Score
‘We stole Lululemon’s designs and made them less terrible for the environment’
The campaign by Mumumelon highlights the urgent need for established brands like Lululemon to accelerate their sustainability efforts. By creatively mimicking Lululemon's designs while emphasizing environmental responsibility, the initiative pressures the brand to prioritize renewable energy and reduce emissions in its supply chain, reflecting a growing consumer demand for sustainable practices in fashion.
FastCompany: “Same soulless vibes. Fewer fossil fuels.” So says the website for Mumumelon , a new project that made exact dupes of Lululemon staples like hoodies and yoga pants—but with renewable energy and a detailed plan to cut emissions.
Inside a fake pop-up store in London in late March, a fake employee gave customers the pitch: “We stole Lululemon’s designs and made them less terrible for the environment.” “We’ve been campaigning on Lululemon for a few years now to push them to invest in the renewable energy transition and phase out fossil fuels from their supply chain,” says Ruth MacGilp, a climate campaigner at the advocacy group Action Speaks Louder .
“We wanted to do something a bit more creative.” (Lululemon said in a statement that it was “disappointed” with the nonprofit’s approach.) [Photo: courtesy Action Speaks Louder] The website lays out the basic challenge: like most clothing brands, Lululemon’s emissions keep going up. The company committed to transition to renewable electricity at factories, in part after pressure from Action Speaks Louder. But it has moved slowly, and missed a goal to reach 25% renewable electricity last year. Electricity also isn’t the only problem.
The majority of its emissions actually come from heat used in industrial processes at factories, MacGlip says, including boilers that run on coal. [Photo: courtesy Action Speaks Louder] “The majority of energy is actually in the form of process heat, and in fashion generally that comes from burning fossil fuels to generate hot water and steam,” she says. “The alternative to fossil fuels for heat is using electricity, but what has to happen first is those processes have to be electrified through technologies like heat pumps and electric boilers. And that’s not yet common practice in the fashion industry.
It’s commercially available technology, but it hasn’t yet scaled.” The group argues that as a major brand, with $11 billion in sales last year, Lululemon can afford to move faster. The company positions itself as committed to sustainability, and it’s something that its core customers care about. The campaign targeted yoga influencers, who’ve started tagging the company in posts saying how disappointed they are.
[Photo: Karen Yeomans/courtesy Action Speaks Louder] “We hope that helps put it higher up the priority list than if it was just us as a nonprofit saying the same thing,” says MacGlip, who says that she’s had a meeting with the company since the campaign launched. In its statement, Lululemon defended its sustainability work, saying that it is “continuing to make meaningful progress” on its goals. “Climate action and worker wellbeing are key focus areas for us, and we have achieved a 60% absolute reduction of greenhouse emissions in our owned and operated facilities.
Article truncated for readability. Read the full piece →
The article discusses a significant campaign that challenges a major brand's sustainability practices, which is highly relevant to current industry trends and consumer expectations.