Onderwear: Soiled Even Before They're Used
by Dominic Muren, Philadelphia, USA 
on 06.22.05
As the Voice of Treehuggers everywhere, from time to time, we feel obligated to point out a product which has strayed from the path of the true hugger. It's a heavy responsibility, so we try to limit it only to those who are truly misguided. But every once in a while, something screams out at us like a 7 year old in the back of the class with his hand raised. So, with out further ado, Onederwear, will you please come to the front of the class...
Before we just launch into this, let's take a little time for a thought experiment. Though we like to think of out time as the only time, we are living in what will someday be the past. It's interesting to imagine what future archaeologists will think when confronted with specimens of some present day products.
Onederwear is one of these.
If someone said to you, as an expert on ancient earth culture, "We've located a pair of underwear which were designed to be so flimsy that they would tear after a few washes. Additionally, though greener alternatives were available, they were intentionally made from one of the worst polluting fibers on the planet."
What would you say?
Well, this is Onederwear. Designed for use by tourists on cruises and other luggage-critical trips, they are mens and womens brief-style underwear made from super-thin cotton fabric. So thin, in fact, that according to the site:
"To enjoy the convenience of OnederWear, we suggest that you just wear and toss. OneDerWear will however last a few washes. OneDerWear is much thinner than traditional underwear, and will tend to tear after a few washes."
So, even if you wanted to re-use them, you're hard pressed to do so. Personally, we just nestle our dirties in the corner of our bag, but if you're really picky about this sort of thing, try stuffing them in a dirty sock, or a sandwich bag. If you're really in a huggin' mood, why not make sure the panties you're stashing are organic. Thanks to Kari for the...Un-tip. :: Onederwear
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Green Your Bikini Waxing Routine with Soy, Pine Sap and Organic Bikini Wax
- Surf Green with Eco-Friendly Surf Gear
- Preserving the Harvest: Strawberry Balsamic Jam
- 8 Ways Laughter Can Help You Naturally Improve Your Health and Lose Weight
- Build a Greenhouse without Going Broke
- Forget about Pills: Eat Away A Bad Mood!
Actually, if you really want to be untreehugger, you can go to Wal-mart and buy bangladeshi-made regular underwear for less than $ 1.80 per pair (cost of the onederwear) and just throw them away. With globalism, everything is disposable.
Why not just go commando? Maybe onederwear will create onederwear outerwear for those commandoes out there. They might have some competition from OldNavy in that area though.
Thanks for the link. This is truly an abomination.
Go send them some fine customer service email.
customerservice@onederwear.com
Or call them at:
310 649-4799
I'm not really clear what the big deal is. Cotton is biodegradable, right? So that's not really the issue.
How much energy, materials, toxicity, etc, goes into the production of a flimsy pair of underwear? And how much goes into a "durable" pair of underwear?
Then, you'd need to also account for the energy, materials, toxicity, etc, that go into washing and drying a pair of "durable" underwear.
Then of course you need to factor in the weight of underwear (which, I might add, isn't negligible, as I discovered on a recent trip) and how much that adds to fuel consumption of airplanes, shuttle buses, cabs, etc.
And if you want to get even more detailed, you might wish to look at the effect of "traveling light" as opposed to "traveling heavy" on the psyche of people and how that may or may not manifest in terms of material impact (eg, will they be more stressed, selfish, hungry, etc).
There are bigger fish to fry than this one.
I forgot to mention the cost of laundering at a hotel, since this is obviously one of the markets this company is targeting.
At this ANA Hotel in Osaka, for example:
http://www.anahtlosaka.co.jp/english/room/laundry.html
the price of laundering a pair of "under drawers" is 231 yen, or about $2.12. A pair of Onederwear costs between $1.60 and $2.00.
Wow, thanks for all the comments guys.
In response to Joseph:
While cotton biodegrades (though not in landfills) the real trouble here is that cotton really does consume the largest percentage of insecticides and fertilizers of any cultivated plant in the world. 25% of world insecticide use is used on cotton. The following (obviously bias) link provides some other useful data:
http://www.simplelife.com/organiccotton/13PSTCDSSTTSTCS.html
The amount of cotton used in a regular pair of underwear VS a pair of Onederwear can't be more than 3x or so. Given that a standard pair of underwear last many more than 3x "a few washes", standard underwear is still better as far as material and energy usage.
Similarly, because Onederwear are packed in small lots (on the website, you can buy packs of 5 pairs), there would be considerably greater shipping energy expended, which would probably offset any minuscule gains from having lighter luggage (OK, this is wild speculation, but you get the point).
All this stuff aside, I think the most unfortunate thing about this product is that they didn't use organic cotton. They're already charging a premium for a niche product, so why not tack on the extra money for organic cotton, hemp, or a less environmentally devastating fiber?
Of course there are bigger fish to fry. The G-8 conference is coming up. Peak oil is (depending on who you talk to) threatening, or a hoax.
But a cloud of Piranha can kill you just as dead as a big old scary looking shark. If nobody takes the time to keep the little fish in check, they can cause just as much damage as the big ones. This was my attempt to open the eyes of one well meaning, but misguided little fish.
Thanks for the response, Dominic.
You cover a lot of bases, so I'll just focus on one for now. The price point of this underwear is already near (or even above) the price of regular underwear. What people are paying for is the convenience of something that takes up less space, weighs less, etc.
If you tack on a premium for organic cotton, then you're going to price this product above that of regular underwear, and above the cost of laundering underwear at a hotel. So now you've just created an incentive for people to buy regular underwear, which uses more cotton and other materials, and thus is more wasteful than this Onederwear product, if the consumer decides to toss it after one use as well.
At the price point this product is at, normal consumers aren't going to rush out in droves to buy it. If it's part of your home set of clothing, it makes no sense to buy something other than normal underwear. It's a niche product, to say the least.
Add in to that the environmental trade-offs (as well as the personal well-being trade-offs) are unclear, then I'm not convinced there's really much of an issue here.
Trying to imagine this in relation to, say, plastic soda pop bottles or these new cans which heat the product inside, then it puts it in perspective. Or how about the single serving plastic cans for Doritos and similar products? There's a lot of gratuitous waste out there that dwarfs whatever impact this product will ever have.
Dominic and Joseph, you both make good points, but what I think bothers me the most about this is the principle.
Even if it has a very small lifecycle impact, it's still encouraging use-once consumption when it's not even particularly needed or convenient.
It's just the extreme of products that are designed to be flimsy - with built-in obsolescence - so they break down and you have to buy new ones (companies don't like products to last too long, you have to buy buy buy all the time).
Just got back from a Target run. Saw a 7 pack of Hanes or some similar brand for less than $7. So actually the unit price of "normal" underwear is about 1/2 of these Onederwears.
It's not about cost, but about convenience, size, and lightness for this new product. If it were about cost, people would just by those Hanes and toss them instead.
AS any woman wanting to avoid pantylines knows, you can just get the pantyliners and stick them to your pants if you don't want to wear underwear. Lots cheaper and way more cost-effective, and take up even less luggage space. This is simply a stupid product.
Quick-dry unders. A little costlier, but you only need 2 pair (one to wear while you're washing the other). Or, heck, buy 1 pair and live a little. Wash in hotel sink. Whatever.
Another ridiculous thing: they say on their website that these are great for backpacking: "why waste space in your backpack?" "Just TOSS em" But Where ?? in a stream ? under a tree ? REALLY! Do us a favor and pack them OUT. ;-)
I travel a lot for work and have found that the best way to deal with my dirties is to do this:
1. collect the bag that i found hanging from my doorknob in the morning
2. remove newspaper. do something responsible with it
3. put dirties into the bag that the newspaper was in
4. finish packing. your dirties are now separated from the leftover cleans