sustainability and recycling

SUSTAINABILITY AND RECYCLING

These two words are bantered around the outdoor industry continuously these days. I am sure they do not know the meaning of sustainability. The clue to understanding the reason they do not know the meaning of sustainability is because they are interested in recycling the products they sell when they die.

I was reading this week that Adidas will be selling 100 percent of their products by the year 2024 made from recycled polyester fiber. I assume that they are in the process of recycling now and by 2024 it will be all products.This tells me that they are even less interested in sustainable products. They are not alone as I have read many times that Patagonia is in full swing of recycled products and I am sure all of the other multi-billion dollar companies that market products are as well.

If you think about sustainability doesn’t that mean producing products that will last for a long time? Obviously things will eventually wear out, but if they are made well to begin with from quality materials they will last. However when you think recycling it is because the products that they have been selling do not last very long, do they? Recognizing their quality problems these marketing companies step up and say when the product you bought from us wears out we can recycle it. Of course you did not realize it would wear out in one season, but it did. They pat themselves on the back for showing they are good stewards of the earth.

Noting that their products are definitely not sustainable they jump on the recycling route. In their minds this is good publicity for the company; however there are other problems that arise.

When you recycle polyester fiber that is in the realm of post-consumer which means after consumers have used the product it has to go through a series of processes. The following is a paragraph from an article I read this morning in Sportstextiles online magazine.

“After six years of intensive research, Worn Again has said it is ready to come out of the laboratory and bring its patented technology to market. The process it has developed is capable of separating, decontaminating and extracting polyester polymers and cellulose (from cotton) from non-reusable textiles, as well as from plastic bottles and packing. This material can then be used to make new products”.

As you can see the recycling process is not easy as it may or may not have been perfected. Worn Again will find out at some point, they do need customers first to use their service.

The folks at Adidas will be recycling clothing as well as their footwear. What I do know is that the quality of the fiber once extruded is not the same quality as virgin polyester makes, it is weaker and less durable.

What I also know is the costs involved with recycling are higher than the costs of virgin polyester.

What does all of this mean; you are paying more for products made with recycled materials and you are getting less quality. However, this does mean that you will wear out the recycled product sooner and send it back to go through the whole recycling process again. Isn’t that just peachy!!! You have less quality and greater cost. Sounds to me like “planned obsolescence”.

This could be a lesson for me; if I made crappy products that looked good and didn’t work very well maybe I too would be a billion dollar company. But since I make products that just keep going for my customer’s year in and year out they are not replacing them unless they are lost or stolen. So I will never hit the billion dollar mark, but that is okay with me.

YOU TAX DOLLARS AT WORK

The “Outdoor Industry Confluence,” brought together outdoor industry, natural resources and economic development leaders from North Carolina, Colorado, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Wyoming to collaborate on a vision for supporting and growing the industry. The accord finalized during these sessions established a set of principles across four areas: economic development, public health and wellness, conservation and stewardship and education and workforce development.

I have met the head of the Colorado outdoor recreation department some time ago. Aside from hosting parties and attending parties at the Outdoor Retailer trade show which takes place in Denver I do not know what he does.

The person in his position may very well be tasked to find companies that make outdoor related products move to the state they represent. Here we have 11 states that will be competing with each other for the elusive manufacturer. Since they will not find a prime name company since there aren’t many that actually make product here that leaves very small startups that will need funding. That is what they want startups that they can fund and where do the funds come from; TAXES. Yes the taxes collected by the states from people who work and businesses that have nothing to do with the outdoor industry. These people who get to divvy out tax dollars are not knowledgeable business people, if they were they would be “public servants”, and what’s more they would not know if the people they give the funding to are knowledgeable business people.

As I see it the outdoor industry just loves the government.

What they are ignorant of is that there is a slowdown with people doing long distance backpacking. This is evidenced by the fact that retailers are not selling large backpacks at this time.