Fashion’s use of fossil fuels is becoming too hot to handle.
If the industry can’t find a way to convert to clean heat for things like dyeing, printing, washing and making synthetic fibers, it’s going to fall further behind in a decarbonization effort that has already lost steam in recent years.
“Fashion’s climate targets are falling dangerously out of step with reality,” a recent report from Fashion Revolution noted. “Instead of cutting emissions at the pace science demands, billion-dollar fashion brands are dragging their feet, withholding even the most basic data, all while emissions continue to soar.”
The focus on sustainability, transparency and reducing carbon footprints has faded into the background of business decisions, just as diversity and equity efforts slinked out of favor. And it has been difficult for some brands to justify the additional investment when tariffs and other geopolitical pressures are shrinking margins to new lows. But too few remain unwilling to acknowledge that investments now will save both the bottom line—and consumer favor—in the longer run.
What’s more, according to the report, “relying on fossil fuel imports that are subject to increasingly volatile market prices is a risky strategy.” Some companies have already figured this out, Fashion Revolution notes. “We see more and more companies across sectors investing in on-site renewable electricity generation or contracting with renewable energy generators directly. Without similar investment, fashion’s reliance on fossil-powered heat will leave suppliers exposed to rising costs and supply disruptions.”
There are already existing technologies that can replace fossil fuels for fashion, like heat pumps, electric boilers and heat batteries that use electricity from clean power sources like solar and wind (this shift is called electrifying production processes). But as with anything, it’s a matter of getting the industry on board with doing things a new way, and investing the time, effort and capital on change. Before long, however, their hands may be forced, as regulation and market forces will soon “leave no room for inaction.”
“The fashion industry has the chance to electrify much of its low-temperature processing now,” according to the report. “Paired with renewable energy, this is low-hanging fruit for decarbonization.”
To get there, it’s going to take addressing four levers the NewClimate Institute says cover up to 85 percent of fashion’s Scope 3 emissions: electrifying tier 1-2 production processes; switching to renewable energy in tier 1-3; reducing overproduction and shifting business models; and using lower greenhouse gas alternative fibers.
“Taken together, these measures represent fashion’s clearest pathway to climate alignment—but only if brands move beyond accounting tricks and into real-world emissions cuts,” Fashion Revolution said.
While 55 percent of brands surveyed in the report publish time-bound and measurable commitments to decarbonization, less than a quarter (24 percent) publish long-term science-based targets aligned with curbing climate change, and fewer than a third (29 percent) provide evidence that they have actually reduced their greenhouse gas emissions from the baselines they started from. Only 6 percent are disclosing strategies or efforts to electrify manufacturing processes.
“Brands who disclose targets without strategies to electrify or phase out fossil-fueled heat risk locking in biomass or other stopgap solutions,” the report noted. “Electricity may be renewable, but heating, cooling and steam can still run on coal or gas. Decarbonization requires a comprehensive plan that covers both power and heat.”
Of the brands that do disclose renewable energy and electricity goals, according to the Fashion Revolution report, H&M says by 2030, it will use 100 percent renewable electricity for garment production in tiers 1-3. Zara parent company Inditex says by 2030, it will use 50 percent renewable electricity in its manufacturing process, with a target of getting to 100 percent by 2040. According to the International Energy Agency, “across all industries, we must reach 100 percent renewable and 100 percent electric by 2040” if global climate goals are to be met.
Coal will have to be phased out, too. According to the report, “If heat is fashion’s hidden emissions hotspot, coal is its dirtiest fuel source.” Last year, just 15 percent of brands disclosed targets for phasing out coal, and in this year’s report, that number climbed to 21 percent, though Fashion Revolution says the industry “remains dangerously off pace on coal phase out.” Some brands, like Calzedonia, Gildan and Hermés, have been able to show they don’t use coal in their supply chains, but it will be important to watch what companies replace coal with, since things like unsustainable biomass and transition fuels aren’t exactly improving decarbonization.
But it all comes back to electrification, Fashion Revolution says.
“Electrification, more than any other solution, has the potential to reduce absolute emissions. The more brands that invest in electrification, the higher the demand for renewable energy—which ultimately helps accelerate the green transition in the global energy system,” the report noted.
For companies ready to invest, heat pumps use electricity to transfer heat from a source like air or water to where it needs to go via a refrigeration cycle. It can then generate steam and hot water for industrial processes with high efficiency (200 percent to 500 percent) and high costs and energy savings, low-carbon and no on-site air pollution. The challenges are the high upfront capital cost and technical expertise required to implement it. On the bright side, according to the report, “Despite high electricity prices in many textile-producing countries, high efficiency can lower energy cost per unit of production and deliver acceptable payback periods.”
When it comes to electric boilers, water is heated using electric resistance elements to produce steam. The result is high efficiency (99 percent), low carbon and no on-site air pollution. The challenges include increased energy costs and possible near-term increases in CO2 if the grid is carbon intensive. The bottom line upside here is that, “even with higher energy costs, the impact on final textile product prices may be small due to energy’s low share of total production costs,” according to the report.
Because the temperatures required in fashion production are lower than in sectors like steel or chemicals, Fashion Revolution says the apparel industry has an opportunity to lead the way on electrification if brands step up to make commitments and follow through on them.
“When Big Fashion brands set a target for 100 percent renewable energy or renewable electricity for manufacturing, they send a powerful message: clean energy is a key factor in sourcing decisions,” Fashion Revolution said. “This influences not only suppliers, but also governments, industry peers and grid planners in garment-producing countries, signaling that demand for clean power is rising.”
