nation entered the search.