91av

AT AUSTRALIA’S recent Fashion Week, fur coats were everywhere, but not a single animal was harmed in their making – they were all synthetic. “We’ve never seen this many fashionistas get on board with this particular trend,” said , an Australian fashion website.

The fad is part of a global backlash against animal-derived textiles like fur, leather, wool and silk – last week, the UK’s Labour party pledged to . Driven in part by the growing vegan movement, people are choosing to buy plastic imitations made from materials like polyester and acrylic instead.

“Vegan fabrics, despite being kinder to cows and sheep, may unwittingly be harming ocean creatures”

That may seem like the obvious ethical choice, but plastic comes with its own set of problems. These materials are derived from non-renewable petroleum, don’t biodegrade and can shed harmful microfibres into the oceans.

“We’ve got these two uber issues – animal welfare and overconsumption of plastic – that are coming up against each other,” says , a sustainable fashion consultant based in Sydney.

On one hand, many peoples say that exploiting animals for their skin and fur is cruel, so favour plastic alternatives. And the problem could run deeper: a recent investigation by animal welfare organisation PETA, for instance, claimed to have found evidence of Australian shearers , hitting and cutting sheep.

On the other hand, proponents of animal-based textiles say their longevity and biodegradability makes them environmentally friendly. The International Council of Hides, Skins and Leather Traders Association are “based on natural, renewable resources”.

So are the likes of fur and leather really better for the environment? To provide some clarity, the Sustainable Apparel Coalition – a global collective of environmentally minded fashion brands – created the . It scores textiles based on the amounts of energy, water and chemicals that go into their production, and the pollution and greenhouse gases that result. A higher score means the material is worse for the environment (see “Time for a new look?”).

According to the index, cow leather, for example, is worse than synthetic polyurethane leather, since it scores 161 versus 59. This is because cow farming is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions and leather tanning uses toxic chemicals. In contrast, kangaroo leather scores 29 because it is made from the skin of wild kangaroos and has no farming-related carbon footprint.

One major limitation of the index, however, is that it only evaluates the environmental impact of textiles during their production, says at the University of Sydney. “It doesn’t consider how we use clothes or what we do with them at the end of their life,” she says.

Microfibre mess

For instance, polyester scores more favourably than sheep wool because less energy goes into its production. But a wool coat may ultimately have a smaller environmental footprint than a polyester fur because it is likely to last longer and will biodegrade when it is eventually discarded. “Once a synthetic jacket ends up in landfill, it’s never going to break down,” says Heinze. Moreover, wool doesn’t leach plastic microfibres into oceans, she says.

The environmental impact of such fibres is only just starting to be understood. It began to attract widespread attention in 2016, when researchers at the University of California, Santa Barbara, showed that polyester fleece jackets release . A team at Plymouth University, UK, later showed that a standard load of acrylic or polyester clothes could release .

Since these aren’t fully removed by water treatment, they can be ingested by marine life and damage their digestive tracts. Researchers at the University of California, Davis, recently found that sold at their local fish markets contained plastic clothing fibres. That means that vegan fabrics, despite being kinder to cows and sheep, may unwittingly be harming ocean creatures, says Heinze. “It’s a completely messy issue.”

One option is to wash synthetic clothes in a bag designed to trap loose microfibres. Another is to look for clothing that is both animal and plastic-free, says , co-founder of Good On You, an ethical fashion app.

Several fashion brands are experimenting with using faux leather made from plants, for example. UK vegan footwear label Bourgeois Boheme uses , which is made from the leaves of pineapple plants. A machine pulls long fibres out of the leaves, which are then compressed and treated to make the material. “The texture is more leather-like than synthetic leathers – it’s softer and more pliable,” says Heinze.

One square metre of Piñatex is made from about 480 leaves – the waste from 16 pineapples – and costs £18 per square metre, compared with £20 to £30 for the same amount of cow leather.

Similarly, German brand Nat-2 just launched sneakers (pictured) made of ““. These are much more expensive, selling for £525.

The material is extracted from tinder sponge, a fungus that grows on birch trees. The fungus is harvested by hand, dried for up to one year, and then peeled by hand. Other companies are trying to grow “real” leather and fur in the lab, so that no animals are harmed (see “Lab fashion”).

However, for some types of clothing, animal and plastic-free options are hard to find, says Vuletich. Your winter coat, for example, is most likely made from wool, leather, feather down or polyester. “Maybe you could go for a thick, quilted cotton jacket, but even then, cotton farming typically uses a lot of water and pesticides,” says Vuletich, which isn’t great for the environment.

High-tech materials may one day solve these issues, but until then, consumers must choose between animal-derived and synthetic clothes, says Vuletich. “It really comes down to you and what your values and priorities are,” she says.

Renouf agrees. “Maybe you are more moved by animal issues, or maybe you care more about environmental issues – it’s up to you as a shopper to decide what’s more important.”

This article appeared in print under the headline “What not to wear”