EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

Post by simianparrot » Wed, Feb 18, 2026, 8:27 PM UTC

sehansen wrote: post #865

simianparrot wrote: post #660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same as when the EU puts a ton of restrictions on farmers within the EU countries -- Co2, fertiliser requirements, etc. -- making food so expensive to produce many go out of business and the remainder become practically luxury food, and then countries just end up having to import food from countries outside the EU _without_ those restrictions, simply offloading the environmental burden on "some other countries somewh…

EU is a net food exporter and the only agricultural products the EU isn't self-sufficient in are animal feed, sugar, and tropical fruits & vegetables. So, no, EU farmers are struggling at the moment because they aren't as competitive on the global markets as they used to. Not because Europeans aren't buying their food anymore.

Post by imperfect_blue » Thu, Feb 19, 2026, 3:15 AM UTC

sehansen wrote: post #876

imperfect_blue wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a terrible idea because approximately 90% of the cost of clothing is not in producing it, but in the supply chain - keeping it in stock, transporting it to and from warehouses, the manpower needed to organize and sorting and inspect it. So by saving the 10% of the cost of the clothing, you end up wasting way more in labor and transport and inventory costs. All of which ends up way worse for the environment than…

The clothing that ends up in the landfill also needed to be transported, stored and organized. So if you don't produce those clothes to begin with you not only save the pollution and resource usage that would come from producing it, but also the pollution and resource usage from transporting, etc. It may _cost_ the company more, but only producing what can be sold will be strictly less polluting.

Post by wlecometo » Thu, Feb 19, 2026, 9:19 AM UTC

miki123211 wrote: post #373

motbus3 wrote: post #204

I'm reading the comments and I get confused. I kinda think this is a good idea and it is not like the government is purely making it a 3rd party problem only. This might make production more complicated for a while, but nowadays it is much easier to predict demand and produce quicker in smaller batches. In the 90s you might need change a whole factory setting for every single piece of fabric but nowadays it is that m…

Here's how this law is actually going to work. Instead of destroying the unsold clothes in Europe, manufacturers are going to sell them to "resale" companies in countries with little respect for the rule of law, mostly in Africa or Asia. Those companies will then destroy those clothes, reporting them as sold to consumers. So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to…

Post by James_K » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 5:09 PM UTC

overfeed wrote: post #543

James_K wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was because you could make money by turning old things into new things. Not so with garbage disposal, a service for which you almost always have to pay.

> Not so with garbage disposal There is already a healthy trade for second-hand clothing to 3rd world countries (see pics of kids with " World Champions 2022"). The prices will be better for brand new clothes. The gray distribution channels already exist and will readily pay for new clothes - at steep discounts, but pay for them nonetheless.

Post by buckle8017 » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 8:28 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #817

buckle8017 wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me one person in prison for this

Here’s the first hit on Google: https://www.justice.gov/usao-nm/pr/us-attorneys-office-secur...