Although it may not seem like a very efficient process, local and sustainable clothing is actually a very probable alternative to clothing manufactured overseas. Sustainable clothing also has many environmental benefits. Sheep are often used in the procedure, and they eat grass for food. When the grass regrows, it pulls a ton of carbon out of the air into the roots and soil, cleaning the environment and promoting plant growth. Another advantage sustainable clothing has over materials such as polyester, nylon, spandex, etc., is their lack of microfibers. Microfibers are tiny plastic fibers that do not biodegrade, and often bind with the molecules of chemical pollutants. Microfibers have been found to cause health issues with small sea creatures such as plankton who eat them, and large amounts of microfibers have been found inside fish and  shellfish being sold. With the use of natural clothing, we can cut down on pollution and harmful materials being put out into t he environment.

Sources:
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable … rel-oceans

https://www.patagonia.com/blog/2017/02/ … pollution/

I compleatly agree with this. The transportation and making of cloths done elsewhere is a huge problem. It creates a huge carbon footprint and it hurts other animals. Big brands like H&M and forever 21 make it seem like if its not trendy its not cool. Having your cloths made locally so awesome. They look super cute too.

Though I agree with your ideas, how do you think the costs of locally sourced and all-natural clothing would affect people with lower incomes? And do you think the money would be better spent on other ways of reducing our carbon footprint or other negative earthly effects in general?

It is a great idea however where would all these sheep be kept? How would you get people to buy this? No matter what, people will want what ever is the social norm. How can you make wool clothing a social norm. Maybe if big named brands started making wool clothing, more people would buy it.

This seems like a great idea, but from what I have heard, it seems like the raising of livestock is a huge contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the United Sates. While I see how less shipping could lower costs and emissions, is it also possible that the sheep will emit carbon themselves? If not, is there a way to change the cattle growing process to make it more sustainable?

I think this is a great idea!  The transportation and making of cloths done elsewhere is a huge problem. This can hurt other animals and create a huge problem.

I think that this is a great idea. This is a good idea because transporting goods can be terrible for the environment and the things that live in it. The only thing is if you start using more expansive fabrics products will become more expansive and people will become unable to buy them and they will go to waste.

This is a great idea but the problem with this is that almost every piece of clothing we wear is made in other countries far away. And it will not be so easy for everyone to switch to sustainable clothing since everyone tends to buy things that are affordable and stylish. A sustainable clothing company would not be able to compete against the other titans of the clothing industry since their clothing will cost more since it is not made of easily available materials. Another problem with this is that people find it easier to buy clothes containing polyester or spandex since they are used in clothes made for excercise. people  would not buy the sustainable option if it was not affordable and comfortable along with being a good material for excercising in some cases. The idea is good especially considering how if we switch to locally made sustainable clothing, it will also reduce some CO2 emissions since some CO2 is released when the clothing is shipped to where it n eeds to go. It is sort of like killing two birds with one stone; we reduce the microplastics found in clothes and we also reduce some CO2 emissions.