There Are Pandas, and Then There Are Pandas.
And this isn't either of them! The Pandas we're talking about here, are watches, not bears. And what got me thinking about them (again) was a link posted this morning by @cm.rook who pointed a few of us to the very attractive (and not terribly priced) Yema "Rallygraph" Panda which, in it's most traditional arrangement, looks like the one on the left, but can also be had in the version on the right: The model on the left is a true Panda, while the model on the right is called a reverse Panda. The reason for that distinction is clear--Panda bears, only come in the first arrangement. Now at this point, everyone should be thinking about the most well-know Panda, The Rolex Panda, which is actually a Daytona, and among Rolex Daytonas, the most famous of which is the Paul Newman Daytona, which was famous first, because it was Paul's, and second because it sold at auction for $17.8 million (US Dollars). The story of that auction is well-known so I'll only...
Nov 8, 2019
But first a little about myself... I am a co-founder of product design company specializing in textile and apparels. We believe that the fast fashion model is non-sustainable to our way of lives. The idea of making inexpensive apparels based on short-term trend leads to many problems which will impact our environment for a very long time. The micro-fiber pollution from washing our apparel, made from synthetic fiber has been greatly debated. Now, it has been suggested that avoiding the use of synthetic fibers, and instead, using natural fibers such as wool or cotton may be a possible solution. But as a fellow Reddit user (Tvizz) nicely put it:(https://www.reddit.com/r/Ultralight/comments/61hwd6/microfibers_whats_the_solution/dfeq9cj/)
" Sure, you can use wool. Sheep emit methane. A green house gas 30 times more potent than co2. What about cotton? Requires 20,000 liters of water to make one tee shirt.Polyester? Is oil based and non bio degradable.Fleece? Pretty much like polyester except with shedding microfibers."
It's quite apparent there is no "cure/solution" right away, and is certainly a value and behavioral issue. We need to be more conscious about our needs. After all, we do have the technology and products out there. It's down to consumers to make better choices so "quick fashion" that are cheap and seemingly disposable marketing BS that does no good for the sustainability of our environment be discouraged. If there's currently no cure/solution out there, the next best thing is to reduce the impact.
At my company, we strongly adopt the "Less is More" design philosophy in our apparel designs. By adopting cutting edge material (functional textile) and designing in functions while trying to minimize the use of extra material, we can achieve super lightweight and technical functions (i.e. water repellent, breathabillity and even style) for less.
We call it "Less Resources, More Performance."
Apparels greatly appreciated by communities like the ultralight enthusiasts can and should be adopted more into our daily lives. The concepts of keeping what's necessary, reduce waste and the myriads of technological functions which can be enabled by the textiles of today should be able to suffice the many facets of situations we encounter.