Sign in to follow this  
KScience

Church Clothing - Ethics & Sustainability

Recommended Posts

Odd question, but I have been thinking about sustainability through all parts of my day to day life and prompted by current media have been looking at my own wardrobe. However there is a major part that I cannot change my choice of where I purchase.

I have been trying to find information about the ethical production of church clothing both in terms of manufacturing and resource procurement and but not finding anything. Any ideas where to look or who to ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more about garments as I will be wearing a lot of sets over my lifetime (as long as I am not hit by the proverbial bus anytime soon)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
26 minutes ago, KScience said:

I have been trying to find information about the ethical production of church clothing both in terms of manufacturing and resource procurement and but not finding anything. Any ideas where to look or who to ask?

Garments are made at the following address:

Beehive Clothing Mills

3880 W 1820 S 
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
United States

They aren't made in some sweat shop if that's what you are worried about. 

if it's the environment you are worried about, church owned businesses are supposed to take care in being environmentally friendly, though I can't speak of the Beehive Mills specifically.

 

 
Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KScience said:

I was thinking more about garments as I will be wearing a lot of sets over my lifetime (as long as I am not hit by the proverbial bus anytime soon)

 

Or the literal bus.  I'd be cautious of both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Scott, I know thats the US address for Beehive clothing, but could not find any information that all garments worldwide are produced there. I would suggest that the transportation of garments throughout the world from the US would not be an environmentally friendly approach.

I would like to know more details about "environmentally friendly" policies in place but can not find any more specific information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, KScience said:

I was thinking more about garments as I will be wearing a lot of sets over my lifetime (as long as I am not hit by the proverbial bus anytime soon)

 

I've been doing this for a while.  Here's my advice - there's no point in worrying much about something you can't "not have" and doesn't have alternatives.  Garments is one of those things.  That said, sustainability when it comes to clothing is more to do with the type of fabric being used than how it became garments.  So, if you're sustainability conscious, the more cotton the garments contain, the more sustainable it is.  The more synthetic fiber (poly/nylon/spandex) it contains, the less sustainable it is.   So, you get to decide between the sustainability of the 100% cotton jersey garments versus the slightly less sustainable 95% stretch cotton (5% spandex) garments and balance it out with your level of tolerance for comfort.

That said, I wear the Carinessa (100% synthetic).  It's the balance between my comfort tolerance to my environmental responsibility when it comes to my garments.  I choose sustainable materials most everywhere else.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mikbone, it is one of MANY things I worry about. If I am one less person reliant on irreplaceable resources, chemical bleaching processes which destroy the environment and contributing to "fast fashion" adding to landfill then it will make me feel better about my clothing choices.

Anatess thanks already have that in mind when I make purchases.

I may not be able to do anything about it, but doing my research I may be able to direct questions to others who do have the authority to do something and maybe have them think more about these issues. It may be that there are issues which have already been addressed, just not well publicised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KScience said:

I may not be able to do anything about it, but doing my research I may be able to direct questions to others who do have the authority to do something and maybe have them think more about these issues. It may be that there are issues which have already been addressed, just not well publicised.

The process of making garments is not publicized at all.  But the Church itself has an environmentally conscious culture.  The garments suggestion box has been the place where I have sent some notes over to the Church regarding the environmental impact of things such as microfibers and polyester and suggestions for eco poly sources, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank Anatess, was just wondering if I had missed something.

There was a news release about the sustainable design measures used when building the Rome visitors centre. There was obviously a lot of thought in the plans, although the exceeding the energy efficiency standards in Rome would be easier than the same in other countries, The plan also unfortunately outlined the use of palm oil to fuel the co-generation plant. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/Environmental-Feature.pdf   There have been a number of campaigns against the use of Palm oil in the UK and Europe as it has links to deforestation and environmental damage. 

Without researching what actually happens there can be no one to appeal for change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, KScience said:

Thank Anatess, was just wondering if I had missed something.

There was a news release about the sustainable design measures used when building the Rome visitors centre. There was obviously a lot of thought in the plans, although the exceeding the energy efficiency standards in Rome would be easier than the same in other countries, The plan also unfortunately outlined the use of palm oil to fuel the co-generation plant. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/Environmental-Feature.pdf   There have been a number of campaigns against the use of Palm oil in the UK and Europe as it has links to deforestation and environmental damage. 

Without researching what actually happens there can be no one to appeal for change.

Here's another advice... You need to read beyond the trendy headlines to determine sustainability and environmental decisions.

Palm oil IS a renewable, clean energy product, more so than a lot of other cheap energy alternatives which is a great energy option especially for poverty stricken areas.  Oil Palm is a fast growing plant that thrives in abundance in a lot of developing nations.  The Philippines, for example, rely on the Palm tree from root to leaf for a lot of Philippine products as palm trees grow in abundance in that poverty-stricken country with not much energy options being an archipelago.  Rich nations such as the UK have the luxury of boycotting clean energy sources that they find problematic without much thought of the impact to poor African farmers that supply palm oil to most of Europe.

The campaigns against the use of Palm Oil is not about the renewability of the product but the failure of African farmers to apply sustainable farming practices to prevent deforestation especially for the orangutans.  The solution, therefore, is not to stop using Palm Oil for cogenerating plants but to teach farmers sustainable farming.  Sustainable oil palm farming not only helps the environment as a clean alternative energy source, it also becomes a source of economic productivity to lift poor farmers out of poverty.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Anatess, I was thinking of it more with regard to publicity and the different perspectives of European and US audiences. There are a number of organisations trying to change farming practices, but sustainable practices are presently not able to supply the needs. I look forward to this changing due to consumer pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KScience said:

Mikbone, it is one of MANY things I worry about.

Well perhaps you are worrying about the wrong things?

You may want to read C.S. Lewis's The Screwtape Letters.

As a surgeon I live and die by triage.  When I am literally taking care of a train wreck in in the OR and an ER doc is persisting to speak to me about an ankle sprain or a non-displaced clavicle fracture I go a little bit crazy.  

If the Lord asked me to go out and hunt a grizzly bear and turn his skin into my garments I would.  I killed a little brown bear trying to get into my home 2 weeks ago...

If I wasn't wearing garments.  I would be wearing other underclothing anyways.  LDS would not be going around commando butt nekid otherwise...

When our G's are threadbare we are instructed to remove the sacred parts and to use the remainder as cleaning rags, etc.  

I can go on and on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
2 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

Or the literal bus.  I'd be cautious of both.

So... statistically speaking, which is he more likely to be hit by?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KScience said:

If I am one less person reliant on irreplaceable resources, chemical bleaching processes which destroy the environment and contributing to "fast fashion" adding to landfill then it will make me feel better about my clothing choices.

When did cotton become an irreplaceable resource?

Are you implying that the LDS church is singlehandedly destroying the environment?

Are you referring to Garments as "fast fashion"? 

Cuz, ... really?

And I burn my garments when they are all used up.  So they are not ending up in the precious landfill.  

FeistyDenseIcelandichorse-size_restricted.gif.851b564e327724997fb2f5b45e09e8ec.gif

Edited by mikbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
3 hours ago, KScience said:

Mikbone, it is one of MANY things I worry about. If I am one less person reliant on irreplaceable resources, chemical bleaching processes which destroy the environment and contributing to "fast fashion" adding to landfill then it will make me feel better about my clothing choices.

Just puzzled.  What "chemical bleaching processes" are you talking about?  Are there "non-chemical" bleaching processes?

Edited by Mores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KScience said:

Thanks Anatess, I was thinking of it more with regard to publicity and the different perspectives of European and US audiences. There are a number of organisations trying to change farming practices, but sustainable practices are presently not able to supply the needs. I look forward to this changing due to consumer pressure.

Publicity is the bane of Environmentalism.  It has become very easy to use these publicity mechanisms for political machinations.  Yet it is through publicity that people are made aware.  It is, therefore, my firm belief that it is the responsibility of EVERY SINGLE environmentally conscious person to parse environmental realities out of the garbage rhetoric and narrative and make their decisions according to real world realities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mores said:

Just puzzled.  What "chemical bleaching processes" are you talking about?  Are there "non-chemical" bleaching processes?

non-chemical - Romans used Urine.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
Just now, mdfxdb said:

non-chemical - Romans used Urine.  

And that's not chemical... how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mores said:

Just puzzled.  What "chemical bleaching processes" are you talking about?  Are there "non-chemical" bleaching processes?

All textile from naturally occurring fibers don't come out white in color.  Even cotton.  Natural cotton comes out in shades of moldy-cream.  Natural fibers, therefore, go through a chemical bleaching process to remove the color of the natural fiber so when dye is applied, the fabric comes out a uniform color as is expected from the dye.

Eco-friendly fabrics don't bother with the bleaching process.  The color comes out however it comes out from the fiber.  So uniformity of coloration in the process is not required.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mores
8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

All textile from naturally occurring fibers don't come out white in color.  Even cotton.  Natural cotton comes out in shades of moldy-cream.  Natural fibers, therefore, go through a chemical bleaching process to remove the color of the natural fiber so when dye is applied, the fabric comes out a uniform color as is expected from the dye.

Eco-friendly fabrics don't bother with the bleaching process.  The color comes out however it comes out from the fiber.  So uniformity of coloration in the process is not required.

And what does that have to do with my question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this