New Study Archives - NewsCloud

Jeans Are Pushing Ecosystems Toward Destruction — Reveals a Shocking Study

NewsCloud Editor — Tue, 05 Aug 2025 22:40:03 +0000

There are very few people today who don’t wear jeans. Thanks to globalization, denim has long become a global style statement. Alongside its popularity, demand, production, and prices have soared. Yet, most denim users are unknowingly contributing to the silent destruction of nature. Jeans have become a hidden cause behind the ecological crisis.

Yes, that’s what researchers are warning. A recent international exhibition in Paris showcased this alarming reality. The exhibition, dedicated to jeans, revealed that more than 70 denim products are sold every second worldwide. That adds up to over 2.2 billion jeans sold annually. The exhibition highlighted how this massive production is causing irreversible environmental damage every single moment.

Even before this exhibition, researchers had already raised concerns about the environmental impact of jeans. Several studies pointed out that producing a single pair of jeans requires 2,600 to 5,200 gallons of water — nearly 10,000 to 20,000 liters! Most of this fresh water is drawn from rivers, lakes, or underground sources, as freshwater is essential for processing denim. This overuse of water is directly contributing to worsening water crises.

One of the most alarming examples is the Aral Sea. Located in present-day Uzbekistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union), the area around the Aral Sea saw a boom in denim factories during the 1950s. Cotton (used to make denim) was grown extensively in the region. While this was profitable commercially, it ultimately led to the death of the Aral Sea. Cotton cultivation demands vast amounts of water, which quickly depletes underground reserves. That’s exactly what happened to the Aral Sea. Simultaneously, water from the sea was extracted in huge quantities for denim manufacturing.

But the damage didn’t stop there. The water used in the denim production process — often mixed with dyes, chemicals, and pesticides — was drained back into the Aral Sea. Over time, this polluted the sea, killing off nearly 24 species of fish and leaving thousands of fishermen unemployed. According to satellite data, 90% of the Aral Sea’s water has dried up between 1950 and 2020. Toxic chemical sediments left behind are now carried by wind and sand to nearby regions, causing serious health issues like cancer. A similar crisis is unfolding along the Mato Grosso River in Brazil, where cotton farming is rapidly drying out vast areas of savannah land.

There’s more. Denim manufacturing emits large amounts of greenhouse gases and consumes enormous energy resources. Even when users wash their jeans, microfibers and chemicals are released into the environment, further polluting it.

Years ago, after multiple studies exposed the harmful impact of jeans, several global denim brands pledged to manufacture “green jeans” — environmentally friendly alternatives. However, these eco-friendly jeans cost several times more than regular jeans, resulting in lower demand and production. Even a decade later, the situation hasn’t improved — in fact, denim-related pollution has only intensified.

But is there a solution?

It may not be feasible to eliminate jeans from human civilization overnight. However, researchers suggest washing jeans less frequently can significantly reduce pollution. Avoiding unnecessary purchases and extending the lifespan of each pair of jeans can also reduce both demand and production — ultimately helping the environment. According to experts, this is the first step humanity must take toward controlling denim-driven pollution.

Content and images are sourced from Prohor.

The post Jeans Are Pushing Ecosystems Toward Destruction — Reveals a Shocking Study appeared first on NewsCloud.

Glass or Plastic — Which Is More Environmentally Sustainable?

NewsCloud Editor — Tue, 05 Aug 2025 05:53:50 +0000

The year was 1867. In the town of Speyer, Germany, an ancient glass bottle was discovered—containing a mysterious alcohol-based beverage, likely wine. When this archaeological relic was later analyzed, researchers were astonished to find that the bottle dated back to approximately 325–350 CE.

This discovery earned the bottle the title of the oldest known glass bottle in the world. But more importantly, the study revealed that containers made from glass can remain intact in nature far longer than those made from clay or metal. In other words, glass is non-biodegradable. It does not react with oxygen, nitrogen, or other natural elements at normal temperatures, which explains why the glass bottle has remained preserved for nearly 1,700 years.

Indeed, according to modern research, glass can take up to a million years to decompose in nature—while plastic typically breaks down within 20 to 500 years. However, unlike plastic, which releases harmful microplastics into the environment as it degrades, glass poses no such risk. This makes it a safer and more reliable choice for storing food and beverages over long periods. In fact, statistics support this claim—glass is more widely recycled than wood, plastic, or paper, with an average recycling rate of around 76%.

Naturally, such facts lead many to believe that replacing plastic with glass could help save the planet. Even scientists believed this until about a decade ago. However, recent surveys and studies are now presenting a very different perspective—glass may be no less harmful to the environment than plastic. While not always directly, glass causes indirect environmental damage. But how?

The primary ingredient in glass is silica or silicon dioxide, which is primarily extracted from sand. The increasing demand for glass has led to the rampant extraction of sand, much of it through illegal mining operations. Recent research suggests that the rate of sand mining has surpassed the natural replenishment rate of sand through the erosion of rocks—accelerating land degradation and soil erosion.

That’s not all. The process of converting sand into glass produces silica dust, which, when released into the air, can lead to silicosis—a severe and often fatal lung disease. This illness is increasingly being reported among workers in the glass and cement industries.

Moreover, to reshape or recycle glass products, they must be melted in furnaces. Surprisingly, the temperature required to melt glass is even higher than that needed to extract aluminum. As a result, glass recycling processes emit massive amounts of greenhouse gases. According to research by Alice Brooke from the University of Southampton in the UK, reshaping glass bottles alone results in over 60 megatons of carbon dioxide emissions each year. Additionally, this process consumes vast amounts of energy. All things considered, it’s clear that glass is not significantly less harmful to the environment than plastic.

So the question remains—what’s the solution? Should we stop using glass altogether?

Researchers say the answer lies in reuse. Instead of melting broken glass in energy-intensive furnaces, it should be returned to nature or repurposed without further processing. This approach could help reduce pollution and energy waste.

Note: Content and images are sourced from Prohor.

The post Glass or Plastic — Which Is More Environmentally Sustainable? appeared first on NewsCloud.