Lifestyle
The Quest to Ban the Best Raincoats in the World
Why Patagonia, REI, and just about every other gear retailer are going PFAS-free.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Why Patagonia, REI, and just about every other gear retailer are going PFAS-free.
On Last Energy’s milestone, California CCS, and RFK Jr. vs. microplastics
On a California chem leak, solar manufacturing, and BHP’s climate retreat
The founder of one-time sustainable apparel company Zady argues that policy is the only that can push the industry toward more responsible practices.
Everlane’s reported sale to Shein has left many shocked and saddened. How could the millennial “radical transparency” fashion brand be absorbed by the company that has become shorthand for ultra-fast fashion? While I feel for the team within the company that cares about impact reduction, I am not surprised by the news.
Everlane was built around a theory of change that was always too small for the problem it claimed to address — that better brands and more conscientious consumers could redirect a coal-powered, chemically intensive, globally fragmented industry.
The theory had real appeal, but it was wrong. Yes, it created some better products, but it was never going to remake the fashion industry on its own.
This is the tension at the center of sustainable fashion: Consumer demand can create a niche, even a meaningful one, but it cannot reconfigure the economics of global supply chains. What is needed are common sense laws that require all significant players to play by the same basic rules: reduce emissions, ban toxic chemicals, and maintain basic labor standards.
A company I used to run, Zady, was an early competitor to Everlane, and we were part of the same cultural and commercial moment. When we raised money, we told investors that while our Boomer parents may have thought that changing the world meant marching on the streets, we knew better. Change was going to happen through business.
The problem was that, while our market was growing, fast fashion was growing faster. There was a small but passionate group of consumers trying to buy better, but the overall system drove companies to produce more — more units, more emissions, more chemicals, and more waste.
The truth is that brands do not have direct control over the environmental impacts of their products. Most of the emissions and applications of chemicals are not happening at the brand level, but are instead in fiber production, textile mills, dyehouses, finishing facilities, and laundries, all of which the brands do not own. These factories operate on the thinnest of margins, and the open secret is that brands share these suppliers. No one brand wants to pay the cost for their shared factories to make the necessary upgrades to address their impacts. It’s a classic collective action problem.
Everlane’s capital story matters here, too. Unless a founder arrives with substantial personal wealth, outside investment is often the only path to scale. A company can remain small, independent, and slow-growing, but then it will likely be more expensive, more limited in reach, and less able to influence factories.
Everlane chose the other path. It took institutional growth capital from storied venture firms more closely associated with the digital revolution (including some that also fund clean energy technologies) and became a recognizable national brand. This obligated the company to operate inside a financial structure that leads inexorably toward some kind of exit, whether through a sale, an initial public offering, or some other liquidity event. Once that is the operating system, sustainability can remain a real and important goal, but it is not the final governing logic — investor return is.
“Radical transparency” was never enough to solve the fashion industry’s or venture capital model’s structural problems. Naming a factory is not the same as knowing what happens inside it. Publishing a supplier list does not tell us whether the facility runs on coal, whether wastewater is treated before being released back into the ecosystem, or whether restricted substances are present in dyes, finishes, trims, or coatings.
We already have many forms of transparency in American capitalism. Public companies, for example, are required to disclose executive compensation and the average pay of their workers; this transparency has done exactly nothing to close the pay gap. A disclosure is not the same thing as a legal standard.
So what does this mean for all of us? We don’t know exactly how Shein will absorb Everlane. I could guess that this is a Quince play for Shein, a way to access higher-end consumers that would otherwise never go on the Shein site.
What this tragicomedy reveals is that the idea born from Obama-era optimism, that the arc of history naturally bends toward justice and sustainability, was ephemeral.
The work to make this coal-powered industry sustainable will come from regulation. The technology to decarbonize is there, and unlike with aviation, for instance, it would cost the apparel industry a mere 2 cents per cotton t-shirt to get it done. But unlike with aviation, there are no requirements or incentives that these investments be made, so they are not.
The electric vehicle industry got a head start through direct subsidies and fuel efficiency standards. Apparel needs the same.
If you’re disappointed or angry about this turn of events, I ask you to channel those feelings into citizenship. Help pass the New York or California Fashion Acts that would require all large fashion companies that sell into the states to reduce their emissions and ban toxic chemicals. It’s currently legal to have lead on adult clothing, and Shein is consistently found to have it on their products. The industry is pushing back through their trade associations, so people power is needed so that legislators know it needs to be their priority.
But if you want to shop sustainably, you don’t need a brand. What is most helpful is understanding your own style and lifestyle — that’s how we know what we actually need and what we don’t. There are apps to help on that front. (I love Indyx, for instance, but there are others.)
The only way forward is together, and that means political solutions — emissions requirements, chemical requirements, labor requirements — not just consumer ones.
On Tesla’s solar factory, Bolivia’s protests, and China’s hydrogen motorcycle
Current conditions: The East Coast heat wave is exposing more than 80 million Americans to temperatures near or above 90 degrees Fahrenheit through at least the end of today, putting grid operators who run PJM Interconnection and the New York electrical systems on high alert • Thunderstorms are drenching the United States’ southernmost capital city, Pago Pago, American Samoa, and driving temperatures up near 90 degrees • Some 3,600 miles north in the Pacific, Guam’s capital city of Hagåtña is in the midst of a week of even worse lightning storms.
American investment in low-carbon energy and transportation has fallen for a second consecutive quarter, ending an unbroken growth trend stretching back to 2019. In the first three months of 2026, total investment in those green sectors reached $61 billion, according to a Rhodium Group analysis published this morning. That’s a 3% drop from the previous quarter — and a 9% decline from the first three months of 2025. Contrary to the Trump administration’s claims to be overseeing a resounding revival of U.S. manufacturing, investments in clean technologies fell for a sixth consecutive quarter to $8 billion, down a whopping 34% from the first quarter of 2025. With federal tax credits for electric vehicles eliminated, investments into battery manufacturing plunged 47% year over year. At the state level, there’s been some progress. Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Michigan, and New York all recorded their largest year-over-year increases over the past four quarters as clean electricity investments at least doubled in each state. “Wind was the primary driver in Virginia, New Mexico, New York, and Colorado; and solar in Michigan and Oklahoma,” the report noted. Sales of electric vehicles, at least on a worldwide level, are also gaining momentum: the International Energy Agency released a report this morning that forecast 30% of global new car sales will be battery electric this year.
The Tuesday night primary elections in six U.S. states, meanwhile, offered mixed results for clean energy supporters. Representative Thomas Massie, the dissident Republican from northern Kentucky who repeatedly broke with his party to criticize President Donald Trump and boasted of his off-grid home’s solar and battery system, lost by double digits to his White House-backed rival. Pennsylvania’s state Representative Chris Rabb, a progressive would-be “Squad” member whose platform mirrors the Green New Deal movement’s key policy demands, won the Democratic primary for the 3rd Congressional District spanning parts of Philadelphia.

During an appearance on Fox News last week, investor and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary vowed to release documents showing that opponents of the data center complex he proposed building in the Utah desert received funding from China, suggesting the protesters seeking to thwart his $100 billion megaproject were useful idiots in Beijing’s bid to hamper America’s technological progress. Now Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is echoing those claims. “It’s not organic and local,” he said Thursday on stage at the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference in Anchorage, where he was the keynote speaker. “Some of this is foreign-sourced dark money coming in.” The link between rising electricity prices and data centers, he said, was “specious.” He went on to cite a specific example of a small town in North Dakota, from when he served as the state’s governor, where a billion-dollar data center project ended up reducing costs for ratepayers by paying a premium to “buy down” the price households paid. It wasn’t immediately obvious which project he was referring to. But my best guess from some cursory research is that he may have meant the Applied Digital data center in Ellendale, along the southeastern border with South Dakota. In 2023, Prairie Public reported that the facility helped bring down transmission costs, reducing ratepayers’ bills by as much as $61 per year.
Burgum also suggested that Democrats were inflaming the data center issue for political gain. But opposition spans the political spectrum. Tom Steyer, the billionaire progressive running for governor of California, on Monday walked back a response to a candidate questionnaire published by Greenpeace, in which he said he supported a pause on data center development. In a statement to Politico, campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said that while Steyer wants to ensure protections for electricity prices and water resources, he does not support a temporary ban.
It appears Elon Musk is more likely to follow through on his promise to build enough manufacturing capacity to churn out 100 gigawatts of solar panels in the U.S. than to sell 500,000 Cybertrucks a year. Tesla has selected a site just outside Houston for a new factory that will expand the company’s capacity to churn out panels in its home market. That’s according to Electrek, which said it had independently confirmed a tip from a source pointing the publication to the Brookshire, Texas, site. The plant will be co-located with a battery factory that is already under construction at the same site.
“Any level of commitment to onshore the entire supply chain is a positive sign for American solar manufacturing and supply chain security,” Yogin Kothari, the chief strategy officer at the SEMA Coalition trade group that advocates for U.S. solar manufacturers against cheap Chinese imports, told me in a text message Tuesday night. “We can make solar panels here — we just have to have the commitment to do it.”
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
New Yorkers could receive $200 rebates from the state as part of Albany’s effort to soothe the pinch of rising electricity prices. On Tuesday, Newsday reported that the program would be part of the state budget agreement, which Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul and the Democrat-led legislature are still working to finalize. It wouldn’t be the first check the Hochul administration is sending out to voters as the former lieutenant governor, who initially came to power when former Governor Andrew Cuomo resigned over alleged sexual misconduct, runs for reelection in November. Last year, in a bid to combat the sting of inflation, the state issued rebates ranging from $150 to $400 depending on filing status and adjusted gross income in 2023.
Though it’s home to the world’s largest known reserves of lithium, landlocked Bolivia’s vast resources have largely remained undeveloped after two decades of rule by a left-wing government leery of foreign investment. The right-wing government that finally broke the Movimiento al Socialismo party’s grip on power in La Paz last year has sought to tap the so-called white gold in its salt flats, particularly as Washington looks for new sources of metals outside of supply chains China largely controls. New documents published Tuesday by the left-wing journalist Ollie Vargas appear to show the Bolivia’s Public Prosecutors Office’s warrants to arrest protesters and labor leaders connected to recent nationwide strikes on charges that include terrorism. “Bolivia’s government has ordered the arrest of all the main leaders of the indigenous movements and mineworkers unions,” Vargas wrote in a post on X. “They’re being charged for Terrorism for having organised the general strike against hunger. Strike continues regardless, now in day 7.” Clashes between law enforcement and protesters started last week.
China’s hydrogen industry is booming. Its sales of electrolyzers are beating out domestic manufacturers in Europe. Fuel cell vehicles are hitting the roads. Hydrogen refueling stations are opening. But the Chinese hydrogen sector with the highest volume of orders coming from overseas is for something simpler: Two-wheeled, hydrogen-powered motorcycles. That’s according to the latest China Hydrogen Bulletin, in which analyst Jian Wu reported from the 6th China International Consumer Products Expo on the island province of Hainan that a maker of the motorcycles had secured $300 million in overseas orders.