Wool is a popular material, a textile with timeless allure and unparalleled advantages. For centuries, people have been engaged in the ancient craft of shearing sheep or alpacas and dyeing their wool.
Alpaca fibre, from South America, mainly Peru, Bolivia, Argentina and Chile, is particularly soft - even softer than merino wool. It is not only stronger, but also seven times warmer than sheep's wool, making it ideal for people who are sensitive to cold. In addition, alpaca fibre is an excellent alternative for people who are allergic to lanolin, a natural wax produced by sheep. Alpaca fibre is versatile, offering warmth during cold days and airy luxury in summer. A subcategory, Suri fibre, known for its silky and shiny fibres is often used for weaving rather than knitting.
The appeal of wool is universal: it is the most widely used animal fibre and accounts for 1.2% of all textile fibres in the world.
The environmental impact of wool
It is often said that wool has a significant impact on the environment. Sources such as the Higg Index even verify that wool contributes significantly to global warming. Why does wool have such an immense ecological footprint?
A respectful conversation with the environment
Keeping sheep or alpacas requires extensive pastures to give the animals enough space to graze. According to the UK Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, it is estimated that 2,000 hectare of land is needed to produce one tonne of sheep's wool - a stark contrast with the mere 1.3 hectare needed to produce a comparable quantity of cotton. For alpacas, this footprint is lower, estimated to require 25-30% less land than sheep for a similar amount of wool. Unlike sheep, they are more efficient grazers. They damage vegetation less because they only bite off the top part of the grass and do not pull the roots. Moreover, alpacas require less food and water.
Alpacas grazing in semi-wild conditions, such as in Peru, also offer a host of environmental benefits. As light-footed grazers, alpacas contribute to the maintenance of soil fertility and, as with sheep, can help the soil to store carbon. In addition, controlled grazing contributes to greater biodiversity by preventing a single plant species from dominating the landscape and allowing a more secure eco-system to flourish. This holistic approach to land management can also help keep invasive species under control and reduce the risk of forest fires.
In Peru's vast highlands, the areas where alpacas graze are often not suitable for other agricultural activities, making this practice a natural and effective way to extract value from marginal lands. Moreover, alpaca wool production plays a crucial role in supporting local communities by creating jobs in regions with few economic alternatives.
Methane revisited:
the environmental dynamics of sheep and other livestock
Although sheep, goats and alpacas are known to emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas*, it is good to know that this is part of a complex ecological comparison. On average, a sheep emits about 25 litres of methane every day. In alpacas, this is considerably lower, about half, due to alpacas' more efficient digestive system, which causes less gas formation during digestion.
Furthermore, animal manure emits nitrous oxide. However, in alpacas grazing semi-wild, manure production is 50-70% lower than with sheep, due to their more efficient grazing patterns and natural habitat.
* Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are gases in the Earth's atmosphere that trap heat. When it comes to climate change, three main greenhouse gases are of particular concern: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Methane is 28 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (CO2), but the overall volume of CO2 emissions is much higher, making CO2 a major contributor to global warming despite methane’s greater potency per molecule. Nitrous Oxide is a greenhouse gas up to 298 times more potent than CO2.
Innovations in sustainable wool cleaning
To process wool into textiles, it must first be cleaned with chemicals to remove dirt and possible diseases. Cleaning alpaca fibre has traditionally required intensive chemical treatment, resulting in chemical discharges to water that can be up to 14 times greater than for conventional sheep wool.
Our suppliers, however, are taking initiatives to reduce the impact of this. One of our suppliers, Michell is committed to using the EasyWash line, an eco-friendly cleaning method that uses enzymes to remove dirt and impurities from wool, reducing the need for harsh chemicals and making the process more sustainable. All chemicals used comply with OEKO-TEX and REACH standards, a guarantee that products are free of harmful chemicals and safe for humans and the environment.
There are also circular innovations in water recycling systems that reduce waste water by collecting, filtering and reusing used water. For example, our supplier Inca Tops uses New Zealand's ANDAR system, which optimises water consumption during the washing process and recycles about 30% of used water for irrigation purposes, such as forestry and garden use. They also use arm dyeing machines that leads to significant water savings compared to traditional methods.
The industry continues to develop alternative methods that avoid chemicals, such as ultrasonic cleaning. This uses sound waves to remove impurities. These technologies offer potential for further preservation, especially for wools such as alpaca wool that naturally require more intensive treatment.
Do organic farms make for happier alpacas?
In Peru, alpaca farming is often done in a semi-wild way, with the animals grazing freely in the high mountains. Although these alpacas are often fed organic feed, small farmers often lack the resources to obtain expensive certifications. These small-scale farmers have to compete with larger alpaca farms, where nutrition and medication are strictly controlled to meet organic standards.
So big farms have an advantage because of their certified organic processes, but that does not mean small-scale farmers take less care of their animals. Their alpacas graze naturally, which contributes to the animals' welfare.
Which labels reflect best practice
Despite a recent decline in the worldwide production of wool, driven by concerns about its profitability and a race beween the many competitors to the bottom, there is encouraging news: sustainable alternatives are gaining market share. This positive trend indicates growth and commitment to more responsible methods of producing wool.
Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) and Responsible Alpaca Standard (RAS)
The Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) provides a list of criteria that sourced wool must meet to ensure animal welfare. Clothing brand Patagonia started the RWS certification after several scandals revealed by PETA about an Argentine sheep farm. Today, other major brands such as H&M and C&A have also joined the initiative.
By 2023, the RWS label covered wool products from 354 certified farms in six countries. South Africa led the way, followed by Uruguay, Argentina, Australia, New Zealandand the United States. While this is encouraging, it is worth noting that RWS-certified wool currently accounts for less than 2% of the world's total wool production.
The Responsible Alpaca Standard (RAS) label was also introduced for alpaca products, but as with the Responsible Wool Standard (RWS), the proportion of certified products remains small. To claim RAS certification, every link in the supply chain, including those who do not produce, must be certified. High audit costs mean that we are not currently certified as processors, which means we cannot label our products as RAS-certified, even if the materials we use are. This is a global problem: The cost and complexity of certification is often a major hurdle, especially for smaller producers, who find it difficult to compete with larger companies that can afford these certifications.
How reliable are certificates?
Despite the emergence of eco-friendly certification such as those mentioned above, the complexity of today's long supply chains, which are denuded by numerous intermediaries, makes it a challenge to fully guarantee the ethical production and traceability of the wool in a clothing piece.
In addition, there are concerns about the accessibility of these certifications for clay brands and farms, for whom the cost and complexity of certification is often a major barrier. Although they treat their animals ethically, they often lack the financial resources to pay for certification. Labels, while a step in the right direction, do not offer a panacea for animal welfare.
A robust solution could be to unify allocation criteria, reduce the number of inter-people and promote direct relationships with wool farms to increase transpacific relationships within the industry.