7 ms·

Thanks for sharing the actual letter. Contrary to what the New York Times report (OP) would have you believe, Yvon's note doesn't say anything about climate cha

Thanks for sharing the actual letter. Contrary to what the New York Times report (OP) would have you believe, Yvon's note doesn't say anything about climate change. Rather, it emphasizes "the environmental crisis," "defending nature," "the health and vitality of the natural world," and the Earth’s finite resources. There is so much more to environmental conservation than just "climate change," and Patagonia has done much more around e.g. removing dams, minimizing PFCs in their products, recycling and increasing longevity of materials, and other actions that protect air, land, forests, rivers and oceans, and which encourage sustainable energy production. Dear NYT and fellow readers, please don't throw this diversely interested company into some politically expedient climate change bucket. Their view on the environment is so much more.

xmonkee 4y ago
That's interesting, I wouldn't have made the distinction. I'm not even sure there is a distinction (climate change is by far the greatest threat to the environment). What are your personal views on climate change, if you don't mind me asking?
- oliwary 4y ago
  Not OP, but I think there are very important environmental impacts that are not related to climate change. Take, for example, plastic in the sea - clearly a big issue for the environment, but addressing climate change will not impact this at all. Other examples include destruction of habitats, NO2 in the air, dumping waste in nature and rivers, lead that gets into nature etc.
  - rch 4y ago
    I've found that 'climate change' activism leads with wealth redistribution, social justice, and even socialism in a general sense. Biodiversity activism, on the other hand, tends to organize around reducing anthropogenic sources of CO2/CH4, establishing wildlife corridors, protecting watersheds, and so forth. Both are valid and there's obviously a lot of welcome, positive alignment.
  - zeckalpha 4y ago
    How are sea microplastics and climate change not related? Both involve fossil fuel materials being left somewhere they shouldn't when we are "done" with them.
    - Ma8ee 4y ago
      In one case the fossil fuels contribute to climate change, in the other case it doesn’t.
      - stuaxo 4y ago
        They are both under a broader banner of pollution.
        Ma8ee 4y ago
        And?
      - zeckalpha 4y ago
        Let me say that again: why don't you think the plastics are changing the climate?
        Ma8ee 4y ago
        Because as long as you don't burn them, they don't release any gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect. Could you explain any mechanism that make plastics in nature contribute to the climate catastrophe?
- patcon 4y ago
  Not OP, but was glad they piped up :) My vague concern is that overly emphasizing "climate change" means all these brains are thinking on just one small bit of surface of this larger project. We talk a ton about carbon because it's the tangible thing that brownian motions equally through the atmosphere and we can undeniably quantify, but the whole ship leaks across a number of dimensions. We need eyes and minds on all the little edges of the larger wicked problem: both convincing and creating fellow humans that we can be happy and healthy without unconstrained growth. There's a lot of baggage to work through. The sheer eighth grade math of it is that we can't be anything but cancer or conquerors (at whatever scale) unless we get that under control on this finite planet <3
- jhugo 4y ago
  > climate change is by far the greatest threat to the environment The effects of climate change will be uneven across humanity, and many of the worst effects might be second-order (e.g. instability caused by mass migration). There are other types of environmental change, like accumulation of so-called "forever chemicals", which have the potential to have a more direct effect on the entire human population, and potentially over a shorter time period than climate change. It's not clear to me that climate change is the greatest threat we face.
test098 4y ago
Quite literally references climate change in the third sentence of the letter? > "As we began to witness the extent of global warming and ecological destruction, and our own contribution to it, Patagonia committed to using our company to change the way business was done."
subsubzero 4y ago
Despite some of my issues with the company, they have a few really cool environmentally friendly programs. The "worn well" program is incredible, basically if you have a piece of patagonia clothing and return it through that program, they clean it up or recycle it and you get a free credit towards anything patagonia sells. For kids clothes this is a boon, I would buy my daughter a patagonia jacket from the patagonia outlet at 40% off, she grows out if it and I trade it in for a new jacket and get $20-$30 off of the new jacket. Her old jacket gets cleaned and sold to some other kid who can use it(they have a worn well portal where you can buy used gear), great for peoples pocketbooks, great for the environment - win all around.
- bmj 4y ago
  Yeah, I don't agree with 100% of their political positions (though, to be fair, it is rare that I agree with 100% of anyone's political positions, including my own), but they are really trying to change the way people consume their products. And, many of their products are truly built to last. I have two jackets (one insulated, one a fleece) that are 15+ years old and have been dragged through the dirt, mud, rain, and snow all over the U.S.
  - Stratoscope 4y ago
    > it is rare that I agree with 100% of anyone's political positions, including my own This is my favorite political comment of the year! I hope you won't mind my stealing it when one of my friends is shocked that we disagree on some political position or another.
    - patcon 4y ago
      Ha! I was just about to comment saying the same thing! I like it a whole lot :)
    - dismalpedigree 4y ago
      Do you 100% agree with that statement? It can be seen as political.
  - 4y ago
exysle 4y ago
I like how "global warming" became "climate change." My favorite trick of the mind.
- orwin 4y ago
  I dislike "climate change" too, because it carries the idea that we can change it back. I think "global warming" was fine, but if i had to pick something, it would be "climate drift" i think.
  - e9 4y ago
    I disagree. Climate always changes. Constantly. Warming is just one part of the climate change. Many other things change too so climate change is a lot broader term for this.
    - strbean 4y ago
      "Anthropogenic climate change at a rate that humans and/or natural systems can't cope with" just isn't as catchy.
    - hmlongco 4y ago
      Weather changes. It's when enough weather changes that the overall climate changes where we begin to have issues.
      - e9 4y ago
        Too subjective. Objectively climate has always been changing and will always be changing. Earth has seen much warmer climate and much colder climate and everything in between since formation. Your definition of issues don’t really make sense unless it’s subjective because objectively climate change is just is, not good not bad, just fact and consequence of complicated system. Even in the past many centuries, if you look at history, plenty of empires fell because of climate change(floods, droughts, etc). We are accelerating the change but it would still be changing even if we didn’t exist.
cma 4y ago
Read it again, it does mention climate change. Reflexive ctrl-f won't work because it words it: "global warming." It's in the very first paragraph: > As we began to witness the extent of global warming and ecological destruction, and our own contribution to it, Patagonia committed to using our company to change the way business was done. The New York Times didn't slip this in to mislead everyone.
aydyn 4y ago
I think you are reading too much into it. The letter doesn't say the words "climate change" but that's clearly what they are talking about. Instead, they do mention "global warming" which is part of what is referenced by "environmental crisis". I don't think "global warming" is more or less politicized than the phrase "climate change". Maybe because "global warming" is slightly antiquated, it's less likely to produce knee jerk reactions? I agree that the letter is trying its best to be politically inclusive, and I appreciate it.
- stuaxo 4y ago
  From what I heard it was the polluters who pushed us from "global warming" to "climate change" as the second is less emotive and less likely to be linked to them by people (especially after they paid so much for people to obscure things).
collegeburner 4y ago
I really like environmental causes around preserving natural wild places for future generations to enjoy and appreciate that patagonia (a brand that caters a lot to outdoorsy types) is backing this. Makes me want to support them.
renewiltord 4y ago
Bro "global warming" is "climate change". You gotta read, no Cmd-F. Second sentence, my dude. Gotta read before you dunk, homie.
emptyfile 4y ago
>Yvon's note doesn't say anything about climate change. So this is the standard level of reading comprehension on HN these days? LITERALLY the third sentence in the first paragraph. >I never wanted to be a businessman. I started as a craftsman, making climbing gear for my friends and myself, then got into apparel. As we began to witness the extent of ***global warming***...
hef19898 4y ago
Personally, I don't own any items from Patagonia. As company so, it is model to strive for. A pitty tgat not more companies can resist the worst incentives in capitalism.

xmonkee 4y ago

That's interesting, I wouldn't have made the distinction. I'm not even sure there is a distinction (climate change is by far the greatest threat to the environment). What are your personal views on climate change, if you don't mind me asking?

oliwary 4y ago
Not OP, but I think there are very important environmental impacts that are not related to climate change. Take, for example, plastic in the sea - clearly a big issue for the environment, but addressing climate change will not impact this at all. Other examples include destruction of habitats, NO2 in the air, dumping waste in nature and rivers, lead that gets into nature etc.
- rch 4y ago
  I've found that 'climate change' activism leads with wealth redistribution, social justice, and even socialism in a general sense. Biodiversity activism, on the other hand, tends to organize around reducing anthropogenic sources of CO2/CH4, establishing wildlife corridors, protecting watersheds, and so forth. Both are valid and there's obviously a lot of welcome, positive alignment.
- zeckalpha 4y ago
  How are sea microplastics and climate change not related? Both involve fossil fuel materials being left somewhere they shouldn't when we are "done" with them.
  - Ma8ee 4y ago
    In one case the fossil fuels contribute to climate change, in the other case it doesn’t.
    - stuaxo 4y ago
      They are both under a broader banner of pollution.
      - Ma8ee 4y ago
        And?
    - zeckalpha 4y ago
      Let me say that again: why don't you think the plastics are changing the climate?
      - Ma8ee 4y ago
        Because as long as you don't burn them, they don't release any gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect. Could you explain any mechanism that make plastics in nature contribute to the climate catastrophe?
patcon 4y ago
Not OP, but was glad they piped up :) My vague concern is that overly emphasizing "climate change" means all these brains are thinking on just one small bit of surface of this larger project. We talk a ton about carbon because it's the tangible thing that brownian motions equally through the atmosphere and we can undeniably quantify, but the whole ship leaks across a number of dimensions. We need eyes and minds on all the little edges of the larger wicked problem: both convincing and creating fellow humans that we can be happy and healthy without unconstrained growth. There's a lot of baggage to work through. The sheer eighth grade math of it is that we can't be anything but cancer or conquerors (at whatever scale) unless we get that under control on this finite planet <3
jhugo 4y ago
> climate change is by far the greatest threat to the environment The effects of climate change will be uneven across humanity, and many of the worst effects might be second-order (e.g. instability caused by mass migration). There are other types of environmental change, like accumulation of so-called "forever chemicals", which have the potential to have a more direct effect on the entire human population, and potentially over a shorter time period than climate change. It's not clear to me that climate change is the greatest threat we face.

test098 4y ago

Quite literally references climate change in the third sentence of the letter? > "As we began to witness the extent of global warming and ecological destruction, and our own contribution to it, Patagonia committed to using our company to change the way business was done."

subsubzero 4y ago

Despite some of my issues with the company, they have a few really cool environmentally friendly programs. The "worn well" program is incredible, basically if you have a piece of patagonia clothing and return it through that program, they clean it up or recycle it and you get a free credit towards anything patagonia sells. For kids clothes this is a boon, I would buy my daughter a patagonia jacket from the patagonia outlet at 40% off, she grows out if it and I trade it in for a new jacket and get $20-$30 off of the new jacket. Her old jacket gets cleaned and sold to some other kid who can use it(they have a worn well portal where you can buy used gear), great for peoples pocketbooks, great for the environment - win all around.

bmj 4y ago
Yeah, I don't agree with 100% of their political positions (though, to be fair, it is rare that I agree with 100% of anyone's political positions, including my own), but they are really trying to change the way people consume their products. And, many of their products are truly built to last. I have two jackets (one insulated, one a fleece) that are 15+ years old and have been dragged through the dirt, mud, rain, and snow all over the U.S.
- Stratoscope 4y ago
  > it is rare that I agree with 100% of anyone's political positions, including my own This is my favorite political comment of the year! I hope you won't mind my stealing it when one of my friends is shocked that we disagree on some political position or another.
  - patcon 4y ago
    Ha! I was just about to comment saying the same thing! I like it a whole lot :)
  - dismalpedigree 4y ago
    Do you 100% agree with that statement? It can be seen as political.
- 4y ago

exysle 4y ago

I like how "global warming" became "climate change." My favorite trick of the mind.

orwin 4y ago
I dislike "climate change" too, because it carries the idea that we can change it back. I think "global warming" was fine, but if i had to pick something, it would be "climate drift" i think.
- e9 4y ago
  I disagree. Climate always changes. Constantly. Warming is just one part of the climate change. Many other things change too so climate change is a lot broader term for this.
  - strbean 4y ago
    "Anthropogenic climate change at a rate that humans and/or natural systems can't cope with" just isn't as catchy.
  - hmlongco 4y ago
    Weather changes. It's when enough weather changes that the overall climate changes where we begin to have issues.
    - e9 4y ago
      Too subjective. Objectively climate has always been changing and will always be changing. Earth has seen much warmer climate and much colder climate and everything in between since formation. Your definition of issues don’t really make sense unless it’s subjective because objectively climate change is just is, not good not bad, just fact and consequence of complicated system. Even in the past many centuries, if you look at history, plenty of empires fell because of climate change(floods, droughts, etc). We are accelerating the change but it would still be changing even if we didn’t exist.

cma 4y ago

Read it again, it does mention climate change. Reflexive ctrl-f won't work because it words it: "global warming." It's in the very first paragraph: > As we began to witness the extent of global warming and ecological destruction, and our own contribution to it, Patagonia committed to using our company to change the way business was done. The New York Times didn't slip this in to mislead everyone.

aydyn 4y ago

I think you are reading too much into it. The letter doesn't say the words "climate change" but that's clearly what they are talking about. Instead, they do mention "global warming" which is part of what is referenced by "environmental crisis". I don't think "global warming" is more or less politicized than the phrase "climate change". Maybe because "global warming" is slightly antiquated, it's less likely to produce knee jerk reactions? I agree that the letter is trying its best to be politically inclusive, and I appreciate it.

stuaxo 4y ago
From what I heard it was the polluters who pushed us from "global warming" to "climate change" as the second is less emotive and less likely to be linked to them by people (especially after they paid so much for people to obscure things).

collegeburner 4y ago

I really like environmental causes around preserving natural wild places for future generations to enjoy and appreciate that patagonia (a brand that caters a lot to outdoorsy types) is backing this. Makes me want to support them.

renewiltord 4y ago

Bro "global warming" is "climate change". You gotta read, no Cmd-F. Second sentence, my dude. Gotta read before you dunk, homie.

emptyfile 4y ago

>Yvon's note doesn't say anything about climate change. So this is the standard level of reading comprehension on HN these days? LITERALLY the third sentence in the first paragraph. >I never wanted to be a businessman. I started as a craftsman, making climbing gear for my friends and myself, then got into apparel. As we began to witness the extent of ***global warming***...

hef19898 4y ago

Personally, I don't own any items from Patagonia. As company so, it is model to strive for. A pitty tgat not more companies can resist the worst incentives in capitalism.