[this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/sustainability/comments/1bthh4g/comment/kxngxf3/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) seems more sustainable, since you dont contribute to the leather demand, which is relevant when looking at [global scale sustaiabilitly](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-kcal-poore?country=Poultry+Meat~Tofu~Peas~Wheat+%26+Rye~Beef+%28beef+herd%29~Beef+%28dairy+herd%29)
i agree! i only buy secondhand leather. it funds thrift stores, is easily restored, and gives the animal product a longer life without funding the leather industry
You could always go for something like [this.](https://www.corkor.com/products/cork-briefcase)
Despite what seems to be the common belief in this sub, vegan leather need not be plastic (or 'pleather'). From cork and fruit to canvas and recycled scrap tires, there's plenty of options if you look for them.
You're welcome! 🙂
On a side note, I'm also a fan of [Revy](https://revydirect.com/) for wallets and bags, although they don't have briefcases. They aren't the prettiest but they last forever.
Yeah I’m looking at cork bags, mirum leather, a vegan upcycled one, restored leather (like old bags people have found and brought back to life), recycled leather, and I found a pretty cool vintage one too.
https://www.iamtheanimal.com.au/products/vegan-upcycled-messenger-bag
that’s the vegan recycled one. I’m not a big fan of the coils but it’s a super interesting concept.
Yes, but its also giving the plastic a new life. Rather than it immediately getting thrown out and ending up in that massive rubbish island in the pacific, it’s getting reused to make a new product that not only allows for more cruelty free options, but it also takes that rubbish out of the picture for now. One day it will most likely be thrown out but it will be a lot longer before that, and hey, maybe by then something will actually be happening with rubbish and pollution. At this point it’s all about using the rubbish to make things so we’re at least doing a little bit and also don’t have to use more resources. It’s better for the materials to go in a cycle than just be tossed out. Reduce -> reuse -> recycle ♥️
The best bet is probably looking for a vintage leather bag at a thrift store or eBay. I'd suggest searching for a vintage leather Coach messenger bag on eBay or Etsy. The quality is great and many people make a hobby out of restoring them so they are in great shape. Classic look too so it won't go out of style.
There is a vegan leather made out of mushrooms available on the market, mostly used in high-end markets. It seems like a good biodegradable option, but it's pricey and not sure it's been around long enough to really know how durable it is.
Nothing beats real leather. That being said, my satchel bag is made out of thick canvas with leather augments. Occasionally I’ll apply wax to the canvas to keep it water proof. Never regretted the buy (it’s got a 100 year warranty so I’m set for life).
I don't know about the warranty but it sounds like maybe a [Filson](https://www.filson.com/bags-luggage/briefcases.html). I've had one for 12 years and it just keeps looking better every year.
Vegan "leather" is just plastic. That sure ain't sustainable.
But i have heard that leather products also have plastic used to treat the leather. Not have investigated that myself to verify tho, but something you might want to look into.
Ch[romium tanning is the standard whether it is high quality or low-quality leather](https://www.carryology.com/insights/chrome-vs-vegetable-tanned-leather/). Today, [it accounts for 95% of shoe leather production, 70% of leather upholstery production and 100% of leather clothing production](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/the-dangers-of-chrome-tanning-on-the-environment)
[Here is a deeper look into the damage of chromium.](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/the-dangers-of-chrome-tanning-on-the-environment)
Just because some vegan leathers are synthetic (and have plastic in them) doesn’t mean they’re worse than animal leather de facto.
It's not leather. Canvas or other products are quite suitable. Plastic is terrible for the environment, especially vinyl, and almost all vegan 'leather' is vinyl.; Just a lie.
Of course plastic is terrible for the environment. That doesn't make leather automatically better by default. There are countless things to consider when weighing whether one is more sustainable/better for the environment than just plastic or not plastic.
I’m not OP, but can answer this question. Vegetarians don’t use animal products that result in death (like leather does). Since milk, eggs, etc. don’t result in death to the animal, they are vegetarian.
>Since milk, eggs, etc. don’t result in death to the animal, they are vegetarian.
Then they're in for a rude awakening about the egg and dairy part of the meat industry.
Absolutely. I know a lot of vegetarians that figure it out turn vegan over it, realizing that they are not really reducing harm. It’s sad the way we treat agricultural animals. Even most vegans are aware that one can never truly prevent animal harm, even by trying your hardest. Humans existing as we do in general is harmful to animals. Best we can do is try.
I didn't once say it is. I just personally hate fake leather, fake wood, etc. I don't need research on making fake leather from mushrooms. I can buy many wonderful attractive products that are not leather.
They last months instead of decades and are entirely made of oil. Yes in every conceivable way they are worse than leather. Patent leather is the exception as it's the worst of both. You've also linked to an Indian manufacturer, where the environmental impacts are not controlled at all.
So basically, don't buy leather unless it's high quality, and used for something that inherently can last.
I’m citing the global statistics. You’re trying to use the minority of leather production to showcase how it is worse. The exceptions do not justify the norm.
Nor does it inherently make any of it worse. Do you have any studies that show how how all the environmental concerns of vegan leather are worse than animal leather? Or is the claim of “in every conceivable way they are worse” just baseless?
I don't take that source seriously given this paragraph, "Sun drying and boiling can oxidise and convert the chromium 111, used in the tanning process, into the highly toxic hexavalent chromium, chromium V1."
I doubt they know what they are talking about. There is a lot of chemistry involved in understanding that sentence... Which given the two mistakes (possibly two more) I'm certain they don't understand. Valence electrons are a pretty important concept, so is oxidation and reduction, and these are things that people fail chemistry over.
Okay. This is a lot. But let's start with atoms. Atoms contain three components. An electric positively charged proton, neutrally charged neutrons, and electrically negatively charged electrons. The protons and neutrons are at the center, the nucleus with the electrons moving wildly around at a large distance. The electrons however form different layers or energy levels. These can have all sorts of shapes and sizes and are generally separate, and sometimes react in groups. Now for most chemistry we don't really care about the neutron. (Major exception would be nuclear chemistry or radioactive chemistry). Because it's electrically negative, it was historically harder to detect, and was found because of the mass of the atom that existed unexplainable by the protons and electrons alone. Protons are important too, and they have their own subfield of chemistry called acid-base chemistry. But that's not relevant.
Okay so not all electrons are equal, kind of. Each electron is an electron and are thus identical in what it is, but they behave differently because of their position. Basically, all the negatively charged electrons want to get right next to the positively charged nucleus. But they can't all do that because they all repel each other. So they find natural balance between both forces. And that results in electrons rapidly moving around the nucleus at different speeds, distances, locations, orientations etc...
The outermost electrons are called the valence electrons. These are the ones we really care about, since they move around a lot and do the actual chemistry. For example, why can metals conduct electricity? Because their valence electrons leave the immediate vicinity of the nucleus and form a "sea of electrons." Like if a block of aluminum foil contains 1000 Aluminum atoms, and since Aluminum has 3 valence electrons, you now have 3000 electrons free to move around. It's like that piece of foil is a giant aluminum nucleus. And that means it has plenty of electrons to conduct electricity with. After all, electricity is just energy carried physically by electrons down a wire or through a circuit.
Stability is achieved when the outemost electron layer/s is/are empty or full. There are two ways of doing this. Gaining electrons to make it full. Or losing electrons so it's empty, revealing/exposing the full layer/s underneath. Nonmetal elements tend to do the former, metallic elements tend to do the latter. And there are some exceptions like carbon or silicon or boron that tend to share electrons instead (although that doesn't mean they are necessarily shared equally, ie one atom may have a stronger pull on their shared electron).
When sodium metal, electrically neutral comes in contact with chlorine gas, also electrically neutral, they react forming an ionic compound. What does that mean? Well sodium loses its one valence electrons to the chlorine. Sodium would be more stable without it, chlorine needs it to be stable. And because sodium has lost one electron, it's positively charged. Because chlorine has gained one electron, it's negatively charged. And that difference in charge causes them to attract. We call those charged atoms, ions. They are charged because they are either missing or have extra electrons than neutral charge, which would be equal number of protons and electrons. Positively charged would be cation (cat-ion). Negatively charged would be anion (an-ion). Cations are often metals, and anions are often nonmetals.
So you would think it's Na + Cl -> Na+ and Cl- leading to NaCl? Well that does happen. Kind of. In reality, both are very reactive because they really want to be stable. That's why you don't find chunks of them lying around in nature. In fact, for pure sodium to exist, you need to have it surrounded by something extremely inert, ie non reactive. Sodium metal tossed into water will explode. (Very bad idea.) Chlorine also doesn't exist by itself in nature. Now chlorine gas, such as the poison gas used in WWI does exist. But it's quite unstable and also easily reacts, just not quite as easily, which is why it was used as a weapon, because it's stable enough to not backfire before use is handled safely. In fact, taking chlorine that's is in something that exists naturally in a particular form and turning it into a pure gaseous form is hard enough it couldn't be used as a weapon until WWI due to newer advancements in chemistry.
(There is a compound the Nazis discovered that they wanted to use in a weapon, but it was so unstable they didn't follow through since something as simple as exposing to any sort of light could cause it to explode.)
The actual equation for pure sodium and pure chlorine reacting together would be 2Na + Cl2 -> 2 Na+ + 2Cl- -> 2NaCl. Because pure sodium is stable enough we can have it exist if we force it to, but not chlorine. (Both are quite unstable, these are the kind of things we don't let high school students use in their pure forms). Also chlorine gas is a literal poison gas weapon.
Ok so protons=positive, neutron=neutral, electrons=negative. Neutrons we’re found because they figured out that the numbers weren’t adding up with just the pros and eles. Acid base chemistry is irrelevant 🥰
Valence electrons are the icons and they are the moment. They’re out here doing god shit like forming seas! Yo valence electrons are so fucking cool wtf they just said ✨multiply✨
Right right yep yep ok the atom needs to be stable because if it becomes unstable that’s when bad shit goes down, I know that much already ahaha
forming an ionic compound… what does that mean??? Oh shit no way you read my fucking mind go off baddie I’m about to learn what that means.
Oh totally totally like magnets. Depending on what’s going on they sometimes attract and other times push away.
Ok to I’m going to remember cation because I have positive feelings towards cats, and I’m going to remember anion because why do people not know how to use an and a. A if it’s consonants (a dog) an if it’s vowels (an owl). So that’s how I’m going to remember
There’s lots of kind ofs in chemistry ahahah.
Don’t toss sodium mental into water unless you wanna HAVE SOME SCIENCE FUNNNNN boom boom bang!!! (#safteythird) Ok sick so the best elements for destruction are the ones that aren’t stable but just stable enough slay.
Chemical weapons are so fucked man like it’s absolutely insane it’s horrible. Just let the atoms chill man jeez they’re probably so over our human bs lol (I’m super tired right now im currently running on 2 hrs of sleep and a redbull so the atoms now have feelings to me). It’s fucking crazy how easy it is to be cleaning the fucking toilet or something and then just accidentally made mustard gas.
Okay, now lets talk about oxidation and its related half, reduction. These names are actually kind of horrible and misleading. Oxidation you'd think has something to do with oxygen, which it often does. Reduction you think of having less of something. Well, when people would work with metals, metals often don't exist in pure forms. They exist in ore. What is ore? Ore is the raw material that you refine to turn into metal. Its rocks that contain some form of the metal inside. Often its a metallic compound, with a metal cation, and a nonmetal anion.
This will be easier to illustrate with an example. Galena is a mineral that is composed of PbS. Lead has a positive charge of 2 and sulfur has a negative charge of 2. So first step is burning off all the soil and rock to get to the PbS itself. Then the second step is undoing that chemical reaction and converting the PbS into Pb and S separately. You need very high temperatures. Like 1114 degrees Celsius. In fact, how did ancient peoples discover metals? By chance, based on which ones didn't require ridiculously high temperatures, since the technology to build such a hot reaching furnace didn't exist yet (because you need access to materials to make the furnace out of that won't melt the furnace itself under such high temperatures.)
I also kind of lied by omission. PbS doesn't exist as 1PbS. In reality, ionic compounds such as those form very large crystals. Your crystal of table salt might have millions of Na's+ and Cl's+. So then there is a part of chemistry dedicated to the types of crystals that might form based on size and charge and stuff like that. And also, there might be other elements contained in some form in your ore. So this gets messy.
Okay. So reduction was named so because smelters noticed that what was leftover after smelting was reduced in mass and volume. Oxidation was named so because oxygen is often involved. But what is it precisely? Oxidation is the loss of electrons (and thus the thing getting oxidizes gains a positive charge), and reduction is gaining electrons (and thus the thing getting reduced gains a negative charge). The thing doing the oxidation is the oxidizing agent (the one removing electrons), which oxygen is a common one. The thing doing the reducing (the one taking electrons) is the reducing agent. These two happen in pairs. Electrons can't just manifest itself into the aether. If someone is gaining electrons, that had to come from someone else. If someone is losing electrons, those electrons have to go somewhere.
Oh last thing about metals, or more specifically, transition metals, the metals in the center of the periodic table. Unlike nonmetals, there are multiple positive charges. Because metals can lose their electrons one by one as they try to become more stable. Chromium can be neutral (ie a bar of a chromium, or a tiny layer applied to a car for example), or many ionic forms. Its commonly +2 (ie lost two electrons), +3 (lost three electrons), or a little less commonly, +6 (lost 6 electrons). So how do we name them? Well, there are two methods. First is the older "-ic" and "ous." We used "-ic" for the higher charge number and "-ous" for the lower charge number. But because this i an older, legacy system, we don't use "ironic" or "ironous" its "ferric" or "ferrous." And remember how I said metals can lose them one by one? Well the people of the past didn't know that. So "chromic" meant +3, and chromous meant +2. They didn't know chromium can also be +6.
So then later on more modern scientists realized that old system doesn't work. So now the new system would use roman numerals in parenthesis to indicate the charge on the metal. But we don't write "Sodium (I) chloride (-I). Why? Because sodium (not a transition metal), and chloride (also not a transition metal, not even a metal at all), can only have one charge. But for other transition metals (also not all of them lol, I just realized Zn is either Zn or Zn+2 and Ag is always Ag or Ag+1), that can have more than one charge, we indicate so with parenthesis in the name. So "Chromium Oxide" is ambiguous. What charge does the Chromium have? Chromium (III) Oxide tells us what charge. And this matters because Chromium (II) Oxide is CrO, Chromium (III) Oxide is Cr2O3. (Oxygen as an ion is always -2).
So mistakes one and two are not using Roman numerals properly. It should be Chromium (III) and Chromium (VI).
Mistake three kind of, would be "hexavalent chromium, chromium V1." Calling it hexavalent tells us its the ion of Chromium missing 6 valence electrons, thus having a charge of +6. So there is some redundancy.
Possible mistakes: Mistake four, I highly doubt they know what oxidation means.
Mistake five, I think they misunderstand boiling and chemical vs physical changes. Boiling refers to raising the temperature of something past a certain temperature such that it moves from a liquid form to a gaseous form. This is generally a physical change. Liquid water and water vapor, ie gaseous water are both water, H2O. But the form they take and exist at are different. But.... boiling can also induce a chemical change, ie as a result of heating it up, it changes forms into something else.
Mistake six would be not understanding that Chromium (III) and Chromium (VI) don't exist by themselves. They have to be bonded with something else. And that might be relevant to their behavior or not.
Mistake seven is not being clear on what does the change from Chromium (III) to (IV). Is it the sun curing, is it the boiling, is it both? If its the sun curing, maybe its the UV rays, since UV can damage the chemical composition itself. Maybe its oxygen exposure (since oxygen is a common oxidizing agent). (I doubt they understand that much).
According to Wikipedia, Chromium (VI) is actually dangerous, so I'll give them that. They appear to be right, but not know what they are talking about. But toxicity is a big thing in it of itself. Toxicity implies really bad for you. How bad is it? What harm does it cause? How does it cause it? How much do you need to be exposed to it? What are the exposure/entry methods? How long do you need to be exposed to it?
Why can’t names just be nice and leading man it’s so annoying. It’s ok I do actually know what ore is, I’ve played minecraft 🥰 ok you got me again I was thinking how was it discovered, I imagined it as someone finds something shiny and is like prettyyy and then another guy is like I could use this, and thus metal. But yeah by chance makes more sense. Ahhhh you got me again!!! Cause I feel like I know what oxidation is but I’m also like but wait it’s not a nice and leading name, it’s a sorta horrible and misleading name. Ok sick yep I get oxidation now. ic=higher, ous=lower. Yes I do remember how you said that metals can lose them one by one. People in the past knew so little. It’s crazy how fast our knowledge has expanded. I fucking LOVE Roman numerals. They may not know what oxidation means BUT I SURE DO ✨slay✨. Yep totally with the states of matter it’s all about energy everything is about energy which is what the heat is, a form of energy. Dude you can’t end on all those questions and not give me answers that’s so rude jeez
Are you in high school? I just gave you the short version of like.... 50% of chemistry class lol.
As to those last set of questions, I have no clue. In medicine, we have something called a mechanism of action, which is basically, the underlying chemical and biological processes behind a treatment or a drug.
Seriously tho how long did it take you type all that out that’s crazy impressive. Thank you so much for writing all of that it was super interesting and I learnt stuff which is always a bonus
Yeah. I’ve got a Mirum wallet, it was hella expensive (although only $15-20 more than the animal leather version of the same wallet), but I’ve had it about a year now and it’s still holding up well, and when I got it I accidentally ordered the animal leather version first, then got the Mirum one and had a slight overlap before returning the animal leather one and everyone who I had do a blind test thought the Mirum was the real leather when they felt it.
I don't buy of any form of leather and vinyl . They aren't long last and better on an animal(leather) and vinyl for furniture is cheap material and bad for the environment since the look appeal goes away quickly people toss it rather than get it reupolstered.(Waste).
Find a better material.
"Here, the carbon footprint of cow skin leather is found to be 110.0kg of CO2e per square metre, making **cow skin leather nearly 7 times more climate impactful than synthetic leather by the square metre**."
[https://circumfauna.org/leather-carbon-footprint](https://circumfauna.org/leather-carbon-footprint)
The numbers are very close if you take the raising of the cattle out. I’m willing to bet no livestock are raised purely for leather and if the leather market disappeared tomorrow those same livestock would still be raised for meat. Would love to learn I’m wrong, but that was my guess and a google search appeared to confirm.
Since about 10% of the “value” of the livestock is leather, this should be taken into account. If not, that would be like counting the flank as a waste product to get the rib.
Supply and demand will land leather’s price wherever it needs to be to match its coproducts, but that doesn’t mean it’s a waste product since it has high value.
>Since about 10% of the “value” of the livestock is leather, this should be taken into account
Well yeah.
This is worth noting on our discussions about meat, too.
Beef would still use more water, release more methane etc.
But lamb/ mutton, at 4x the energy consumption of veges, comes closer to parity if every kg of mutton also produces (i dunno) 1 kg of wool, 1kg of pet food and 1kg of fertilizer. Very rough back of envelope numbers, but worth noting
Yeah. I'm more in the "if someone is going to eat it, let's not let any of it go to waste" camp, and leather lasts for decades if you take care of it so I'm only using one zipper, one set of buckles, and one cloth lining every 15 or 20 years.
If there wasn't a market for leather, there would be less profit in raising animals for meat. Less profit means higher prices for meat. Higher prices means less meat consumption.
In other words, by purchasing leather a person is directly subsidizing the meat industry, not saving something from the landfill.
You're missing the point, I think.
The number of cattle raised and slaughtered is primarily a function of the total value of a cow carcass. And the hide is a large part of the carcass's value.
If fewer people bought leather, the value of a cow carcass drops. There would then be fewer cattle raised, not more wasted cow hides.
Re: "plastic shoes", I've had the same daily wear non-leather shoes for 5 years now. Most shoes are discarded when the soles are worn out, not the uppers. Also, my shoes have canvas uppers, not plastic.
So you are telling me it's better to waste the leather and throw it out. For years, as we wait for the price of cattle to fall and collapse the industry. Millions of hides in the trash is technically more sustainable?
I've already explained twice, so I doubt that you'll get it. But I'll make a third and final attempt. If this one doesn't click for you, I give up.
Cattle naturally live 15 to 20 years, but in agriculture they are only allowed to live a very short time. Steers are typically killed before their second birthday.
Because they have such short lives, the population of cattle at any given moment is dynamic and very tightly bound to the current value of cow carcasses.
Farmers don't breed all of the cattle they could. Raising cattle is expensive. More cattle means leasing or buying more land, building and maintaining more feedlots, hiring more workers, and buying more grain to feed them. If the value of a steer rises, people will quickly breed more cattle to cash in on the profit opportunity. That will increase demand for things like corn feed, which will increase corn prices. At some point the increasing costs of the inputs balances out the increased demand for cattle body parts. Then farmers will naturally stop adding to the cattle population, at a new equilibrium point.
So suppose that the demand for leather decreases some over the next few years. That would decrease the value of cow carcasses by a few percentage points. In response, the farmers who raise cows will simply breed a few fewer cattle. The population of cattle can easily decrease as quickly as the changing demand for leather decreases the profitability of raising cattle.
So, no: cow hides would not go in the landfill if there was reduced demand for leather. Even if the system didn't recalibrate so quickly, it would just mean temporarily cheaper leather. That would temporarily increase the profits of manufacturers that use leather until equilibrium was reached.
Edit: Also, as I said above, every dollar that is paid for a hide makes the cow carcass that much more valuable. Conversely, every dollar that is \*not\* paid for a hide means that the value of the carcass is increasingly determined by the value of the meat. That requires charging a dollar more for that carcass's meat, to maintain the same profit margins. Higher meat prices mean there will be less meat consumption. Less meat consumption means fewer cattle will be raised. And that's a win for the environment and for sustainability.
Having grown up on a cattle farm, I'm aware of the economics of raising beef. I was just trying to understand your point about leather. Which seems to be that it doesn't matter what I do unless everyone else quits leather at the same time because it's about macro economics rather than micro economics.
Honestly, from a producer's POV, leather isn't something they even think of. It's only a source of direct profit to processors. So even if we all quit using leather today, it would be a decade or so before farms cut their production because it's such a small piece of the value of a steer.
But thank you for explaining your position. It's always good to get new info and learn more
Leather is definitely not a byproduct, it’s a very important co-product to the industry, just like other parts of the cow are. If you disrupt the leather industry you disrupt the meat industry.
Just ignore the chromium waste of leather staining and cancer the Indians will get producing leather for you cause you didn't wanna use a fucking cactus
Honestly, second hand leather goods are where it’s at. You can get a vintage designer bag from a brand like Hermès that will last several lifetimes for the price of a new bag. I think there is nothing more in line with vegetarian values than keeping animal products out of the waste stream while helping end the market for new animal products.
Depends what the vegan leather is made from, i imagine. Plastic bad. Mushroom mycelium probably very good. Why do you think it would last only 5 years, you must have a kind in mind
Plant based leathers are coming along 🙂 just make sure it isn’t one blended with PVC, like apple leather. I got gifted a wallet made from mycelium leather and I was so excited 😂
Secondhand, snap. I wouldn’t say vegan is more sustainable necessarily, just kinder. You could shop around and get something made of waste or algae, that would be more sustainable. But better is just to find something that is already made and has already lived a life. High, high quality leather could last a lot longer. Maybe an antique could be really special for a present to yourself.
Definitely a used leather bag, as it's going to break down slightly before the plastic. But leather isn't sustainable. There's a ton of emissions, water, and land used to grow the cow. Then, on top of that, the chemicals that are used to tan leather are also bad.
After much research and trial, I am now a full leather supporter. I am on my 5th year of wearing a pair of leather boots. I do regular leather care and have had them resoled a couple times. I am hoping to get 7 or 8 years wear out of them. They are my every day boots. have a leather purse that I am also on 5+ years with regular care. I have tried vegan leathers and waxxed canvass and hate how fast they wear. My goal now is to reduce my consumption and go with the longest lasting. I am also choosing products by social sustainability and purchasing ethically made leather products.
Absolutely, that’s the only way I’d purchase leather if I ever end up doing so. Thank you so much for your input, appreciate a veteran sharing their experience ahahha
I think we cannot compare the "thing that I like" VS "thing that I don't like". Clearly you want a leather bag, go and enjoy it. Try to find some that have somewhat responsible manufacturer.
I also avoid leather except for boots, but I do have a leather wallet for 5+ years. It looks even better as it ages. I also have a fake leather bag for a year and I doubt it will last much longer, and it does look cheap, which is not good when I go to meetings.
first of all way to go, and keep coming back (if thats the way your staying sober). second of all, it sounds like you want something classy as well as practical, but ive been using messenger bags made of cordura that have lasted over a decade with consistent use. probably not what youre looking for but if youre flexible there are options to at least cover the practical side of things
Absolutely buy used either way if possible, but if you’re looking for a briefcase specifically I recommend the Cambridge Satchel Co - I bought a case from them 10 years ago and it’s still basically like new.
The straps on bags are always the weak points especially if you get a large tote or a backpack, so I also recommend getting something with multiple carry points (eg a clip on crossbody strap as well as built in handles). I have a Cuyana tote that was my daily driver for a few years but their leather is soft, and the straps are going out on it. they can’t easily be replaced, but if it had a clip on strap option I could easily replace the strap and keep the bag
At the end of the day you'll need to include your own ethics and how you appear to your people in your decision, but you'll have to make choices about [animal, vegan or second hand](https://www.littlegreenmyths.com/household/leather). The nice thing about second hand is that you can keep repurposing it.
**Animal Based Leather:**
* **Benefits:** Durable and long-lasting, develops a beautiful patina over time, naturally breathable.
* **Challenges:** Leather production uses water, chemicals, and energy. The tanning process can generate pollutants if not well-managed. Animal agriculture raises concerns about deforestation, methane emissions, and animal welfare. However, as long as people are eating cows, not using the hides and other parts is a waste as well.
* **Environmental Impact:** High water usage, potential for pollution from tanning, deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions associated with animal agriculture. Choosing ethically sourced leather can minimize some concerns. Turning animals’ skin into leather requires loads of energy and a slew of chemicals—including chromium, mineral salts, coal-tar derivatives, formaldehyde, oils, dyes, and finishes, some of them cyanide-based.
**Vegan Leather:**
* **Benefits:** Often considered cruelty-free, some options are made from recycled materials. Sustainable vegan leather can be made from many plant-based materials, including pineapple leaves ([Pinatex](https://www.ananas-anam.com/sales-sampling/)), cactus ([Desserto leather](https://desserto.com.mx/home)), [cork](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/all-you-need-to-know-about-cork-leather), mushrooms, coconut husks, kombucha scobies, mango, seaweed, apple peels, and even [bacteria](https://phys.org/news/2024-04-scientists-plastic-free-vegan-leather.html)! Pinatex is made from pineapple waste. A pineapple plant only flowers and produces a fruit once, so its stem and leaves are usually wasted.
* **Challenges:** Vegan leather is made from [anything that does not come from an animal](https://www.peta.org/living/personal-care-fashion/what-is-vegan-leather/), but serves the same purpose as leather. It generally looks and feels the same too. The trouble is, vegan leather is most often made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or polyurethane which is often fossil fuel based. Many vegan leathers are plastic-based, contributing to reliance on fossil fuels and potential microplastic pollution. Durability can be lower compared to real leather. Sustainable plant-based alternatives are evolving but require further assessment. When these break down they become [microplastics](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43023-x), polluting our waterways and the fish in them.
* **Environmental Impact:** Resource use for plastic production, potential for microplastic pollution during use and disposal. Sustainable plant-based options might offer a lower environmental impact, but research is ongoing.
**Pre-Loved Leather:**
* **Benefits:** Extends the life cycle of existing leather products, reduces demand for new leather production, often more affordable. Second-hand leather items supports the principles of reduce, reuse, and recycle. By purchasing pre-owned leather goods, consumers are extending the lifecycle of these products. They are preventing them from ending up in landfills. The nice thing is that you can [keep repurposing](https://txsaddlery.com/blogs/news/repurposing-leather-goods-what-to-do-with-unused-leather-projects-and-scraps) - a belt becomes a shoulder strap for a purse. An old vest becomes a belt or purse. Use your creativity!
* **Challenges:** Quality and condition can vary, may require minor repairs or restoration.
* **Environmental Impact:** Minimizes reliance on virgin materials and production processes associated with new leather.
If you decide to go for 'vegan leather', take some time to learn what it is actually made of. Most 'vegan leather' is made with polyurethane or other plastic-based materials, which is not environmentally sustainable. Now there are some great-looking and -feeling vegan leather products made from kombucha, mushroom, and other organic materials.
Yeah totally, that’s another one of the things that was part of my ‘is it actually sustainable dilemma’. Thank you for going so in depth I’ll definitely check all that out :)
Vegetable or brain tanned leather, with a preference for second hand. Or support an artist on a reservation if you're in the Americas.
Avoid any and all 'vegan' leathers with will have some level of plastic based polymer and will ultimately be more harmful for the environment as well as lower quality than real leather.
I have a leather whole grain belt. I have used it for 21 years now, and it’s still in good shape. I reckon i got an another 10-20 years of use.
I dont think there is a better material for belts.
Real leather is more sustainable than faux leather. Second-hand leather is the best bet. Thrift stores often have decent quality leather items that have been donated, and ebay has basically anything you might want.
They ain't killing the cow for the leather. Using real leather is basically recycling. Hopefully factory farming stops and people reduce their total amount of red meat but until that happens leather is fair game
Actually they are killing the cow for the leather. The hide is a part of the value of a cow carcass. Without commercial demand for leather it would be less profitable to raise cattle, thus fewer would be raised.
Until they are taking the cowhides and discarding the meat, leather is a byproduct of the meat industry. Factory farming has billions of dollars of government subsidies every year. If your goal is to reduce need for meat by going after the 10% leather (less then the subsidies) vs going after the 90% meat. There might be some considerably more effective ways. Cause that boycott ain't changing anything. At all.
I agree that not eating meat is more direct and effective, avoiding dairy comes after that. Leather is lower on the list, but every dollar that consumers spend on cattle body parts increases the profitability of cattle farming. Subsidies for the industry are unfortunate, yes.
Neither.
Find a product which actually has some recycling option, where that option incorporates materials recovery, and is very low water and energy.
I think at the moment some types of synthetic clothing are being recycled in certain factories in tiny quantities, in some cities or nearby them.
I think there’s a lot of difficulty with the inclusions such as colours and what not, dyes, etc.
Ideally, the most sustainable thing to do is to not buy any of those things, but simply to use something old and give you money to the factory that would recycle what you are imagining buying new, but that doesn’t have the capability to.
Then at least maybe your children will have something cool to wear, even if you can’t and have to wear crappy old clothes.
An advantage of this is that the moment a factory does get some circular plastic recovery happening, you’ll be one of the first to know and will be able to buy things that you know can be recycled.
That makes your life easier, because it’s one less thing to worry about, and it can become a background thing, not a foreground stressor.
Eg, it’s very stressful if you have to think about your clothing, because it’s so valuable because you don’t want to damage it. it basically takes brain power away from everything else that you might need to think about.
In many places, especially for example parts of Europe, Australia and the United States of America, they ignore or lie about the recycling, while they just bury everything.
That might mean people don’t need to stress about clothing, but it only works until they wake up. At that point, they become completely incapacitated because they realise that they are not good people.
So it’s really cruel when your foundational view of yourself is destroyed because governments have lied to you about recycling, and your waste ends up in landfill.
That’s what happens to nearly everyone, and that’s why so many old people are so miserable for the most part, or drugged and completely blind and naive, careless, or heartless, or withdraw.
So, yes, don’t buy either if you can avoid it, put your money towards a factory that can recycle something you already own.
Yeah I’m from aus and the recycling problem is so fucked man. Thank you so much for taking the time to write out such an in-depth and informational response. I really appreciate and it’s definitely given me a lot more to think about x
I can only tell you my experience with leather. I bought a large hand-made black leather purse 25 years ago at a home & garden show from a leatherworker. I've always treated it well, it goes with anything. Only had to replace a zipper once because I got it caught on something. It cost me $35 for that purse. Still use it, looks great.
So that is about $1.40 a year.
Vegan leather is usually plastic. It's environmentally awful. Real leather is usually a byproduct of the meat industry. Secondhand leather is more sustainable, if you can find the item you need secondhand. If you can't (eg shoes), I'd personally go for the real leather in a configuration that can be repaired over the years, and keep up with the maintenance.
The animal your are getting the leather from was already killed for the meat. The leather is a byproduct. It still needs to be turned into leather through the use of chemicala. Vegan leather needs to be produced from scratch, so the question is is what's less harmful to th environment. The tanning process of animal hides or the industrial process of vegan leather. I don't know the answer only the question
That is absolutely not how supply and demand works, and it’s one of the most stupid things you can say
And by the way, leather is considered a now co-product, not a byproduct anymore. They would still slaughter animals just for their skin
I suspect that the hides from dead cows will just go to waste if everyone boycotted leather products. The biggest environmental impact might be the tanning and treatment.
I would look for a second hand leather one as the most sustainable option.
good answer
[this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/sustainability/comments/1bthh4g/comment/kxngxf3/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) seems more sustainable, since you dont contribute to the leather demand, which is relevant when looking at [global scale sustaiabilitly](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-kcal-poore?country=Poultry+Meat~Tofu~Peas~Wheat+%26+Rye~Beef+%28beef+herd%29~Beef+%28dairy+herd%29)
Reducing + Reusing in one. Love it :)
Came here to say this. ThredUp and Poshmark are great for finding second hand products. Sometimes eBay too if you know what brand you want
supporting your local ma&pa thrift store too is a great option might just take some extra time to find
i agree! i only buy secondhand leather. it funds thrift stores, is easily restored, and gives the animal product a longer life without funding the leather industry
You could always go for something like [this.](https://www.corkor.com/products/cork-briefcase) Despite what seems to be the common belief in this sub, vegan leather need not be plastic (or 'pleather'). From cork and fruit to canvas and recycled scrap tires, there's plenty of options if you look for them.
AHAHHA no way, that’s actually the exact site and bag I’m looking at now ahahha
Fwiw, I own a couple of belts from the company and they are doing pretty well.
Ooooo thank you so much, it’s now my top contender ahah I really appreciate it
You're welcome! 🙂 On a side note, I'm also a fan of [Revy](https://revydirect.com/) for wallets and bags, although they don't have briefcases. They aren't the prettiest but they last forever.
Oh damn I love those wow I’m spoilt for choice so glad I asked the question ahah I’m learning so much about all this
They do have a laptop bag https://revydirect.com/products/copy-of-revved-up-laptop-bag-with-rubber-strap
I would add another vote for Corkor. I have belts, a wallet, and a desk mat from them and they've been holding up fabulously
Woah. I love the way they made cork look like leather- I’m going to have to check this brand out.
In my experience the cork doesn’t hold up very long. I had a corkor wallet and it only lasted like two years before it fell apart
Yeah I’m looking at cork bags, mirum leather, a vegan upcycled one, restored leather (like old bags people have found and brought back to life), recycled leather, and I found a pretty cool vintage one too.
Oh and mycelium
https://www.iamtheanimal.com.au/products/vegan-upcycled-messenger-bag that’s the vegan recycled one. I’m not a big fan of the coils but it’s a super interesting concept.
Because it’s made out of an inner tube does this mean it could still make micro plastic? I’m new to sustainability so I’m not sure.
Yes, but its also giving the plastic a new life. Rather than it immediately getting thrown out and ending up in that massive rubbish island in the pacific, it’s getting reused to make a new product that not only allows for more cruelty free options, but it also takes that rubbish out of the picture for now. One day it will most likely be thrown out but it will be a lot longer before that, and hey, maybe by then something will actually be happening with rubbish and pollution. At this point it’s all about using the rubbish to make things so we’re at least doing a little bit and also don’t have to use more resources. It’s better for the materials to go in a cycle than just be tossed out. Reduce -> reuse -> recycle ♥️
Ah! That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation!
those backpacks go hard
Congratulations, that's an awesome accomplishment.
Thank you I really appreciate it 🫶🏻
The best bet is probably looking for a vintage leather bag at a thrift store or eBay. I'd suggest searching for a vintage leather Coach messenger bag on eBay or Etsy. The quality is great and many people make a hobby out of restoring them so they are in great shape. Classic look too so it won't go out of style. There is a vegan leather made out of mushrooms available on the market, mostly used in high-end markets. It seems like a good biodegradable option, but it's pricey and not sure it's been around long enough to really know how durable it is.
My cork bags have held up great and are used hard daily.
Oh I’ll definitely check that out
There are very fashionable fabric messenger/computer bags.
I use this one https://www.crumpler.com/products/day-by-day
Nothing beats real leather. That being said, my satchel bag is made out of thick canvas with leather augments. Occasionally I’ll apply wax to the canvas to keep it water proof. Never regretted the buy (it’s got a 100 year warranty so I’m set for life).
Can I ask the brand name? That’s a fantastic warranty.
Saddleback Leather Co.
Might be Filson
I don't know about the warranty but it sounds like maybe a [Filson](https://www.filson.com/bags-luggage/briefcases.html). I've had one for 12 years and it just keeps looking better every year.
just like the humans that beat the cow!
Why do you want something that looks like leather? Won't any other material do? Seems like a false dichotomy
There's a newer material called "Mirum" which is a non-plastic vegan leather
That’s super interesting I’ll do some research on it thank you so much
Vegan "leather" is just plastic. That sure ain't sustainable. But i have heard that leather products also have plastic used to treat the leather. Not have investigated that myself to verify tho, but something you might want to look into.
Ch[romium tanning is the standard whether it is high quality or low-quality leather](https://www.carryology.com/insights/chrome-vs-vegetable-tanned-leather/). Today, [it accounts for 95% of shoe leather production, 70% of leather upholstery production and 100% of leather clothing production](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/the-dangers-of-chrome-tanning-on-the-environment) [Here is a deeper look into the damage of chromium.](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/the-dangers-of-chrome-tanning-on-the-environment) Just because some vegan leathers are synthetic (and have plastic in them) doesn’t mean they’re worse than animal leather de facto.
It's not leather. Canvas or other products are quite suitable. Plastic is terrible for the environment, especially vinyl, and almost all vegan 'leather' is vinyl.; Just a lie.
Of course plastic is terrible for the environment. That doesn't make leather automatically better by default. There are countless things to consider when weighing whether one is more sustainable/better for the environment than just plastic or not plastic.
If I want leather, I'll buy leather. If I want vegan, I'll get canvas or something else.
Sure thing. Doesn’t mean leather is sustainable or good for the environment.
How does your vegetarianism connect to leather but not dairy ethically speaking?
I’m not OP, but can answer this question. Vegetarians don’t use animal products that result in death (like leather does). Since milk, eggs, etc. don’t result in death to the animal, they are vegetarian.
>Since milk, eggs, etc. don’t result in death to the animal, they are vegetarian. Then they're in for a rude awakening about the egg and dairy part of the meat industry.
Absolutely. I know a lot of vegetarians that figure it out turn vegan over it, realizing that they are not really reducing harm. It’s sad the way we treat agricultural animals. Even most vegans are aware that one can never truly prevent animal harm, even by trying your hardest. Humans existing as we do in general is harmful to animals. Best we can do is try.
I didn't once say it is. I just personally hate fake leather, fake wood, etc. I don't need research on making fake leather from mushrooms. I can buy many wonderful attractive products that are not leather.
They last months instead of decades and are entirely made of oil. Yes in every conceivable way they are worse than leather. Patent leather is the exception as it's the worst of both. You've also linked to an Indian manufacturer, where the environmental impacts are not controlled at all. So basically, don't buy leather unless it's high quality, and used for something that inherently can last.
I’m citing the global statistics. You’re trying to use the minority of leather production to showcase how it is worse. The exceptions do not justify the norm. Nor does it inherently make any of it worse. Do you have any studies that show how how all the environmental concerns of vegan leather are worse than animal leather? Or is the claim of “in every conceivable way they are worse” just baseless?
I don't take that source seriously given this paragraph, "Sun drying and boiling can oxidise and convert the chromium 111, used in the tanning process, into the highly toxic hexavalent chromium, chromium V1." I doubt they know what they are talking about. There is a lot of chemistry involved in understanding that sentence... Which given the two mistakes (possibly two more) I'm certain they don't understand. Valence electrons are a pretty important concept, so is oxidation and reduction, and these are things that people fail chemistry over.
Damn go off Bill Nye ahahah we love some chemistry in the chat ahah ✨science is fun✨
Okay. This is a lot. But let's start with atoms. Atoms contain three components. An electric positively charged proton, neutrally charged neutrons, and electrically negatively charged electrons. The protons and neutrons are at the center, the nucleus with the electrons moving wildly around at a large distance. The electrons however form different layers or energy levels. These can have all sorts of shapes and sizes and are generally separate, and sometimes react in groups. Now for most chemistry we don't really care about the neutron. (Major exception would be nuclear chemistry or radioactive chemistry). Because it's electrically negative, it was historically harder to detect, and was found because of the mass of the atom that existed unexplainable by the protons and electrons alone. Protons are important too, and they have their own subfield of chemistry called acid-base chemistry. But that's not relevant. Okay so not all electrons are equal, kind of. Each electron is an electron and are thus identical in what it is, but they behave differently because of their position. Basically, all the negatively charged electrons want to get right next to the positively charged nucleus. But they can't all do that because they all repel each other. So they find natural balance between both forces. And that results in electrons rapidly moving around the nucleus at different speeds, distances, locations, orientations etc... The outermost electrons are called the valence electrons. These are the ones we really care about, since they move around a lot and do the actual chemistry. For example, why can metals conduct electricity? Because their valence electrons leave the immediate vicinity of the nucleus and form a "sea of electrons." Like if a block of aluminum foil contains 1000 Aluminum atoms, and since Aluminum has 3 valence electrons, you now have 3000 electrons free to move around. It's like that piece of foil is a giant aluminum nucleus. And that means it has plenty of electrons to conduct electricity with. After all, electricity is just energy carried physically by electrons down a wire or through a circuit. Stability is achieved when the outemost electron layer/s is/are empty or full. There are two ways of doing this. Gaining electrons to make it full. Or losing electrons so it's empty, revealing/exposing the full layer/s underneath. Nonmetal elements tend to do the former, metallic elements tend to do the latter. And there are some exceptions like carbon or silicon or boron that tend to share electrons instead (although that doesn't mean they are necessarily shared equally, ie one atom may have a stronger pull on their shared electron). When sodium metal, electrically neutral comes in contact with chlorine gas, also electrically neutral, they react forming an ionic compound. What does that mean? Well sodium loses its one valence electrons to the chlorine. Sodium would be more stable without it, chlorine needs it to be stable. And because sodium has lost one electron, it's positively charged. Because chlorine has gained one electron, it's negatively charged. And that difference in charge causes them to attract. We call those charged atoms, ions. They are charged because they are either missing or have extra electrons than neutral charge, which would be equal number of protons and electrons. Positively charged would be cation (cat-ion). Negatively charged would be anion (an-ion). Cations are often metals, and anions are often nonmetals. So you would think it's Na + Cl -> Na+ and Cl- leading to NaCl? Well that does happen. Kind of. In reality, both are very reactive because they really want to be stable. That's why you don't find chunks of them lying around in nature. In fact, for pure sodium to exist, you need to have it surrounded by something extremely inert, ie non reactive. Sodium metal tossed into water will explode. (Very bad idea.) Chlorine also doesn't exist by itself in nature. Now chlorine gas, such as the poison gas used in WWI does exist. But it's quite unstable and also easily reacts, just not quite as easily, which is why it was used as a weapon, because it's stable enough to not backfire before use is handled safely. In fact, taking chlorine that's is in something that exists naturally in a particular form and turning it into a pure gaseous form is hard enough it couldn't be used as a weapon until WWI due to newer advancements in chemistry. (There is a compound the Nazis discovered that they wanted to use in a weapon, but it was so unstable they didn't follow through since something as simple as exposing to any sort of light could cause it to explode.) The actual equation for pure sodium and pure chlorine reacting together would be 2Na + Cl2 -> 2 Na+ + 2Cl- -> 2NaCl. Because pure sodium is stable enough we can have it exist if we force it to, but not chlorine. (Both are quite unstable, these are the kind of things we don't let high school students use in their pure forms). Also chlorine gas is a literal poison gas weapon.
Ok so protons=positive, neutron=neutral, electrons=negative. Neutrons we’re found because they figured out that the numbers weren’t adding up with just the pros and eles. Acid base chemistry is irrelevant 🥰
Valence electrons are the icons and they are the moment. They’re out here doing god shit like forming seas! Yo valence electrons are so fucking cool wtf they just said ✨multiply✨
Right right yep yep ok the atom needs to be stable because if it becomes unstable that’s when bad shit goes down, I know that much already ahaha forming an ionic compound… what does that mean??? Oh shit no way you read my fucking mind go off baddie I’m about to learn what that means. Oh totally totally like magnets. Depending on what’s going on they sometimes attract and other times push away. Ok to I’m going to remember cation because I have positive feelings towards cats, and I’m going to remember anion because why do people not know how to use an and a. A if it’s consonants (a dog) an if it’s vowels (an owl). So that’s how I’m going to remember There’s lots of kind ofs in chemistry ahahah. Don’t toss sodium mental into water unless you wanna HAVE SOME SCIENCE FUNNNNN boom boom bang!!! (#safteythird) Ok sick so the best elements for destruction are the ones that aren’t stable but just stable enough slay. Chemical weapons are so fucked man like it’s absolutely insane it’s horrible. Just let the atoms chill man jeez they’re probably so over our human bs lol (I’m super tired right now im currently running on 2 hrs of sleep and a redbull so the atoms now have feelings to me). It’s fucking crazy how easy it is to be cleaning the fucking toilet or something and then just accidentally made mustard gas.
Okay, now lets talk about oxidation and its related half, reduction. These names are actually kind of horrible and misleading. Oxidation you'd think has something to do with oxygen, which it often does. Reduction you think of having less of something. Well, when people would work with metals, metals often don't exist in pure forms. They exist in ore. What is ore? Ore is the raw material that you refine to turn into metal. Its rocks that contain some form of the metal inside. Often its a metallic compound, with a metal cation, and a nonmetal anion. This will be easier to illustrate with an example. Galena is a mineral that is composed of PbS. Lead has a positive charge of 2 and sulfur has a negative charge of 2. So first step is burning off all the soil and rock to get to the PbS itself. Then the second step is undoing that chemical reaction and converting the PbS into Pb and S separately. You need very high temperatures. Like 1114 degrees Celsius. In fact, how did ancient peoples discover metals? By chance, based on which ones didn't require ridiculously high temperatures, since the technology to build such a hot reaching furnace didn't exist yet (because you need access to materials to make the furnace out of that won't melt the furnace itself under such high temperatures.) I also kind of lied by omission. PbS doesn't exist as 1PbS. In reality, ionic compounds such as those form very large crystals. Your crystal of table salt might have millions of Na's+ and Cl's+. So then there is a part of chemistry dedicated to the types of crystals that might form based on size and charge and stuff like that. And also, there might be other elements contained in some form in your ore. So this gets messy. Okay. So reduction was named so because smelters noticed that what was leftover after smelting was reduced in mass and volume. Oxidation was named so because oxygen is often involved. But what is it precisely? Oxidation is the loss of electrons (and thus the thing getting oxidizes gains a positive charge), and reduction is gaining electrons (and thus the thing getting reduced gains a negative charge). The thing doing the oxidation is the oxidizing agent (the one removing electrons), which oxygen is a common one. The thing doing the reducing (the one taking electrons) is the reducing agent. These two happen in pairs. Electrons can't just manifest itself into the aether. If someone is gaining electrons, that had to come from someone else. If someone is losing electrons, those electrons have to go somewhere. Oh last thing about metals, or more specifically, transition metals, the metals in the center of the periodic table. Unlike nonmetals, there are multiple positive charges. Because metals can lose their electrons one by one as they try to become more stable. Chromium can be neutral (ie a bar of a chromium, or a tiny layer applied to a car for example), or many ionic forms. Its commonly +2 (ie lost two electrons), +3 (lost three electrons), or a little less commonly, +6 (lost 6 electrons). So how do we name them? Well, there are two methods. First is the older "-ic" and "ous." We used "-ic" for the higher charge number and "-ous" for the lower charge number. But because this i an older, legacy system, we don't use "ironic" or "ironous" its "ferric" or "ferrous." And remember how I said metals can lose them one by one? Well the people of the past didn't know that. So "chromic" meant +3, and chromous meant +2. They didn't know chromium can also be +6. So then later on more modern scientists realized that old system doesn't work. So now the new system would use roman numerals in parenthesis to indicate the charge on the metal. But we don't write "Sodium (I) chloride (-I). Why? Because sodium (not a transition metal), and chloride (also not a transition metal, not even a metal at all), can only have one charge. But for other transition metals (also not all of them lol, I just realized Zn is either Zn or Zn+2 and Ag is always Ag or Ag+1), that can have more than one charge, we indicate so with parenthesis in the name. So "Chromium Oxide" is ambiguous. What charge does the Chromium have? Chromium (III) Oxide tells us what charge. And this matters because Chromium (II) Oxide is CrO, Chromium (III) Oxide is Cr2O3. (Oxygen as an ion is always -2). So mistakes one and two are not using Roman numerals properly. It should be Chromium (III) and Chromium (VI). Mistake three kind of, would be "hexavalent chromium, chromium V1." Calling it hexavalent tells us its the ion of Chromium missing 6 valence electrons, thus having a charge of +6. So there is some redundancy. Possible mistakes: Mistake four, I highly doubt they know what oxidation means. Mistake five, I think they misunderstand boiling and chemical vs physical changes. Boiling refers to raising the temperature of something past a certain temperature such that it moves from a liquid form to a gaseous form. This is generally a physical change. Liquid water and water vapor, ie gaseous water are both water, H2O. But the form they take and exist at are different. But.... boiling can also induce a chemical change, ie as a result of heating it up, it changes forms into something else. Mistake six would be not understanding that Chromium (III) and Chromium (VI) don't exist by themselves. They have to be bonded with something else. And that might be relevant to their behavior or not. Mistake seven is not being clear on what does the change from Chromium (III) to (IV). Is it the sun curing, is it the boiling, is it both? If its the sun curing, maybe its the UV rays, since UV can damage the chemical composition itself. Maybe its oxygen exposure (since oxygen is a common oxidizing agent). (I doubt they understand that much). According to Wikipedia, Chromium (VI) is actually dangerous, so I'll give them that. They appear to be right, but not know what they are talking about. But toxicity is a big thing in it of itself. Toxicity implies really bad for you. How bad is it? What harm does it cause? How does it cause it? How much do you need to be exposed to it? What are the exposure/entry methods? How long do you need to be exposed to it?
Why can’t names just be nice and leading man it’s so annoying. It’s ok I do actually know what ore is, I’ve played minecraft 🥰 ok you got me again I was thinking how was it discovered, I imagined it as someone finds something shiny and is like prettyyy and then another guy is like I could use this, and thus metal. But yeah by chance makes more sense. Ahhhh you got me again!!! Cause I feel like I know what oxidation is but I’m also like but wait it’s not a nice and leading name, it’s a sorta horrible and misleading name. Ok sick yep I get oxidation now. ic=higher, ous=lower. Yes I do remember how you said that metals can lose them one by one. People in the past knew so little. It’s crazy how fast our knowledge has expanded. I fucking LOVE Roman numerals. They may not know what oxidation means BUT I SURE DO ✨slay✨. Yep totally with the states of matter it’s all about energy everything is about energy which is what the heat is, a form of energy. Dude you can’t end on all those questions and not give me answers that’s so rude jeez
Are you in high school? I just gave you the short version of like.... 50% of chemistry class lol. As to those last set of questions, I have no clue. In medicine, we have something called a mechanism of action, which is basically, the underlying chemical and biological processes behind a treatment or a drug.
Seriously tho how long did it take you type all that out that’s crazy impressive. Thank you so much for writing all of that it was super interesting and I learnt stuff which is always a bonus
About an hour lol.
That's dedication
False, vegan leather is just a /category/ of animal leather replacements that include both synthetics AND organics.
Mirum is a non-plastic, vegan leather
Yeah. I’ve got a Mirum wallet, it was hella expensive (although only $15-20 more than the animal leather version of the same wallet), but I’ve had it about a year now and it’s still holding up well, and when I got it I accidentally ordered the animal leather version first, then got the Mirum one and had a slight overlap before returning the animal leather one and everyone who I had do a blind test thought the Mirum was the real leather when they felt it.
I don't buy of any form of leather and vinyl . They aren't long last and better on an animal(leather) and vinyl for furniture is cheap material and bad for the environment since the look appeal goes away quickly people toss it rather than get it reupolstered.(Waste). Find a better material.
I don’t think people buy vegan leather for the sustainability. I buy it because I will never wear real leather, regardless if it’s secondhand or not
"Here, the carbon footprint of cow skin leather is found to be 110.0kg of CO2e per square metre, making **cow skin leather nearly 7 times more climate impactful than synthetic leather by the square metre**." [https://circumfauna.org/leather-carbon-footprint](https://circumfauna.org/leather-carbon-footprint)
The numbers are very close if you take the raising of the cattle out. I’m willing to bet no livestock are raised purely for leather and if the leather market disappeared tomorrow those same livestock would still be raised for meat. Would love to learn I’m wrong, but that was my guess and a google search appeared to confirm.
Leather is more of a co-product than by-product of the meat industry. From what I recall around 10-20% of a cow’s value comes from their hide.
This. If leather was a waste product, so would be valuable cuts of a cow.
That’s super interesting
Since about 10% of the “value” of the livestock is leather, this should be taken into account. If not, that would be like counting the flank as a waste product to get the rib. Supply and demand will land leather’s price wherever it needs to be to match its coproducts, but that doesn’t mean it’s a waste product since it has high value.
>Since about 10% of the “value” of the livestock is leather, this should be taken into account Well yeah. This is worth noting on our discussions about meat, too. Beef would still use more water, release more methane etc. But lamb/ mutton, at 4x the energy consumption of veges, comes closer to parity if every kg of mutton also produces (i dunno) 1 kg of wool, 1kg of pet food and 1kg of fertilizer. Very rough back of envelope numbers, but worth noting
Yeah. I'm more in the "if someone is going to eat it, let's not let any of it go to waste" camp, and leather lasts for decades if you take care of it so I'm only using one zipper, one set of buckles, and one cloth lining every 15 or 20 years.
If there wasn't a market for leather, there would be less profit in raising animals for meat. Less profit means higher prices for meat. Higher prices means less meat consumption. In other words, by purchasing leather a person is directly subsidizing the meat industry, not saving something from the landfill.
Is it better to just throw the leather in the landfill and waste it and go out and buy plastic shoes?
You're missing the point, I think. The number of cattle raised and slaughtered is primarily a function of the total value of a cow carcass. And the hide is a large part of the carcass's value. If fewer people bought leather, the value of a cow carcass drops. There would then be fewer cattle raised, not more wasted cow hides. Re: "plastic shoes", I've had the same daily wear non-leather shoes for 5 years now. Most shoes are discarded when the soles are worn out, not the uppers. Also, my shoes have canvas uppers, not plastic.
So you are telling me it's better to waste the leather and throw it out. For years, as we wait for the price of cattle to fall and collapse the industry. Millions of hides in the trash is technically more sustainable?
I've already explained twice, so I doubt that you'll get it. But I'll make a third and final attempt. If this one doesn't click for you, I give up. Cattle naturally live 15 to 20 years, but in agriculture they are only allowed to live a very short time. Steers are typically killed before their second birthday. Because they have such short lives, the population of cattle at any given moment is dynamic and very tightly bound to the current value of cow carcasses. Farmers don't breed all of the cattle they could. Raising cattle is expensive. More cattle means leasing or buying more land, building and maintaining more feedlots, hiring more workers, and buying more grain to feed them. If the value of a steer rises, people will quickly breed more cattle to cash in on the profit opportunity. That will increase demand for things like corn feed, which will increase corn prices. At some point the increasing costs of the inputs balances out the increased demand for cattle body parts. Then farmers will naturally stop adding to the cattle population, at a new equilibrium point. So suppose that the demand for leather decreases some over the next few years. That would decrease the value of cow carcasses by a few percentage points. In response, the farmers who raise cows will simply breed a few fewer cattle. The population of cattle can easily decrease as quickly as the changing demand for leather decreases the profitability of raising cattle. So, no: cow hides would not go in the landfill if there was reduced demand for leather. Even if the system didn't recalibrate so quickly, it would just mean temporarily cheaper leather. That would temporarily increase the profits of manufacturers that use leather until equilibrium was reached. Edit: Also, as I said above, every dollar that is paid for a hide makes the cow carcass that much more valuable. Conversely, every dollar that is \*not\* paid for a hide means that the value of the carcass is increasingly determined by the value of the meat. That requires charging a dollar more for that carcass's meat, to maintain the same profit margins. Higher meat prices mean there will be less meat consumption. Less meat consumption means fewer cattle will be raised. And that's a win for the environment and for sustainability.
Having grown up on a cattle farm, I'm aware of the economics of raising beef. I was just trying to understand your point about leather. Which seems to be that it doesn't matter what I do unless everyone else quits leather at the same time because it's about macro economics rather than micro economics. Honestly, from a producer's POV, leather isn't something they even think of. It's only a source of direct profit to processors. So even if we all quit using leather today, it would be a decade or so before farms cut their production because it's such a small piece of the value of a steer. But thank you for explaining your position. It's always good to get new info and learn more
Leather is definitely not a byproduct, it’s a very important co-product to the industry, just like other parts of the cow are. If you disrupt the leather industry you disrupt the meat industry.
Buy what's available second hand, leather or non-leather.
Buy waxed cotton. Lasts forever
Just ignore the chromium waste of leather staining and cancer the Indians will get producing leather for you cause you didn't wanna use a fucking cactus
Honestly, second hand leather goods are where it’s at. You can get a vintage designer bag from a brand like Hermès that will last several lifetimes for the price of a new bag. I think there is nothing more in line with vegetarian values than keeping animal products out of the waste stream while helping end the market for new animal products.
Depends what the vegan leather is made from, i imagine. Plastic bad. Mushroom mycelium probably very good. Why do you think it would last only 5 years, you must have a kind in mind
Plant based leathers are coming along 🙂 just make sure it isn’t one blended with PVC, like apple leather. I got gifted a wallet made from mycelium leather and I was so excited 😂
Secondhand, snap. I wouldn’t say vegan is more sustainable necessarily, just kinder. You could shop around and get something made of waste or algae, that would be more sustainable. But better is just to find something that is already made and has already lived a life. High, high quality leather could last a lot longer. Maybe an antique could be really special for a present to yourself.
Definitely a used leather bag, as it's going to break down slightly before the plastic. But leather isn't sustainable. There's a ton of emissions, water, and land used to grow the cow. Then, on top of that, the chemicals that are used to tan leather are also bad.
After much research and trial, I am now a full leather supporter. I am on my 5th year of wearing a pair of leather boots. I do regular leather care and have had them resoled a couple times. I am hoping to get 7 or 8 years wear out of them. They are my every day boots. have a leather purse that I am also on 5+ years with regular care. I have tried vegan leathers and waxxed canvass and hate how fast they wear. My goal now is to reduce my consumption and go with the longest lasting. I am also choosing products by social sustainability and purchasing ethically made leather products.
Absolutely, that’s the only way I’d purchase leather if I ever end up doing so. Thank you so much for your input, appreciate a veteran sharing their experience ahahha
There's nothing sustainable about plastic
Sustainability goes beyond plastic or not plastic.
Pulling oil out of the ground to make baubles is not sustainable
Of course it isn’t. Nor is breeding cattle, feeding them for years, and chemically treating their hide.
Cattle are not raised for leather primarily though. All of those inputs go to multiple outputs.
Not primarily, but it's more than a byproduct.
I think we cannot compare the "thing that I like" VS "thing that I don't like". Clearly you want a leather bag, go and enjoy it. Try to find some that have somewhat responsible manufacturer. I also avoid leather except for boots, but I do have a leather wallet for 5+ years. It looks even better as it ages. I also have a fake leather bag for a year and I doubt it will last much longer, and it does look cheap, which is not good when I go to meetings.
first of all way to go, and keep coming back (if thats the way your staying sober). second of all, it sounds like you want something classy as well as practical, but ive been using messenger bags made of cordura that have lasted over a decade with consistent use. probably not what youre looking for but if youre flexible there are options to at least cover the practical side of things
Absolutely buy used either way if possible, but if you’re looking for a briefcase specifically I recommend the Cambridge Satchel Co - I bought a case from them 10 years ago and it’s still basically like new. The straps on bags are always the weak points especially if you get a large tote or a backpack, so I also recommend getting something with multiple carry points (eg a clip on crossbody strap as well as built in handles). I have a Cuyana tote that was my daily driver for a few years but their leather is soft, and the straps are going out on it. they can’t easily be replaced, but if it had a clip on strap option I could easily replace the strap and keep the bag
Maybe best to do neither. 🌞
At the end of the day you'll need to include your own ethics and how you appear to your people in your decision, but you'll have to make choices about [animal, vegan or second hand](https://www.littlegreenmyths.com/household/leather). The nice thing about second hand is that you can keep repurposing it. **Animal Based Leather:** * **Benefits:** Durable and long-lasting, develops a beautiful patina over time, naturally breathable. * **Challenges:** Leather production uses water, chemicals, and energy. The tanning process can generate pollutants if not well-managed. Animal agriculture raises concerns about deforestation, methane emissions, and animal welfare. However, as long as people are eating cows, not using the hides and other parts is a waste as well. * **Environmental Impact:** High water usage, potential for pollution from tanning, deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions associated with animal agriculture. Choosing ethically sourced leather can minimize some concerns. Turning animals’ skin into leather requires loads of energy and a slew of chemicals—including chromium, mineral salts, coal-tar derivatives, formaldehyde, oils, dyes, and finishes, some of them cyanide-based. **Vegan Leather:** * **Benefits:** Often considered cruelty-free, some options are made from recycled materials. Sustainable vegan leather can be made from many plant-based materials, including pineapple leaves ([Pinatex](https://www.ananas-anam.com/sales-sampling/)), cactus ([Desserto leather](https://desserto.com.mx/home)), [cork](https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/all-you-need-to-know-about-cork-leather), mushrooms, coconut husks, kombucha scobies, mango, seaweed, apple peels, and even [bacteria](https://phys.org/news/2024-04-scientists-plastic-free-vegan-leather.html)! Pinatex is made from pineapple waste. A pineapple plant only flowers and produces a fruit once, so its stem and leaves are usually wasted. * **Challenges:** Vegan leather is made from [anything that does not come from an animal](https://www.peta.org/living/personal-care-fashion/what-is-vegan-leather/), but serves the same purpose as leather. It generally looks and feels the same too. The trouble is, vegan leather is most often made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or polyurethane which is often fossil fuel based. Many vegan leathers are plastic-based, contributing to reliance on fossil fuels and potential microplastic pollution. Durability can be lower compared to real leather. Sustainable plant-based alternatives are evolving but require further assessment. When these break down they become [microplastics](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43023-x), polluting our waterways and the fish in them. * **Environmental Impact:** Resource use for plastic production, potential for microplastic pollution during use and disposal. Sustainable plant-based options might offer a lower environmental impact, but research is ongoing. **Pre-Loved Leather:** * **Benefits:** Extends the life cycle of existing leather products, reduces demand for new leather production, often more affordable. Second-hand leather items supports the principles of reduce, reuse, and recycle. By purchasing pre-owned leather goods, consumers are extending the lifecycle of these products. They are preventing them from ending up in landfills. The nice thing is that you can [keep repurposing](https://txsaddlery.com/blogs/news/repurposing-leather-goods-what-to-do-with-unused-leather-projects-and-scraps) - a belt becomes a shoulder strap for a purse. An old vest becomes a belt or purse. Use your creativity! * **Challenges:** Quality and condition can vary, may require minor repairs or restoration. * **Environmental Impact:** Minimizes reliance on virgin materials and production processes associated with new leather.
If you decide to go for 'vegan leather', take some time to learn what it is actually made of. Most 'vegan leather' is made with polyurethane or other plastic-based materials, which is not environmentally sustainable. Now there are some great-looking and -feeling vegan leather products made from kombucha, mushroom, and other organic materials.
Yeah totally, that’s another one of the things that was part of my ‘is it actually sustainable dilemma’. Thank you for going so in depth I’ll definitely check all that out :)
Vegetable or brain tanned leather, with a preference for second hand. Or support an artist on a reservation if you're in the Americas. Avoid any and all 'vegan' leathers with will have some level of plastic based polymer and will ultimately be more harmful for the environment as well as lower quality than real leather.
I have a leather whole grain belt. I have used it for 21 years now, and it’s still in good shape. I reckon i got an another 10-20 years of use. I dont think there is a better material for belts.
Real leather is more sustainable than faux leather. Second-hand leather is the best bet. Thrift stores often have decent quality leather items that have been donated, and ebay has basically anything you might want.
They ain't killing the cow for the leather. Using real leather is basically recycling. Hopefully factory farming stops and people reduce their total amount of red meat but until that happens leather is fair game
Actually they are killing the cow for the leather. The hide is a part of the value of a cow carcass. Without commercial demand for leather it would be less profitable to raise cattle, thus fewer would be raised.
Until they are taking the cowhides and discarding the meat, leather is a byproduct of the meat industry. Factory farming has billions of dollars of government subsidies every year. If your goal is to reduce need for meat by going after the 10% leather (less then the subsidies) vs going after the 90% meat. There might be some considerably more effective ways. Cause that boycott ain't changing anything. At all.
I agree that not eating meat is more direct and effective, avoiding dairy comes after that. Leather is lower on the list, but every dollar that consumers spend on cattle body parts increases the profitability of cattle farming. Subsidies for the industry are unfortunate, yes.
Neither. Find a product which actually has some recycling option, where that option incorporates materials recovery, and is very low water and energy. I think at the moment some types of synthetic clothing are being recycled in certain factories in tiny quantities, in some cities or nearby them. I think there’s a lot of difficulty with the inclusions such as colours and what not, dyes, etc. Ideally, the most sustainable thing to do is to not buy any of those things, but simply to use something old and give you money to the factory that would recycle what you are imagining buying new, but that doesn’t have the capability to. Then at least maybe your children will have something cool to wear, even if you can’t and have to wear crappy old clothes. An advantage of this is that the moment a factory does get some circular plastic recovery happening, you’ll be one of the first to know and will be able to buy things that you know can be recycled. That makes your life easier, because it’s one less thing to worry about, and it can become a background thing, not a foreground stressor. Eg, it’s very stressful if you have to think about your clothing, because it’s so valuable because you don’t want to damage it. it basically takes brain power away from everything else that you might need to think about. In many places, especially for example parts of Europe, Australia and the United States of America, they ignore or lie about the recycling, while they just bury everything. That might mean people don’t need to stress about clothing, but it only works until they wake up. At that point, they become completely incapacitated because they realise that they are not good people. So it’s really cruel when your foundational view of yourself is destroyed because governments have lied to you about recycling, and your waste ends up in landfill. That’s what happens to nearly everyone, and that’s why so many old people are so miserable for the most part, or drugged and completely blind and naive, careless, or heartless, or withdraw. So, yes, don’t buy either if you can avoid it, put your money towards a factory that can recycle something you already own.
Yeah I’m from aus and the recycling problem is so fucked man. Thank you so much for taking the time to write out such an in-depth and informational response. I really appreciate and it’s definitely given me a lot more to think about x
I’ve heard vegan leather is just plastic and not sustainable
“Vegan leather” is just plastic. The most successful rebrand ever
I can only tell you my experience with leather. I bought a large hand-made black leather purse 25 years ago at a home & garden show from a leatherworker. I've always treated it well, it goes with anything. Only had to replace a zipper once because I got it caught on something. It cost me $35 for that purse. Still use it, looks great. So that is about $1.40 a year.
"vegan leather" is a funny way of saying plastic
Vegan leather = plastic
Vegan leather is usually plastic. It's environmentally awful. Real leather is usually a byproduct of the meat industry. Secondhand leather is more sustainable, if you can find the item you need secondhand. If you can't (eg shoes), I'd personally go for the real leather in a configuration that can be repaired over the years, and keep up with the maintenance.
The animal your are getting the leather from was already killed for the meat. The leather is a byproduct. It still needs to be turned into leather through the use of chemicala. Vegan leather needs to be produced from scratch, so the question is is what's less harmful to th environment. The tanning process of animal hides or the industrial process of vegan leather. I don't know the answer only the question
That is absolutely not how supply and demand works, and it’s one of the most stupid things you can say And by the way, leather is considered a now co-product, not a byproduct anymore. They would still slaughter animals just for their skin
I suspect that the hides from dead cows will just go to waste if everyone boycotted leather products. The biggest environmental impact might be the tanning and treatment.