The Secret World Of Fashion Waste, Trash Dumps, And Global Inequity
This is the fourth article in the ongoing series exploring the intersection of fashion and sustainability—a journey that has uncovered the hidden emissions, toxic water pollution, and microplastic fallout sewn into the seams of what we wear. In this installment, we continue our focus on fashion's waste crisis—one so vast that its impact is now visible from space. What happens to that waste is rarely shown on runways or in advertising campaigns? It piles up in deserts like Chile's Atacama, where mounds of unsold garments—many still tagged—create sprawling landfills of fast fashion excess. It floods markets in West Africa, where secondhand donations, disguised as charity, arrive by the millions each week—only to overwhelm local waste systems, pollute beaches, and burn in open pits. This article exposes the underbelly of global fashion's waste pipeline—from overproduction in the Global North to under-regulated dumping grounds in the Global South. It examines the systemic failures that allow this cycle to continue unchecked, and challenges the industry to move beyond lip service toward real responsibility, repair, and reform.
According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, the world produces over 92 million tons of textile waste annually, equivalent to a truckload dumped every second. According to Glimpse From The Global, vast quantities of unsold and discarded clothing are now littering desert landscapes, forming what many have dubbed 'the great fashion garbage patch.' Towering mounds of textiles sprawl across the terrain, with some garments—price tags still intact—entangled among plastic bags, bottles, and other waste. According to recent estimates, as much as 39,000 tons of unwanted clothing are dumped in the end up annually in Chile's Atacama Desert—visible from space—and that figure continues to grow.
Textile waste is often made of synthetic materials like polyester, which can take 20 to 200 years to break down, according to Business Waste statistics. These dumps not only scar the landscape, but also release toxic dyes, microplastics, and methane into the air and soil, worsening climate change and polluting nearby communities
Women search for used clothes amid tons discarded in the Atacama desert, in Alto Hospicio, Iquique, ... More Chile, on September 26, 2021. EcoFibra, Ecocitex and Sembra are circular economy projects that have textile waste as their raw material. The textile industry in Chile will be included in the law of Extended Responsibility of the Producer (REP), forcing clothes and textiles importers take charge of the waste they generate. (Photo by MARTIN BERNETTI / AFP) (Photo by MARTIN BERNETTI/AFP via Getty Images)
Although donation is marketed as a noble gesture, according to Greenpeace, Germany alone collects roughly 1 million tons of used clothing each year—a figure that has surged by 20% since the mid-1990s, fueled by the relentless pace of fast fashion. Yet only a fraction of these garments are resold within the countries where they're collected. In the UK, for instance, just 10–30% of donated clothing is resold domestically, with similar patterns observed in the U.S. and Canada.
The majority of second-hand clothes are shipped overseas, feeding into a vast global trade. Take the UK-based charity Oxfam: of the 11,000 tons of clothing it receives annually, only 27% is sold through its local shops. The rest is either discarded or exported—primarily to Eastern Europe and parts of East and West Africa. It's estimated that over 70% of reused clothing from the UK alone ends up abroad, joining the billions of second-hand garments exchanged in the global resale economy each year. The rest are shipped to countries like Ghana, Kenya, and Uganda, where, up to 40% are too damaged to wear and end up in informal landfills, beaches or are burned. Ghana alone receives 15 million garments per week, overwhelming local waste systems and half of this amount is unsellable.
This aerial view shows a dump site where secondhand clothes are discarded at Old Fadama in Accra, ... More Ghana, on November 15, 2023. Ghana became the world's largest importer of used clothing in 2021, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) data site, with garments worth $214 million shipped mostly from China, the United Kingdom and Canada. (Photo by Nipah Dennis / AFP) (Photo by NIPAH DENNIS/AFP via Getty Images)
The evidence is undeniable: pollution due to fashion is no longer hidden. It is floating in oceans, poisoning rivers, and piling up in deserts visible from space. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the UN, fashion is among the world's highest-polluting industries—yet it remains one of the least regulated. Dr. Hakan Karaosman, chief scientist of Fashion's Responsible Supply Chain Hub, powerfully argues, sustainability must go beyond green marketing and material choices. It must become embedded across the full spectrum of operations—from fiber to final stitch—grounded in science, ethics, and justice. His research underscores that true progress lies in transparent, inclusive supply chains that not only reduce emissions but also protect people and ecosystems.
The way forward requires bold shifts at every level.
1. Brands must move from performative sustainability to systemic accountability—investing in cleaner technologies, circular design, and the communities they source from.
2. Governments must implement policies that hold producers responsible for waste, emissions, and labor practices—both at home and abroad.
3. Consumers, empowered with knowledge, must demand better—not just for aesthetics, but for equity and environmental survival.
In the next article in this series, our attention will shift to labor, spotlighting the millions of workers—from fast fashion hubs to luxury ateliers in—whose low wages and unsafe conditions are quietly fueling the environmental crises in their own countries. Many brands may tout eco collections and possess sustainability certifications, but they remain silent on investments in waste infrastructure, water treatment, or environmental resilience in the very places where they profit most.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Putin Must Be Thrilled With the Result of the Alaska Summit
Russian President Putin speeches during their joint press conference with U.S. Persident Donald Trump after their meeing on war in Ukraine at U.S. Air Base In Alaska on August 15, 2025, in Anchorage, Alaska, United States. Credit - Contributor—Getty Images Vladimir Putin wanted a lot of things from his visit to Alaska. A ceasefire in Ukraine was not one of them. Throughout the summer, his troops have been grinding out advances along the frontline, and they achieved a sudden breakthrough in the days before the Alaska summit. Putin's main objective was to buy time for his troops to continue those advances, all while avoiding the 'very severe consequences' that President Donald Trump promised to impose on the Russians if they refused to call a ceasefire. It appears Putin succeeded on both counts. In his public statements on Friday night, Trump made clear he no longer plans to impose any economic pain on Russia. 'Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that,' he told Fox News after the summit. 'I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now.' In Trump's understanding, two or three weeks is a malleable term, as the New York Times recently noted, 'not a measurement of time so much as a placeholder.' Read more: From the Sidelines, Ukraine Prepares to Watch as U.S., Russia Discuss Its Fate On the battlefield, however, it could mean the difference between holding off the Russians and allowing them to seize another region of Ukraine. The epicenter of the fighting in recent weeks has been the region of Donetsk, where Ukrainian troops were able to stop the latest Russian breakthrough. The latest maps of the fighting indicate that the Kremlin remains determined to seize that region. Another few weeks of Russian infantry assaults could achieve that goal, allowing Putin to negotiate with the U.S. and Ukraine from a position of greater advantage. 'Things at the front are going well for them,' a senior Ukrainian military officer tells TIME. 'Slow but steady.' These gains helped Putin negotiate in Alaska from a position of strength. Ahead of their talks, Trump indicated that he wants the warring sides to 'swap' territories, with Ukraine giving away its own land in exchange for areas Russia has occupied. 'They've occupied some very prime territory,' Trump said a few days before his summit with Putin. 'We're going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine.' Trump failed to achieve that in Alaska, and his chances of getting what he calls a 'fair deal' for Ukraine diminish as Russian forces continue to gain ground. For reasons that remain unclear, Trump said he believes that Putin wants to stop the fighting. 'I believe he wants to get it over,' Trump said. 'Now, I've said that a few times, and I've been disappointed.' Alaska marks the latest of these disappointments, but Trump has shown no inclination to change his strategy. He did not even secure some of the easier concessions from Putin that might have given the Americans something to show for the Alaskan spectacle. One of Russia's leading dissidents, Yulia Navalnaya, had urged Trump to secure the release of Russian political prisoners jailed for their opposition to the war. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, for his part, has urged the U.S. to demand the release of thousands of Ukrainian children that Russian forces have abducted from the war zone. Neither of these issues came up in the official statements in Alaska. Appearing side by side on Friday, Trump gave his guest the floor, allowing Putin to deliver another one of his rambling history lessons, a maneuver that has been likened to diplomatic 'filibustering.' When Trump's turn came to speak, he admitted that the talks had not resulted in a deal. The next step toward peace, he suggested, would be to arrange a meeting between Putin and Zelensky. But the Russian side has given no indication that it would be open to such an arrangement. Instead, at the end of their press conference in Alaska, Putin suggested in English that he and Trump would meet 'next time in Moscow,' an idea that seemed to catch Trump off guard. 'Oh, that's an interesting one,' he replied. 'I'll get a little heat on that one.' This final exchange pointed again to the paltry outcomes of the summit. The two sides had not even agreed on a location or a format for the next stage of the peace process, while Putin came away confident enough to suggest that his capital would be a fitting venue. It was hard to blame him. Given the red-carpet treatment he received in Alaska, Putin had every reason to feel like a winner coming out of those talks. He had, after all, achieved his main objective, and given nothing away. Contact us at letters@
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why the U.S. and China Are Playing Nice
Credit - Getty Images The U.S. and the People's Republic of China are strategic rivals in the battle for global leadership in the 21st century. So it was no surprise when President Donald Trump hit China with 20% tariffs in the first few weeks of his second term and then imposed reciprocal tariffs of 34% on 'Liberation Day.' And when Trump a few days later lowered tariff rates for everyone else to calm markets, he quadrupled duties on China to a whopping 145%. But all that now feels like ancient history. Over the past four months, Trump has bent over backwards to be kind to Beijing. The two sides announced a 90-day ceasefire in Geneva in early May, agreeing to reduce tariffs and negotiate their differences over export controls and other issues. (Remaining U.S. tariffs on China are still at roughly 55%, and China's tariffs on the U.S. stand at almost 33%. These are historically high levels, but not sufficient to outright stop trade.) Further discussions in London and Stockholm made enough progress for the two sides this week to announce another extension of the ceasefire, with the White House praising Beijing for being cooperative and flexible in the negotiations to date. Read More: Why Trump Will Blink First on China In the same vein, the Trump Administration has not shut down TikTok in the U.S. despite the fact that it is still Chinese-controlled, in contravention of American law; it denied a transit visa for Taiwanese President William Lai; and it is allowing Nvidia and AMD to sell advanced chips in China despite originally blocking many of these sales, following a pay-for-play deal. So why the sudden about-face on China? It is doubly odd given the U.S.'s simultaneous tough tact toward other members of the BRICS—a rival to the U.S.-led G7 that includes Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa—not to mention many of America's traditional allies. Three reasons stand out. First, both Washington and Beijing now have proven weapons that are restraining the aggressive instincts of the other side. Unlike others who caved in to Trump's pressure, Beijing retaliated, first with its own high tariffs, and then, more importantly, with restrictions on rare earth minerals, over which they have a global chokehold. Once Trump began lowering most of the initial reciprocal tariffs and calling for talks with Xi, they had confidence that restricting rare earths minerals and magnets would be met not with counterstrikes but with concessions. That includes the Trump Administration backing off imposing new export controls on several technologies and scrapping their threat to 'aggressively revoke' Chinese student visas. Beijing now believes it has perfected the recipe for making a 'TACO' ('Trump always chickens out'). Second, Trump and Xi both have an interest in strengthening economic confidence at home. With persistent overcapacity and price wars across industrial and consumer sectors, 'involution' has become the word of the year in China, a nod to the excessive competition that is hurting local businesses. Xi needs to shore up government finances, consolidate industries, and avoid further international barriers to Chinese exports and investment. The U.S.'s current economic picture is stronger, but constituents in town halls across the country have expressed deep worries about lost export markets, inflation, budget deficits, and a potential recession. Third, both Trump and Xi want to meet each other, most likely in the Fall in Asia. Trump has been signaling his desire for direct communication with Xi since at least April. He wants to assemble a deal that he can sell at home as boosting U.S. business opportunities and stopping the fentanyl epidemic, given China's role in producing most of the precursors in the synthetic opiod that is trafficked to America. The Chinese have played hard to get, privately saying any summit must be preceded by detailed negotiations and planning. Based on my conversations with experts in China in recent weeks, Xi wants to avoid being disrespected, as Ukrainian President Zelensky and other world leaders were during their White House visits. And with Trump making concession after concession, Beijing may want to consolidate its recent gains and aim even higher, perhaps inducing Trump to make further compromises over tariffs, export controls, and Taiwan. Read More: It's Time for Trump and Xi to Meet Although one should not dismiss the value of stable ties between the world's two largest economies, each equipped with massive stockpiles of nuclear weapons, this warming trend is unlikely to last very long. Both sides prefer calmness now because it aligns with their short-term interests. Chinese official rhetoric aside, neither side sees the relationship in cooperative terms, and neither is willing to take major steps to provide strategic reassurance to the other. The underlying fundamental challenges created by the countries' deep divisions over their economic ties, the potential for conflict over Taiwan and other hotspots, and their competing visions of the international order can only be papered over for so long. At some point Beijing may run out of luck, and either not concede enough in negotiations or push too hard to make a TACO, and instead generate a Trumpian tirade or policy overreaction. Trump's unpredictability make linear extrapolations of any U.S. policy or strategy a risky bet. At some point, for either reasons of policy or fashion, the U.S.'s current gentle approach toward Beijing is likely to eventually harden, and for a new scene in the drama to unfold. Read More: Why China Can't Win a Trade War Beijing knows no deal with Trump is permanent. They will enjoy the peace and quiet as long as they can, but they know they need to be prepared for the next round of escalation—whenever it arrives. Other countries, companies, and markets should, too. Contact us at letters@ Solve the daily Crossword
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
Fed Expected To Cut Interest Rates, Though Inflation May Be Picking Up
WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 18: Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell speaks during a news conference following the September meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee at the William McChesney Martin Jr. Federal Reserve Board Building on September 18, 2024 in Washington, DC. The Federal Reserve announced today that they will cut the central bank's benchmark interest rate by 50 basis points to a new range of 4.75%-5%. (Photo by) Getty Images Fixed income markets fully expect that the Federal Open Market Committee will cut interest rates on September 17. However, economic data suggests that the FOMC may have to manage a monetary policy trade-off over the coming months. That's because the jobs market appears to have been weakening between May and July. That would typically call for lower rates. However, inflation may be picking up slightly on recent data. If that trend continues it might imply higher rates are needed. Of course, the FOMC only has a single policy tool, interest rates, so if unemployment rises and inflation picks up, then the FOMC's decision making may be made more complicated. The July Employment Situation Report saw 73,000 nonfarm payrolls added for July, which was itself a relatively slow pace of growth compared to prior months. However, figures for May and June were also revised down significantly to under 20,000 nonfarm payrolls added in both cases. In contrast, over 100,000 jobs had been added monthly over most of the prior 2 years. That said, the unemployment rate has been relatively stable since summer 2024, but if the recent slow pace of job creation continues, it may signal downside risk for the economy. The jobs report for August will be released on September 5, offering further data before the FOMC next meets. Recent data has shown some acceleration of inflation, too. July Producer Price Indexes showed a relatively pronounced rise in prices. In addition, there were some signs of rising prices in the July Consumer Price Index. For now, overall inflation remains relatively mild. For example, annual inflation is close to 3% to July depending on the metric used. However, the FOMC's annual target is 2% and inflation could accelerate further as the impact of tariffs, which in many cases have only been recently implemented, are felt. That said, some policymakers have said they are willing to look through any tariff-related inflation, believing it will be one-off in nature. If so, that makes it an easier decision to lower rates if there are concerns about a softening job market. At the last FOMC meeting in July both Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman dissented, preferring to lower rates. That and the likely appointment of Stephen Miran to the FOMC before the September meeting, suggest added pressure for a rate cut. That's because President Trump is known to favor lower rates, and he likely proposed Miran with the belief that he would vote to lower rates. It seems likely that the FOMC will cut interest rates in September. There are still more economic reports to come before that meeting, but fixed income markets strongly predict a rate cut. That said, there are signs that inflation could be accelerating, that may not prevent a September cut, especially if signs of a soft labor market continue, but could present challenges for policy makers later in 2025 if they have to choose between restraining inflation and supporting the jobs market.
