Executive Summary

The fashion industry is a massive emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, with an estimated 2–8% share of global emissions.
The demand for sustainability is evident. Eco-friendlier solutions must, however, have commercial viability to ensure actual implementation.
Three general trends can be observed: circular models, which are extending the lifespan of garments; bio-based materials replacing textiles with a much better emissions footprint; and the re-use of existing materials such as plastic.
Bio-based materials may yield the most promising environmental performance, commercial value, and scalability outcomes. We see a significant opportunity to supercharge these companies with the needed capital.

The Fashion Problem

Did you know that the fashion industry produces between 2–8% of global carbon emissions, which are projected to keep rising in the next few years (1)?

Fast fashion is clearly a global problem. This sector stands in the spotlight, from greenhouse gas emissions over microplastic pollution to social issues such as worker rights infringements. Over the last decades, the supply of fashion has skyrocketed. A McKinsey report shed light on the sheer amount of collections produced by popular fashion stores: “Zara offers 24 new clothing collections each year; H&M offers 12 to 16 and refreshes them weekly” (2).

Projected carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the apparel industry worldwide from 2019 to 2030 in megatonnes (3)

These startling numbers are reflected in revenue numbers: LVMH (Moët Hennessy — Louis Vuitton SE) is currently on top of the list of fashion houses with revenues of $50.9B in 2021 (!), followed by Nike, Kering (Gucci, Saint Laurent) and Inditex (Zara, Massimo Dutti & Co).

Over the last 15 years, the number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4). However, consumers are now actively pushing for more sustainable practices. Google searches for sustainability in fashion were 2X as many in July 2020 versus July 2019 (5). Fashion houses must adopt better practices to cater to these audiences and ensure that sustainability is not a choice for consumers but a norm.

How do sustainability and commercial value find common ground to enhance an imminent and feasible course of direction?

We spoke to various companies and industry experts and weaved through academic papers to conclude.

The number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4) Image (6)

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

The demand for more sustainable fashion has led to many companies aiming for low-hanging fruits to turbocharge their sustainability stance. This has often been accompanied by incremental changes such as introducing recycled tags or adding 1% of recycled polyester to the fabric mix to label it as “recycled fibers.” Such steps are a warning sign and oftentimes clearly greenwashing.

What needs to occur is an approach that takes into consideration all effects of practices across a garment’s life cycle. To realistically reduce the number of collections, waste, and virgin materials used, the fashion industry needs to adopt a broad set of sustainability principles, which we have summarized below:

Resource efficiency (water, energy, toxic chemicals, carbon emissions)
Longevity and quality of the product (wear and tear, beyond first-life use)
Ethical and social considerations (animal-derived vs. plant-based, safety and standards of production environment, wages and work standards of employees).

Three general directions for lower environmental emissions are identified based on our research and discussions:

Extending the lifespan of garments through circular solutions,
Improving the ecological footprint (water, carbon, toxins) of textiles by developing less harmful bio-based alternatives, and
Re-using (upcycling, recycling) existing resources (from plastics to deadstock textile material).

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

Circular solutions

Vinted has pioneered the second-hand market, making existing garments a sensible choice without compromising on choice through their large peer-to-peer marketplace. Other approaches have emerged, including specialized vintage or high-end companies or rental verticals rotating novel or existing garments across multiple people.

However, the author Alden Wicker, in the book “To Dye For: How Toxic Fashion is Making You Sick” pointed out a study that concluded “clothing rental is worse for the climate than resale, recycling, owning for an extended period or even owning for a short time and throwing the clothing away” because of the transportation involved (8). Furthermore, the dry cleaning between rents and the plastic or paper films/wrappers add to the material cost.

Bio-based materials

These have captured the attention of many people. From algae-based polymers to alternative silk, this avenue can use renewable resources and significantly lower the resource cost of garment production. For example, Lyocell, a natural material made from plant cellulose, is almost indistinguishable from cotton while requiring much less water in production and no or minimal pesticides (9).

One drawback is that biobased materials often still lack the infrastructure to scale and thus have higher unit economic costs than conventional yarns such as polyester. Yet, we feel this will change over the next three to five years. One current synergistic factor is that companies producing sustainable fibers tend to pay greater attention to work standards, often impacting the product’s price.

Re-using existing resources

The likes of Adidas have attempted to introduce sneakers made from plastic waste. It’s assumed that it is possible to increase economic output without increasing the consumption of natural resources. However, a study shows that it is very doubtful to expand the complete recycling of products and components at zero biophysical cost (7). In fact, the energy and water needed to recycle garments or plastic may sometimes be close to or surpass its original environmental footprint.

Due to economies of scale, certain fossil-derived materials may save on energy more than recycled solutions. At the same time, these economies of scale can also be achieved post-first-life use and save high environmental costs. Companies such as Patagonia, pledging for a longer life cycle of garments, may nourish consumer awareness towards longer and repairable wear.

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Producing no virgin materials and new garments is idealistic. Fashion houses want to satisfy consumer and environmental needs in a realistic world. Therefore, we see the opportunity to replace harmful materials through biobased solutions that can meet the demand of configuration and scale that recycled solutions may not yield. These include alternative polyester, e.g., from cellulose, or alternative leather based on mycelium (fungi).

(Watch “Fantastic Fungi” on Netflix to be blown away by the power of fungi!)

Special attention must be paid to land-use, as well as water and energy use, for bio-based resource extraction and processing. A holistic circularity approach should be adopted along the entire product life cycle (from fiber feedstock provisioning to polymer production and end-of-life recyclability and degradability) for best-practice interventions. For example, for mycelium-based leather production, mycelium’s energy value can be reduced by up to 80% if air drying (vs. oven-drying) is used.

Venture capital can supercharge the infrastructure needed to scale bio-based material manufacturing and put into place a way to combine sustainable and commercial value for the fashion industry ushering in a new era of sustainable fashion.

Sources

Executive Summary

The fashion industry is a massive emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, with an estimated 2–8% share of global emissions.
The demand for sustainability is evident. Eco-friendlier solutions must, however, have commercial viability to ensure actual implementation.
Three general trends can be observed: circular models, which are extending the lifespan of garments; bio-based materials replacing textiles with a much better emissions footprint; and the re-use of existing materials such as plastic.
Bio-based materials may yield the most promising environmental performance, commercial value, and scalability outcomes. We see a significant opportunity to supercharge these companies with the needed capital.

The Fashion Problem

Did you know that the fashion industry produces between 2–8% of global carbon emissions, which are projected to keep rising in the next few years (1)?

Fast fashion is clearly a global problem. This sector stands in the spotlight, from greenhouse gas emissions over microplastic pollution to social issues such as worker rights infringements. Over the last decades, the supply of fashion has skyrocketed. A McKinsey report shed light on the sheer amount of collections produced by popular fashion stores: “Zara offers 24 new clothing collections each year; H&M offers 12 to 16 and refreshes them weekly” (2).

Projected carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the apparel industry worldwide from 2019 to 2030 in megatonnes (3)

These startling numbers are reflected in revenue numbers: LVMH (Moët Hennessy — Louis Vuitton SE) is currently on top of the list of fashion houses with revenues of $50.9B in 2021 (!), followed by Nike, Kering (Gucci, Saint Laurent) and Inditex (Zara, Massimo Dutti & Co).

Over the last 15 years, the number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4). However, consumers are now actively pushing for more sustainable practices. Google searches for sustainability in fashion were 2X as many in July 2020 versus July 2019 (5). Fashion houses must adopt better practices to cater to these audiences and ensure that sustainability is not a choice for consumers but a norm.

How do sustainability and commercial value find common ground to enhance an imminent and feasible course of direction?

We spoke to various companies and industry experts and weaved through academic papers to conclude.

The number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4) Image (6)

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

The demand for more sustainable fashion has led to many companies aiming for low-hanging fruits to turbocharge their sustainability stance. This has often been accompanied by incremental changes such as introducing recycled tags or adding 1% of recycled polyester to the fabric mix to label it as “recycled fibers.” Such steps are a warning sign and oftentimes clearly greenwashing.

What needs to occur is an approach that takes into consideration all effects of practices across a garment’s life cycle. To realistically reduce the number of collections, waste, and virgin materials used, the fashion industry needs to adopt a broad set of sustainability principles, which we have summarized below:

Resource efficiency (water, energy, toxic chemicals, carbon emissions)
Longevity and quality of the product (wear and tear, beyond first-life use)
Ethical and social considerations (animal-derived vs. plant-based, safety and standards of production environment, wages and work standards of employees).

Three general directions for lower environmental emissions are identified based on our research and discussions:

Extending the lifespan of garments through circular solutions,
Improving the ecological footprint (water, carbon, toxins) of textiles by developing less harmful bio-based alternatives, and
Re-using (upcycling, recycling) existing resources (from plastics to deadstock textile material).

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

Circular solutions

Vinted has pioneered the second-hand market, making existing garments a sensible choice without compromising on choice through their large peer-to-peer marketplace. Other approaches have emerged, including specialized vintage or high-end companies or rental verticals rotating novel or existing garments across multiple people.

However, the author Alden Wicker, in the book “To Dye For: How Toxic Fashion is Making You Sick” pointed out a study that concluded “clothing rental is worse for the climate than resale, recycling, owning for an extended period or even owning for a short time and throwing the clothing away” because of the transportation involved (8). Furthermore, the dry cleaning between rents and the plastic or paper films/wrappers add to the material cost.

Bio-based materials

These have captured the attention of many people. From algae-based polymers to alternative silk, this avenue can use renewable resources and significantly lower the resource cost of garment production. For example, Lyocell, a natural material made from plant cellulose, is almost indistinguishable from cotton while requiring much less water in production and no or minimal pesticides (9).

One drawback is that biobased materials often still lack the infrastructure to scale and thus have higher unit economic costs than conventional yarns such as polyester. Yet, we feel this will change over the next three to five years. One current synergistic factor is that companies producing sustainable fibers tend to pay greater attention to work standards, often impacting the product’s price.

Re-using existing resources

The likes of Adidas have attempted to introduce sneakers made from plastic waste. It’s assumed that it is possible to increase economic output without increasing the consumption of natural resources. However, a study shows that it is very doubtful to expand the complete recycling of products and components at zero biophysical cost (7). In fact, the energy and water needed to recycle garments or plastic may sometimes be close to or surpass its original environmental footprint.

Due to economies of scale, certain fossil-derived materials may save on energy more than recycled solutions. At the same time, these economies of scale can also be achieved post-first-life use and save high environmental costs. Companies such as Patagonia, pledging for a longer life cycle of garments, may nourish consumer awareness towards longer and repairable wear.

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Producing no virgin materials and new garments is idealistic. Fashion houses want to satisfy consumer and environmental needs in a realistic world. Therefore, we see the opportunity to replace harmful materials through biobased solutions that can meet the demand of configuration and scale that recycled solutions may not yield. These include alternative polyester, e.g., from cellulose, or alternative leather based on mycelium (fungi).

(Watch “Fantastic Fungi” on Netflix to be blown away by the power of fungi!)

Special attention must be paid to land-use, as well as water and energy use, for bio-based resource extraction and processing. A holistic circularity approach should be adopted along the entire product life cycle (from fiber feedstock provisioning to polymer production and end-of-life recyclability and degradability) for best-practice interventions. For example, for mycelium-based leather production, mycelium’s energy value can be reduced by up to 80% if air drying (vs. oven-drying) is used.

Venture capital can supercharge the infrastructure needed to scale bio-based material manufacturing and put into place a way to combine sustainable and commercial value for the fashion industry ushering in a new era of sustainable fashion.

Sources

Executive Summary

The fashion industry is a massive emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, with an estimated 2–8% share of global emissions.
The demand for sustainability is evident. Eco-friendlier solutions must, however, have commercial viability to ensure actual implementation.
Three general trends can be observed: circular models, which are extending the lifespan of garments; bio-based materials replacing textiles with a much better emissions footprint; and the re-use of existing materials such as plastic.
Bio-based materials may yield the most promising environmental performance, commercial value, and scalability outcomes. We see a significant opportunity to supercharge these companies with the needed capital.

The Fashion Problem

Did you know that the fashion industry produces between 2–8% of global carbon emissions, which are projected to keep rising in the next few years (1)?

Fast fashion is clearly a global problem. This sector stands in the spotlight, from greenhouse gas emissions over microplastic pollution to social issues such as worker rights infringements. Over the last decades, the supply of fashion has skyrocketed. A McKinsey report shed light on the sheer amount of collections produced by popular fashion stores: “Zara offers 24 new clothing collections each year; H&M offers 12 to 16 and refreshes them weekly” (2).

Projected carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the apparel industry worldwide from 2019 to 2030 in megatonnes (3)

These startling numbers are reflected in revenue numbers: LVMH (Moët Hennessy — Louis Vuitton SE) is currently on top of the list of fashion houses with revenues of $50.9B in 2021 (!), followed by Nike, Kering (Gucci, Saint Laurent) and Inditex (Zara, Massimo Dutti & Co).

Over the last 15 years, the number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4). However, consumers are now actively pushing for more sustainable practices. Google searches for sustainability in fashion were 2X as many in July 2020 versus July 2019 (5). Fashion houses must adopt better practices to cater to these audiences and ensure that sustainability is not a choice for consumers but a norm.

How do sustainability and commercial value find common ground to enhance an imminent and feasible course of direction?

We spoke to various companies and industry experts and weaved through academic papers to conclude.

The number of times a garment is worn has declined by around 36% (4) Image (6)

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

The demand for more sustainable fashion has led to many companies aiming for low-hanging fruits to turbocharge their sustainability stance. This has often been accompanied by incremental changes such as introducing recycled tags or adding 1% of recycled polyester to the fabric mix to label it as “recycled fibers.” Such steps are a warning sign and oftentimes clearly greenwashing.

What needs to occur is an approach that takes into consideration all effects of practices across a garment’s life cycle. To realistically reduce the number of collections, waste, and virgin materials used, the fashion industry needs to adopt a broad set of sustainability principles, which we have summarized below:

Resource efficiency (water, energy, toxic chemicals, carbon emissions)
Longevity and quality of the product (wear and tear, beyond first-life use)
Ethical and social considerations (animal-derived vs. plant-based, safety and standards of production environment, wages and work standards of employees).

Three general directions for lower environmental emissions are identified based on our research and discussions:

Extending the lifespan of garments through circular solutions,
Improving the ecological footprint (water, carbon, toxins) of textiles by developing less harmful bio-based alternatives, and
Re-using (upcycling, recycling) existing resources (from plastics to deadstock textile material).

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

Circular solutions

Vinted has pioneered the second-hand market, making existing garments a sensible choice without compromising on choice through their large peer-to-peer marketplace. Other approaches have emerged, including specialized vintage or high-end companies or rental verticals rotating novel or existing garments across multiple people.

However, the author Alden Wicker, in the book “To Dye For: How Toxic Fashion is Making You Sick” pointed out a study that concluded “clothing rental is worse for the climate than resale, recycling, owning for an extended period or even owning for a short time and throwing the clothing away” because of the transportation involved (8). Furthermore, the dry cleaning between rents and the plastic or paper films/wrappers add to the material cost.

Bio-based materials

These have captured the attention of many people. From algae-based polymers to alternative silk, this avenue can use renewable resources and significantly lower the resource cost of garment production. For example, Lyocell, a natural material made from plant cellulose, is almost indistinguishable from cotton while requiring much less water in production and no or minimal pesticides (9).

One drawback is that biobased materials often still lack the infrastructure to scale and thus have higher unit economic costs than conventional yarns such as polyester. Yet, we feel this will change over the next three to five years. One current synergistic factor is that companies producing sustainable fibers tend to pay greater attention to work standards, often impacting the product’s price.

Re-using existing resources

The likes of Adidas have attempted to introduce sneakers made from plastic waste. It’s assumed that it is possible to increase economic output without increasing the consumption of natural resources. However, a study shows that it is very doubtful to expand the complete recycling of products and components at zero biophysical cost (7). In fact, the energy and water needed to recycle garments or plastic may sometimes be close to or surpass its original environmental footprint.

Due to economies of scale, certain fossil-derived materials may save on energy more than recycled solutions. At the same time, these economies of scale can also be achieved post-first-life use and save high environmental costs. Companies such as Patagonia, pledging for a longer life cycle of garments, may nourish consumer awareness towards longer and repairable wear.

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Producing no virgin materials and new garments is idealistic. Fashion houses want to satisfy consumer and environmental needs in a realistic world. Therefore, we see the opportunity to replace harmful materials through biobased solutions that can meet the demand of configuration and scale that recycled solutions may not yield. These include alternative polyester, e.g., from cellulose, or alternative leather based on mycelium (fungi).

(Watch “Fantastic Fungi” on Netflix to be blown away by the power of fungi!)

Special attention must be paid to land-use, as well as water and energy use, for bio-based resource extraction and processing. A holistic circularity approach should be adopted along the entire product life cycle (from fiber feedstock provisioning to polymer production and end-of-life recyclability and degradability) for best-practice interventions. For example, for mycelium-based leather production, mycelium’s energy value can be reduced by up to 80% if air drying (vs. oven-drying) is used.

Venture capital can supercharge the infrastructure needed to scale bio-based material manufacturing and put into place a way to combine sustainable and commercial value for the fashion industry ushering in a new era of sustainable fashion.

Sustainable Fashion: Exploring Three Possible Avenues

Executive Summary

The Fashion Problem

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Sources

Executive Summary

The Fashion Problem

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Sources

Executive Summary

The Fashion Problem

Connecting Sustainability and Growth?

Pros and Cons of Possible Avenues

An Opportunity to Back Renewable Bio-based Materials

Sources