How Sustainable Is Vegan Fashion? | Interview with Julia Zhorzel

The sustainable revolution of fashion does not only occur singlehandedly but there are various ways and developments that take us to the future that the planet deserves. As brands and producers are primarily responsible to engage in this revolution, there is also an irrefutable responsibility that should be taken by the consumers. However, it is not always the easiest to be an eco-conscious consumer: One should be careful of a bunch of standards, especially when it comes to sustainable fashion. If not, the paradox of the eco-conscious occurs which is being experienced between vegan fashion and sustainability. Several arguments have developed throughout time where vegan fashion is blamed to be ‘unsustainable’. Especially pointing out the dualities between real and vegan leather, fur, and other byproducts related to animal cruelty – it is inevitable for the responsible consumer to experience confusion. We wanted to ask an expert about how to recognize sustainable aspects of vegan fashion compared to the non-vegan one. Julia Zhorzel, one of the Campaigns Coordinators at PETA Germany, enlightened us. Here is a vision-enhancing interview on vegan fashion.

L: Around the vegan and non-vegan fashion discussions, one of the hot topics emerges as the argument on real leather being more sustainable than vegan leather. Many exemplify these with vegan leather products often being made by PVC or PU and contributing to plastic pollution while real leather is biodegradable. Though it avoids cruel practices towards animals, today a lot of consumers are still doubtful about vegan leather in terms of sustainability at this point. What makes vegan leather still a better choice?

JZ: The leather industry often claims that leather is a “natural by-product”. In actuality, leather should be considered a co-product of a perpetually unsustainable industry. Leather is the skin of a dead animal, which in most cases is a highly chemically processed material. Only after running through 20 to 40 process steps -which involve dehydrating, pickling and degreasing, and tanning the skin with often toxic chemicals such as arsenic and chromium – the result is leather. While e.g. innovations in tanning processes may improve biodegradability, all manufacturing processes aim to deter an organic material – skin from a dead animal – from rotting, making it, therefore, less biodegradable. Furthermore, analogous to faux leather alternatives, substances like polyurethane, acrylic resins, and lacquers are regularly used to finish leather. Alongside these fossil-fuel-derived plastics, producers use non-biodegradable and toxic dyes. After being produced most animal leather is severely limited in terms of biodegradability, and recycling is not technologically feasible or economically viable. So used animal leather is currently either landfilled or incinerated. Thus, promoting leather as vastly different from synthetic alternatives is just plain consumer deception. Some sources even claim that composting the skins would be more environmentally friendly than turning them into leather. However, disposal costs money, so leather production exists for one reason only – financial gain. 

Additionally, the fashion industry – which is inextricably interwoven with animal agriculture – often tries to cover up its true environmental impact by emitting core data and numbers. This is done to deliberately attempt to deceive customers. A common smokescreen the leather industry uses is shifting the blame on the meat industry. The fashion industry’s calculations often don’t factor in their “cradle-to-gate” carbon footprint and broader environmental profile including the whole life cycle of an animal. However, leather is a for-profit business, and the entire leather supply chain, farms included, must be considered when exploring the environmental and ethical implications of fashion’s use of it. Raising the animals whose skin eventually becomes leather requires vast quantities of water and wide tracts of pastureland, which must be cleared of trees. In fact, in the last half-century, 70 percent of the Amazon rainforest has been cleared to make way for pastures or for growing feed crops. This mass deforestation causes habitat loss for millions of species, eliminates the Earth’s tree canopy, and drives climate change. Animal agriculture and its methane- and nitrous oxide–rich products, including leather, are leading contributors to climate change. Runoff from feedlots and dairy farms also creates a major source of water pollution. Leather has one of the greatest impacts on the eutrophication of all materials used for fashion, a serious ecological problem in which runoff waste creates an overgrowth of plant life in water systems, which suffocates animals by depleting oxygen levels in the water and is the leading cause of hypoxic zones, also known as “dead zones.” By some estimates, animal agriculture is responsible for more greenhouse gases than all of the world’s transportation systems combined.

The most important difference between vegan and non-vegan leather is that it’s not made from the skin of dead animals. More than a billion cows, pigs, goats, sheep, alligators, ostriches, kangaroos, and even dogs and cats are cruelly slaughtered for their skins every year. The tails and horns of many of these animals are cut off without painkillers, and some are even skinned and cut apart while still conscious. By contrast, vegan leather offers a killer look without any killing. While vegan leather alternatives are not perfect yet concerning their point of total decomposition, accounting for all factors in comparison synthetic leather still has less emissions than cow skin leather. Moreover, development in this area is face-paced. Many companies are researching vegan leathers that don’t harm animals and the planet, such as Mirum®. The innovative leather-like material is entirely free from both animal and plastic inputs. Moreover, there are amazing plant-based fibers like linen, hemp, and organic cotton. In light of the highly detrimental and cruel leather industry, companies should focus on vegan and gradually more and more sustainable alternatives.

L: Though a variety of brands are applying non-plastic production methods, do you think a major shift in vegan fashion brands from plastic to biodegradable or compostable sources will happen?

JZ: The tide is turning against animal-derived materials, and people—especially young consumers—now object in droves to supporting industries predicated on animal exploitation and slaughter. A recent survey found that approximately 73% of Gen Z identify as animal rights activists. Thus, a variety of new vegan materials, which also place an emphasis on sustainability, enter the market every year. Traditionally, the animal agriculture industry is highly subsidized, which makes animal products an unfair competitor to their alternatives. Under the pressure of being dependent on continual funding vegan companies run against the clock. Oftentimes a company’s success depends on whether it can scale up quickly. Therefore, buying and promoting vegan leather instead of animal skins is essential in securing financial autonomy and helps drive sustained research into viable, sustainable, and animal-free alternatives.

L: The same discussion also exists around the fur. Some argue going for vintage fur is more sustainable. Do you think there is a non-cruel but sustainable way for consumers to have furs?

JZ: Wearing “vintage fur” sends the same unacceptable message as wearing newly sourced fur—that it’s OK to allow animals to languish in steel traps or be skinned alive for the sake of vanity. People can’t tell the fur’s backstory by looking at it, so wearing any fur is essentially a pro-fur billboard. Analogous to leather, the only way to wear the look of fur in a sustainable way is by choosing a company that sells sustainable and ethical faux fur. More sustainable options like faux fur based on hemp and Tencel are being developed right now and should be the main focus of fashion.