top of page

NEWS

Search

Fast Fashion: The Hidden Fees of Trendy Clothing

    If you’ve ever told yourself, “30 more minutes,” and then 2 hours of doomscrolling go by, you’ve probably seen the videos. People wearing colorful but disjointed outfits. Or, it was someone, bags in hand, exclaiming the results of their recent clothing haul. Maybe you’ve even glanced at the affiliate link attached to the post and decided to check out the clothes. Maybe you’ve even bought a few items. What could hurt? They’re so cheap and their quality seems alright. Yet, when they actually arrive, they lose their appeal. They’re worn a few times and then relegated to the depths of your closet or dresser, or even returned before you even wear them. In a few days or weeks, this cycle might begin anew. It might only cost you some money, time, and a bit of regret, but the same can’t be said for the environment.


    The U.N. Environmental Programme (UNEP) reported that globally, the fast fashion industry generates more carbon dioxide than aviation and shipping combined. Estimates from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change predict textile industry emissions will be 60% higher before 2030. This is obviously an issue, as more CO2 contributes to global warming and all the environmental damage that comes with that. What’s the point in buying clothes to layer if the planet gets too warm to comfortably do so? 

     

    This issue of emissions comes largely from the fact that in the fast fashion industry, there are so many products being sold, the products are made at high speeds, and their lifespans are lower than clothes made outside this industry. During the process of production itself, industry reliance on synthetic fibers increases microplastic pollution chances. Even after being sold, products are often returned and if unable to be sold again, end up in landfills. Methods of disposal like incineration produce greenhouse gases; however, letting them naturally decompose risks the same issue, as well as harmful chemicals from dyes leeching into the soil. Once in the soil, they can runoff into water sources that we use for drinking or cleaning. 


    Some countries are particularly affected by this issue. In Chile, the Atacama desert is a popular tourist spot, known for its unique geography, stargazing potential, and unique local culture. It is also a popular dumping ground for clothing. The UNEP reports that piles of clothes are so high they can reportedly be seen from space. It is illegal to dump textiles in Chile’s landfills due to the chance of causing soil instability, so dumping them in the desert “fixes” the issue, though the Guardian writes that this dumping is still illegal. This issue manifests in other forms in places like Bangladesh and the English Channel, with the former having a river being discolored due to textile dyes, and the latter having researchers find synthetic fibers in the stomach of fish. The problem of animals we eat consuming microplastics is already severe, and the fast fashion industry exacerbates this problem.


    With this problem coming from an industry so large, and one that only seems to be increasing its size and influence over time, it may seem hard to find solutions. Despite this, the UNEP, Georgetown Journal, and people like Chellie Pingree (the U.S. representative for Maine) have outlined ways to make progress towards solving this problem. Just like how recent years have brought innovation and efficiency to metal and plastic recycling technology, better textile and fabric recycling could turn unsold but still usable clothing into new clothes. If manufacturers can make more sustainable clothes, they will stay in circulation longer, reducing the chance of cases like the one in the Atacama desert being more common. Less reliance on synthetic fibers and dyes can reduce water pollution or biomagnification. As consumers, trying to reduce overall buying of clothes in exchange for higher quality clothes can help as well. 


    So, next time you feel compelled to buy some cheap clothes to hop on a trend or just want to quickly expand your wardrobe, maybe take some time to think that decision through. Try to support smaller shops or brands who sell more sustainably made and sold clothes. While it may cost a bit more, it will help the planet in the long term. 



    1. Johnson, Sarah. “Castoffs to Catwalk: Fashion Show Shines Light on Vast Chile Clothes Dump Visible from Space.” The Guardian, The Guardian, 8 May 2024, www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/may/08/castoffs-to-catwalk-fashion-show-shines-light-on-vast-chile-clothes-dump-visible-from-space.

    2. Koep-Andrieu, Hannah , and Julia Del Valle. “Hitting the Headlines: The Ultra-Fast Fashion Business Model and Responsible Business Conduct.” Oecd.org, 2025, www.oecd.org/en/blogs/2025/10/hitting-the-headlines-the-ultra-fast-fashion-business-model-and-responsible-business-conduct.html.

    3. Lusher, A.L., et al. “Occurrence of Microplastics in the Gastrointestinal Tract of Pelagic and Demersal Fish from the English Channel.” Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 67, no. 1-2, Feb. 2013, pp. 94–99, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0025326X12005668, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.11.028.

    4. Niinimäki, Kirsi. “From Fast to Slow: How to Construct a Better Balance in the Fashion System.” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 30 Aug. 2021, gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/08/30/from-fast-to-slow-how-to-construct-a-better-balance-in-the-fashion-system/.

    5. Pingree, Chellie. “Curbing Fast Fashion Pollution | U.S. Representative Chellie Pingree.” House.gov, 13 Nov. 2017, pingree.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=14924.

    6. UNEP. “Five Ways to Reduce Waste in the Fashion Industry.” UNEP, 25 Mar. 2025, www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/five-ways-reduce-waste-fashion-industry.

    7. Weis, Judith S., and Francesca De Falco. “Microfibers: Environmental Problems and Textile Solutions.” Microplastics, vol. 1, no. 4, 1 Nov. 2022, pp. 626–639, https://doi.org/10.3390/microplastics1040043.

    The Hidden Cost of Your Click: AI’s Growing Environmental Footprint


      On the surface, our digital lives feel almost weightless. Every question asked, image uploaded, or movie queued up flickers across a screen and disappears just as quickly. It’s easy to forget that behind each AI tool lies a physical footprint. Somewhere, far from the glow of your device, something hums, something cools, something burns energy so that your online life can feel effortless.


      Artificial Intelligence (AI), especially generative AI models like ChatGPT or Gemini, run on sprawling networks of computers called data centers—warehouses packed with servers that run 24/7, storing and processing mountains of data. All this computing takes an enormous amount of power. According to researchers at MIT, training a single large language model can emit as much carbon dioxide as the equivalent of 300 round-trip flights between New York and San Francisco, or nearly 5 times the lifetime emissions of the average car [1][3]. Once the model is trained, the usage doesn’t just disappear; every user interaction spins the system back up again. 


      On top of electricity use, AI demands enormous amounts of water. Data centers often rely on water-based cooling systems that use millions of gallons daily to prevent servers from overheating. One study estimated that training GPT-3 used roughly 700,000 liters of clean water, mostly for cooling [2]. In some areas, like Arizona and Iowa, where many major AI data centers are located, this has raised concerns about water scarcity [7].


      The electricity that powers AI mostly comes from fossil fuels, meaning that more AI activity often equals more greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) warns that the energy consumption of AI data centers could more than double by 2030 if trends continue [5]. Meanwhile, the International Energy Agency estimates that data centers and AI combined could soon use as much electricity as the entirety of Japan [8]. Even when these facilities tout “renewable energy commitments”, most still depend on local grids that rely on coal or natural gas during peak hours [6].


      Hardware is another piece of the puzzle. Training and running AI requires specialized chips called GPUs, which are built using rare metals and complex manufacturing. Producing these chips generates emissions long before they even reach a data center [4]. As demand for AI accelerates, so does the demand for new chips, servers, and network hardware, which all contribute to electronic waste when outdated parts are thrown away [3].


      But the story isn’t entirely negative. Some researchers argue that AI can actually help fight climate change by improving renewable energy systems and making manufacturing more efficient [8]. For example, AI models can optimize power grids, predict energy demand, and even monitor deforestation using satellite images [12]. That tension—AI as both a tool for progress and a driver of harm—is one of the central contradictions of our time.


      That’s where the concept of “green AI” comes in. Green AI focuses on designing models that use fewer resources without sacrificing performance. MIT researchers say this involves making models smaller and more efficient; a shift from “bigger is better” to “smarter is cleaner” [1]. Organizations like the United Nations Environment Programme are calling for transparency from tech companies, asking them to report exactly how much energy and water their AI systems consume [2][9]. Without open data, it’s nearly impossible to measure whether AI is becoming more sustainable or simply scaling faster than we can manage.

      Solutions do exist. Some are technical: redesign chips to use less power, build data centers in cooler climates, switch to on-site renewable energy, or reuse server heat to warm nearby buildings [10][11]. Others are policy-driven: carbon labeling for AI products or stricter reporting requirements [13].


      The question, then, is not whether we should keep developing AI—it will. It’s whether we can do it responsibly. Just as rare earth elements power green technologies but damage the planet when mined, AI carries its own trade-offs. The challenge is balancing the incredible potential of AI with its hidden environmental costs; making sure our smartest technology doesn’t make the Earth any dumber. 







       









      Underwater Noise Pollution

        Every day, our lives are filled with sounds: birds chirping in the morning, cars honking down the highway, people chattering in a crowded cafe. Most of the time, we don’t even notice these noises because they fade into the background. But when someone suddenly screams in your ear, the noise becomes painful and impossible to ignore. That’s what many underwater animals are going through today. Sounds in the ocean used to be calm and natural, but now they’re becoming louder and more harmful. Underwater noise pollution has become one of the most alarming yet overlooked threats facing ocean life.


        Over the past few decades, human-made noise has increased drastically in our oceans. Research shows that it stresses out marine animals, disrupts behavior, and can even physically harm them. Because I care deeply about marine life, I decided to research more to understand how this noise affects animals underwater. What I found was both unexpected and shocking.


        The majority of harmful underwater noise comes from large shipping boats. When ships move across the ocean, their propellers create bubbles that rapidly form and collapse This process is called cavitation. Each collapsing bubble results in a sharp burst of sound, like popping hundreds of balloons underwater. These sounds are not only loud but can travel long distances making them a severe and wide stretching threat.


        Despite the magnitude of the problem, modern propellers remain largely unchanged because they are efficient, low in cost, and most importantly, the issue of noise pollution is not widely known. But the consequences of not taking action extend far beyond just “annoying” marine animals. Underwater noise directly interferes with animal health, behavior, and reproduction.


        One of the biggest impacts is on communication. Many marine species rely heavily on sound to survive as light penetrates only a few hundred feet underwater. The most prominent use of their advanced hearing is to find mates. In The Role of Acoustic Signals in Fish Reproduction, M. Clara P. Amorim (2023) shows that male fish produce certain sounds that tell females about their size, condition, and readiness to mate. In species like the painted goby, females had a higher success rate of reproduction with males that called out more frequently. But when background noise increases, their calls are drowned out and females become less likely to spawn. This means noise pollution can directly reduce reproductive success. [1]


        The OceanCare report by L. Weilgart (2018) builds off this concern. After reviewing 115 studies on fish and invertebrates, the report concludes that loud noise can damage several physical aspects such as the inner ear, the lateral line, and the swim bladder. Severe and constant noise exposure can even cause brain damage and can bend the spines of young fish. In some regions, fish catches have dropped by 80% due to noise pollution causing population decline. [2]


        The problem of cavitation and noise pollution not only harms fish, but also marine mammals, especially whales. A study modeling baleen whale migration in the North Sea shows that increased noise is severely harmful. Cargo ships take the same general routes of whale migration paths to ship goods, so when it comes time for migration the whales find themselves swimming down a path of constant and loud noise. Because of this they are unable to communicate clearly and forced to change their migratory paths in order to avoid the painful noise. This change causes them to waste energy and time. [3] In a warming world where whales already struggle to survive, noise pollution adds yet another obstacle.


        So, what can we do?


        The article “Seeking Tranquil Waters” (Hanwha, 2023) highlights several promising solutions. Air lubrication systems can reduce noise by coating the hull in a layer of bubbles. Advanced propellers designed to reduce cavitation can significantly lower noise. The PRAIRIE system proposes a model that injects air directly through the propeller blade to soften cavitation bursts. However, none of these solutions have been researched thoroughly and universally. Further applying these findings is held back by cost and lack of awareness. [4]


        Still, the ocean is too important to ignore. It generates trillions of dollars in economic value, regulates the climate, and supports millions of species. If we keep adding noise without doing anything about it, marine animals will continue to struggle to survive.


        We can’t undo the damage that has already happened, but we can prevent things from getting worse. Raising awareness, supporting quieter ship technology, and encouraging stronger environmental rules can all make a difference. 


        What we do matters. And underwater noise pollution is no longer silent, it is calling out for action.


        Clearwater Innovation

        A program of We Impact Corp, a 501(c)(3) non-profit company 

        A student-run environmental advocacy program founded by Emily Tianshi and Kyle Tianshi, Clearwater Innovation seeks to raise awareness about the global water crisis, encourage garage lab research, and increase student environmental public policy engagement. 

        © 2018 by We Impact Corp

        logo1_画板 1.png
        • Twitter
        • YouTube
        • Instagram
        bottom of page