Stand.earth Links Fashion to Fracking

The industry’s plastic/polyester paralysis—primarily made with fracked ethane—is a not-so-fun fact that the majority of shoppers are oblivious to. Adding fuel to the (literal) fire, brand-published sustainability reports typically gloss over this reliance, alleged Stand.earth Research Group (SRG).

When investigating the link between fashion and fracking, specifically within the Permian basin in Texas, the environmental nonprofit called out 100-plus heavyweight brands as (possibly indirectly) reliant on raw materials linked to fracked oil and gas (NGLs) for polyester production.

“The fashion industry is on track to become a major player in driving the expansion of fracking,” said Dr. Devyani Singh, an investigative researcher at SRG. “Consumers often purchase apparel without knowing the connection to fracking behind the fabric—especially when brands market themselves as environmentally friendly—and this investigation puts a spotlight on the gap between what apparel companies say and what apparel companies actually do.”

The international nonprofit presented its “harmful symbiosis” findings—derived by analyzing various data sets, 10-K filings, supplier disclosure agreements and investor presentations—via an interactive “fracked fashion” map, that “connects the supply chain from Texas to multiple countries, to the conversion of ethane to polyester, production of the garment” before reaching the brands.

Inditex was clocked as one of the largest purchasers of synthetic fibers by volume. Lululemon, a brand of particular interest to the climate group, reportedly used synthetic-fiber-born-from-fossil-fuel in nearly three-quarters (72 percent) of its apparel and footwear products.

“I could understand if Lulu said they’re aiming to do less harm than other brands—that sounds reasonable,” Rachel Kitchin, senior corporate campaigner at Stand.earth, told Sourcing Journal. “But to claim that your products are restorative to the earth or contribute to a healthy environment, is factually incorrect.”

The map’s interactive “visualizer” demonstrates all offending brands—and their parent companies—as well as complete supply chain data and source references.

“Each individual connection is not absolute proof that any one brand uses polyester made from fracked NGL from the Permian basin,” SRG prefaced in a slide deck. “But that many brands are very likely sourcing polyester thread made from NGLs fracked in the Permian basin, contributing to the expansion of global oil and gas industry.”

Within the 107 brands, 57 have explicit (see: public) policies to phase out or reduce reliance on virgin polyester. Most of that 53 percent—including the likes of Puma, Lululemon, Levi Strauss & Co., Adidas and H&M, among others—tend to predominantly focus on using recycled polyester from plastic (like ocean waste). SRG, however, argues that this false, short-sighted solution is an “insufficient effort.”

“This is not a solution,” Kitchin said of rPET. “Recycled polyester from bottles is still feeding, supporting and sustaining the oil and gas industry. It’s just in a slightly less direct way.”

Petrochemicals are on track to become the No. 1 driver of global oil and gas consumption, per the group formerly known as ForestEthics. Synthetic fiber production—made with fossil-fuel-derived chemicals—contributes 15 percent to overall plastic production, bestowing the textile sector with third place as the biggest offender.

For context, Textile Exchange found that more than two-thirds of garments were made of synthetic fibers in 2023.

“Once again, synthetic clothing is linked to contentious sources that threaten both people and the planet,” said Urska Trunk, senior campaign manager at Changing Markets Foundation. “Alarmingly, global fashion brands are increasing their reliance on plastic- based materials, with synthetic fibers set to dominate 73 percent of global production by 2030.”

The grassroots organization chose the Permian basin as its starting point, considering the 75,000 square mile site is colloquially known as a “carbon bomb” that would result in over one gigaton of carbon emissions (if its reserves were totally extracted and burnt).

“At the end of the day, the fact that it’s coming from the Permian basin isn’t the issue,” Kitchin said. “This is about making it real. It’s about saying this doesn’t come out of nowhere, it’s coming from real places that have real impact on real people. One of those places is here.”

Now, the list.

SRG connects brands—including Adidas, Bestseller, H&M Group, Inditex, J.Crew Group, Levi Strauss & Co. and Patagonia, among others—to fracked fibers. How deep that connection is, however, is not made clear.

When a Changing Markets Foundation report from 2021 made similar allegations—aka being friendly with fracking—Adidas, for one, told SJ that six out of 10 of its products are made with sustainable materials, reaching nine out of 10 by 2025. That said, fellow repeat offenders include Gap, Lululemon, Patagonia Primark, Uniqlo, VF Corp. and Walmart, which the Dutch nonprofit dubbed the dirtiest.

Notably, Hugo Boss was the only brand on the list reportedly committed to phasing out virgin polyester altogether.

None, per SRG, have explicit, time-bound targets to increase the use of recycled textile waste.

“Because it’s cheap, fashion brands are making more and more and more; the sheer volume of garments produced increases exponentially every year and that’s due 100 percent to cheap polyester,” Kitchin said. “But that’s the oil and gas industry, that’s the fracking industry: pushing cheap products in any direction that they’ll go. And it’s the fashion industry saying yes.”

A few of the besmirched brands had something to say (when prompted, at least).

For Everlane, SRG’s research is based on “outdated supplier data” and a “flawed methodology” that “wrongly links” Everlane—and, presumably, others—to “incorrect upstream suppliers” based “solely on assumptions” made about finished good factories. It is unclear if anyone on the SR

“Of the two factory suppliers that are connected to Everlane in this research, only one remains an active supplier,” Katina Boutis, Everlane’s director of sustainability, told Sourcing Journal. “That supplier does not manufacture products containing polyester for Everlane.”

Puma, meanwhile, highlighted the publicly available “clear-cut pathway” the sportswear giant has in place in pursuit of reaching 100 percent recycled polyester fabric in its products by 2030. Notably, Puma said it ranked at the top of SRG’s 2023 Fossil Free Fashion Scorecard for its increased supply chain transparency regarding clean energy efforts, including those supporting suppliers in the transition to renewables.

“None of the fibers for our materials come from fracked oil from Texas,” a spokesperson for Patagonia told Sourcing Journal. “We source recycled materials for our synthetics, such as used fishing nets that would otherwise go to waste.”

Fast Retailing highlighted its efforts with recycled materials, as detailed in the Uniqlo parent’s data book, which tracks against its goal of incorporating 50 percent of either recycled materials or those with lower GHG emissions across all items by 2030. Currently, 47.4 percent of polyester used is derived from recycled materials.

Adidas deflected to rPET as well, stating it has phased out virgin polyester “almost completely.”

“Last year, the percentage was already at 99 percent recycled polyester, which means Adidas was on track to use only recycled polyester by the end of 2024,” per an email from the brand. “This makes Adidas a pioneer when it comes to sustainability.”

When asked to comment specifically on the allegations of using fabrics derived from fracking, the sportswear giant replied, “Since we use 99 percent recycled polyester, this is not a topic for Adidas.”