It's surprisingly hard to find 100% organic cotton panties that are less than $20 a pair. I managed to get the last remaining nude pair of Skin bikini panty in my size on Zappos at 55% off. But I choose not to wash and wear the same underwear every day of the week. Since I grew up getting the multi-pack of Fruit of the Loom, the cost of additional organic cotton underwear is quite the sticker shock. None of the retailers that I found had a clear Fair Trade commitment to make the cost more worthwhile. So, I was very excited to find Pact clothing sells organic cotton products at lower prices. Unfortunately, these panties are only 95% organic cotton and 5% elastane.
Elastane is an obvious problem for women's genitalia. It doesn't breath very well, and so could disrupt the very fragile natural balance of vaginal flora. Sure, it makes the boy shorts stay in place throughout the day, but it's not quite clear how well 5% elastane panties breath. Based on how hot and uncomfortable my 5% elastane Levi's get during a humid summer day - I'm guessing it's not great.
But what about the environmental footprint? I'm sacrificing 100% cotton to try 95% organic cotton. How does the elastane off-set the benefits of organic? Elastane is essentially polyurethane. It's a synthetic material made from oil that was originally invented to replace rubber and circumvent the volatile rubber market.
Polyurethane (PU) uses about 104 MJ of energy per kilogram, and cotton uses about 44. PU creates about 4.3 kg CO2 equivalent (global warming potential) per kg, and cotton creates about 2.4. The book doesn't discuss organic cotton, and a quick look through the journals reveals that the data will take a while to sift through, but a best case estimate is that organic cotton has 64% of the impact of cotton when it comes to global warming potential.
0.95 x 2.4 kgCO2/kgcotton x 0.64 kgcotton/kgorganiccotton + 0.05 x 4.3 kgCO2/kgPU = 1.7 kgCO2 per kg of 95% cotton
1.00 x 2.4 kgCO2/kgcotton = 2.4 kgCO2 per kg of 100% cotton underwear
It looks like 95% organic is still better as far as global warming potential (GWP). Of course, there are many other impacts on the environment besides GWP, and I'll leave that for another day after I report back on the high variance in estimates about organic cotton due to disagreements about the yield of organic plants, water use, and land use compared to genetically modified plants.
Elastane is an obvious problem for women's genitalia. It doesn't breath very well, and so could disrupt the very fragile natural balance of vaginal flora. Sure, it makes the boy shorts stay in place throughout the day, but it's not quite clear how well 5% elastane panties breath. Based on how hot and uncomfortable my 5% elastane Levi's get during a humid summer day - I'm guessing it's not great.
But what about the environmental footprint? I'm sacrificing 100% cotton to try 95% organic cotton. How does the elastane off-set the benefits of organic? Elastane is essentially polyurethane. It's a synthetic material made from oil that was originally invented to replace rubber and circumvent the volatile rubber market.
Back of the Envelope Comparison of 100% Cotton and 95% Organic Cotton Material
I decided to do a back of the envelope check comparing 100% cotton and 95% organic cotton with 5% polyurethane. I went to the appendix of my trusty "Materials and the Environment: Eco-Informed Material Choice" by Michael F. Ashby and crunched the numbers.Polyurethane (PU) uses about 104 MJ of energy per kilogram, and cotton uses about 44. PU creates about 4.3 kg CO2 equivalent (global warming potential) per kg, and cotton creates about 2.4. The book doesn't discuss organic cotton, and a quick look through the journals reveals that the data will take a while to sift through, but a best case estimate is that organic cotton has 64% of the impact of cotton when it comes to global warming potential.
0.95 x 2.4 kgCO2/kgcotton x 0.64 kgcotton/kgorganiccotton + 0.05 x 4.3 kgCO2/kgPU = 1.7 kgCO2 per kg of 95% cotton
1.00 x 2.4 kgCO2/kgcotton = 2.4 kgCO2 per kg of 100% cotton underwear
It looks like 95% organic is still better as far as global warming potential (GWP). Of course, there are many other impacts on the environment besides GWP, and I'll leave that for another day after I report back on the high variance in estimates about organic cotton due to disagreements about the yield of organic plants, water use, and land use compared to genetically modified plants.
Comments
Post a Comment