UKH

Green Gear: Can We Trust Yvon Chouinard ?

© Black Diamond
Mick Ryan UKC

This has been read 27,832 times
Does a company's environmental policy influence your buying decision?

Do you actually know anything about the eco-policies of the outdoor companies that you buy from?

Many outdoor companies are making great strides to be environmentally friendly. Perhaps one of the founders of this movement is Yvon Chouinard's company, Patagonia.

Can we trust Yvon Chouinard? You decide.

He is a fellow climber but importantly Patagonia have led the way from making fleece jackets out of postconsumer recycled polyester (plastic bottles) to cofounding The Conservation Alliance. Patagonia's environmental efforts are legend. They've given away $30 million in environmental grants since 1985. This year they were awarded Eco Brand of the year at the ISPO outdoor trade show for their efforts to raise sustainability and environmental issues in their business and their efforts to influence other people and companies.

They admit they are not perfect but continue to lead an "examined life." One of their latest initiatives is called the Footprint Chronicles™ where you can track the impact of ten specific Patagonia products from design through delivery. Sometimes it isn't pretty!

They track where the material is made and under what conditions, how far the garment travels from source to manufacture to their Reno, Nevada warehouse; they measure carbon dioxide emissions, how much waste is generated making a garment and how much energy is used. Patagonia aren't shy about full disclosure of where their products are made.

Chouinard is skeptical of the buzzword "sustainable" and how it is bandied about so that it loses all meaning, preferring the more realistic "to lighten our footprint and do less harm" whilst at the same time making the "best product."

Have a look yourself to see how they are doing at the Footprint Chronicles™

We are going to periodically report on this news page what we think is good environmental practice in the outdoor world, focussing on outdoor companies and their products and practices. These news items will be known as GREEN GEAR. We welcome your comments and suggestions in this dialogue.

This post has been read 27,832 times

Return to Latest News

Comments

Michael Ryan
29 Apr, 2008
Of course I think one of the soundest environmental policies a company can have is to make gear that lasts, that is high quality rather than having inbuilt obsolescence. One jacket for 5 years rather than 5 jackets in 5 years.
grumpybearpantsclimbinggoat
29 Apr, 2008
good effort but sometimes I feel it is used by industry for marketing rather than effect or plainly the consumer is unaware of the effort - who on UKC buys FSC toilet paper? If you have to google FSC then the point is made (satori, don't spoil my fun). G
Michael Ryan
29 Apr, 2008
I think we have to look very closely at companies to investigate whether they just have one product that they tout as 'recycled' or 'organic' OR whether they are green to the core and making their best effort. Some aspects to consider: - are there buildings 'green', do they have efficient heating? - do they purchase alternative power offsets - do employees get incentives for cycling to work or supporting good environmental causes - how much renewable, recycleable, organic materials do they use - what do they do with their waste, do they attempt to minimise waste - is the packaging of their products minimal, and made from recycleable material, uses soy inks etc -how much do they give to charity or what do they do to support environmental organisations - product end of life recyclability - do they have ISO 14000 I'm sure you can think of more. Mick
jl100
29 Apr, 2008
OR we could just buy from companies who make the best gear for the cheapest price and use the time saved not doing excess research to walk/use public transport/develop ingenius solutions to the many problems facing our world or if none of these appeal talk shite on UKC.
grumpybearpantsclimbinggoat
29 Apr, 2008
Mick, I can think of a great many more. The ones you list are again beneficial solely to the company for cost saving. Efficient heating - lower variable cost Offset power- lower variable cost Incentives - ok, a good one Recyclables - waste infringement cost - variable Waste disposal - increasing costs - variable Packaging - interesting one as alternatives are more expensive - have that one Charity - tax deductable Product end cycle - again interesting - recycling like FSC is a given but as said earlier - if the consumer don't know he don't act. ISO 14000 - utter crap paper exercise. EA is putting so much pressure on conforming firms it drives prices up but those they cannot control? Farmers can pollute as they like upstream and is taken into account (policy in place to recognise the issue - duh!) but a firm with controls they clamp down hard to drive them to tighter controls - An EA employee admitted it that they can target these guys easier. Good thread and issues Mick, maybe some on here will take note and maybe throw their empty bottle of wine in a glass bin.
More Comments
Add Comment
Loading Notifications...
Facebook Twitter Copy Email