27 ms·
PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
- jmclnx 4y ago"All" is a bit over the top. I have Carradice bags and a Poncho and they work fine. I have ridden in very heavy rain without issues.
- OJFord 4y agoI have a Carradice poncho too, love it, but I think we're just in a different market segment; it's perhaps 'all' to an every-last-gram-shaving more 'cyclesport' audience. (I also have a couple of pairs of brandless rubber galoshes that would be unaffected. They're waterproof but I actually wear/wore (when I was cycle-commuting) them year-round - more to protect leather soles from the pedals than uppers from the rain.)
- peletiah 4y agoFor how long though?
- jmclnx 4y agoNot sure what you mean for how long, but I have not has issues riding all day.
- TrispusAttucks 4y agoI am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.
- nwah1 4y agoWe are in the middle of a biotech revolution. Figuring out how to scale up bioengineered materials is a likely source of impressive materials. Nature is full of stuff like spider silk, chitin, bone, phosphorescent materials, sponges,etc.
- mnky9800n 4y agoScaling things always seems to be the thing that takes from the environment.
- elric 4y agoI remember reading something about the trillions of chiken bones we discard annually are something of a problem. "The dose makes the poison" seems to apply to the environment as much as it does to the individual.
- CydeWeys 4y agoCurious what the problem is? Animals with bones have existed for hundreds of millions of years. The environment knows what to do with them. PFCs by contrast do not exist naturally in the world and they act as a toxin in the environment.
- vlabakje90 4y agoNever before has there been a time where billions of chickens were killed each year. The dose make the poison.
- aziaziazi 4y agoAround 200 billions chickens are slaughtered each year, not sure how that compare with their population during previous hundreds millions of years.
- karlkeefer 4y agoI can't speak to the actual problems from chicken bones, but scale may be part of the explanation. We are producing something like 50 billion chickens for slaughter every year. I don't think that estimate includes laying hens or culled males, either. The scale of chicken production is bonkers relative to natural bird populations. The most abundant wild bird species is on the order of 1.5 billion. They are sparrow-sized and that's not their annual number. Framed animals dwarf wild mammals and wild birds by mass: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/08/total-biomass-weight-species-earth https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/08/total-biomass-weight-...
- vanniv 4y agoGiven our ever-expanding definition of "environmentally unfriendly" and our ever-contracting definition of "sustainable", I'm actually not sure that anything actually makes the cut in the long run. Everything "effects the environment" in some way, after all.
- myself248 4y agoThis is more or less the argument of various population-reduction advocates. There's simply no way, with current or foreseeable technology, to sustain 8 billion humans AND still have a planet left a few centuries later. If we want there to be humans in the far, far future, more of us need to start going childfree NOW, and encouraging others to do so, AND working on sustainable ways to have a decent standard of living without eviscerating the Earth.
- vanniv 4y agoThe problem being that everybody always wants to force someone else to be the one to have no children and a crappy standard of living, while they get to be one of the people selected to remain.
- DoneWithAllThat 4y agoWelcome to the degrowth mindset, where anything that represents technological innovation by mankind is perforce evil and must be stamped out.
- WillPostForFood 4y agoPeople want to own a dream. Buy it for life, effective, durable, but also easily compostable! Very cheap, but hand made by workers paid a living wage with fair trade materials imported from pro-LQBTQIA green democracies.
- stainforth 4y agoEverything is permitted if its commerce. The right for a business to exist supersedes the right for a human to exist. There is no cause and effect, only commerce. The market is the only thing that exists. Markets will still exist after the end of men.
- JadeNB 4y ago> It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly. This certainly seems plausible, but on what basis do you find it likely?
- downvotetruth 4y ago> Gore is committing to a "goal for being free of PFCs of Environmental Concern." That doesn't affect the ePTFE membrane though because, according to the brand, ePTFE "is inert, insoluble in water, extremely stable and not biodegradable. Therefore, it does not degrade to become a source of PFCs of Environmental Concern." Gore continuation: biodegradable:degradeable ::(->) unbiodegradable:undegradeable
- DoingIsLearning 4y agoIt's more of a case that they as a business have no way of making money without this pollutant not that the pollutant itself is not an issue. I have worn plenty of boots with Gore-Tex reinforced regions and they most definitely break down and become frail and brittle given enough kilometers of trekking.
- ghaff 4y agoI'm honestly not convinced how much good Gore-Tex does in a boot. I've bought boots with Gore-Tex because I liked them for other reasons but I'm not sure they were appreciably more water resistant than those that were "waterproof." Certainly my heavy leather boots (or my winter books that have rubber or whatever on the lower part of the boot) are more resistant.
- ck2 4y agoMaybe we can mimic some of the effects found in nature without chemicals and make hydrophobic surfaces based on their nano-level properties? Or like ducks use preen oil, something closer to that.
- mc32 4y agoThere is already an XVIII century technology and WWII popularized option called millerain. But it requires some maintenance and isn’t “light” as preferred by cyclists and runners.
- coffeebeqn 4y agoYeah wax was used to make tents waterproof as well. But it’s quite a bit heavier than plastic thread
- mc32 4y agoYep. People will have to put more work into things. But it’s that or these toxic options as of now.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y agoOdd choice. Writing “18th” is faster for the writer and the reader.
- pstuart 4y agoI'm guessing it played well with the WWII lettering.
- kwhitefoot 4y agoPerhaps it's my age but I don't find Roman numerals noticeably slower to read than Arabic for the usual use case of recent centuries.
- justsomehnguy 4y ago> is faster for the writer For the whole letter? > reader Only if the reader completely unfamiliar with Roman numbering system. I didn't even thought about it until I saw your comment. Get off my lawn, son?
- olivermarks 4y agoGiven that many cyclists also have deep climate anxieties and conservative (with a small'c') attitudes it sounds as though 1970's era pvc coated nylon and cotton will make a resurgence
- olivermarks 4y agoWhilst PVC is most frequently made from salt and oil, in some regions of the world PVC is made without using oil feedstock at all (substituting oil-derived hydrocarbon with bio-derived hydrocarbon feedstock). PVC is therefore far less oil-dependent than other thermoplastics.
- hammock 4y agoPE same thing…
- wyre 4y agoFor anyone not familiar with what makes Shakedry so revolutionary is its ability to be waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight. Its weight and breathability make it incredible for active sports like cycling or running. These jackets weigh around 100-150g depending on features and size and can pack into the pocket of a cycling Jersey, all while being waterproof and preventing the athlete from overheating.
- acdha 4y ago> waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight This is basically the way most outdoors products have been marketed since the previous century so I’m not sure how much we’re actually talking about here. What I was hoping to see in that article was something more quantitative — does “heavy and doesn't breathe as well” mean something is 20% heavier or 200%, etc.?
- paulcole 4y agoThis is what makes ShakeDry so revolutionary. The nonsense brands have been saying about waterproof and breathable is actually real. I’ve done 30 mile runs in the pouring rain w/ my ShakeDry jacket and come out “dry” at the end. The material never wets through. The only downside for me is that it does wear “warm” so I mostly wear it in under 45F degree weather — which coincides nicely with Portland’s rainiest weather. My jacket was around $300 and more than worth every penny.
- loeg 4y ago> The only downside for me is that it does wear “warm” so I mostly wear it in under 45F degree weather Yeah. For cycling, I wear short-sleeved summer jerseys under the Shakedry down into the 30s Fahrenheit. It gets pretty warm and sweaty in the high 40s but beats alternatives. (I'm up in Seattle.)
- _0w8t 4y agoI remember US army like 10 years ago compared different fabrics and have found eVent was performing significantly better than Gore Tex. Does ShakeDry really better than alternative according to some realistic tests?
- sirsinsalot 4y agoI've always used Nikwax waterproofing products. PFC free and amazing for tents and shells.
- secondcoming 4y agoUnless your tent/garment also has taped/sealed seams then it'll never be waterproof; this is why some garments are marketed as being only 'water repellant'.
- justinator 4y agoNikwax doesn't waterprood anything. It makes water on the surface of materials bead and not wet out so fast. The fabric needs still to be, "waterproof".
- hammock 4y agoYou are getting dinged on semantics but I’m here to +1 you for Nikwax. Its major competitors, like Gear-X and whatever else all use PFCs, and do not indicate this on the label. While the entire Nikwax portfolio is PFC-free And yea, when people put sno-seal or whatever else on their winter boots they typically call it “waterproofing” even if it’s not technically the same meaning of that word as what you would say about a rain jacket
- loeg 4y agoI use Nikwax too, but it's not even remotely as effective as shakedry.
- SkyPuncher 4y agoI love Nikwax. Use it on my ski stuff. People are ripping on your for the technical difference between 99% waterproof and 100% waterproof. It really doesn't matter in practice since your body is going to sweat _and_ some of that will never, possibly leave the garment you're wearing. Nikwax is amazing for crossing the threshold of "I'm freezing cold because I keep getting new water on my skin" and "I'm slightly damp, but warm".
- adultSwim 4y agoI swear by Snoseal. Beewax + cloth or leather has worked well for a very long time.
- noja 4y agoWill the replacement for PFC be something very similar that is equally dangerous?
- meindnoch 4y agoIt will be something that turns out to be a carcinogen/endocrine disruptor 20 years from now.
- noasaservice 4y agoI know you're being sardonic... but it will likely be another fluorine based chemistry that is hopefully more biocompatible (flush out of body easily), and not cause undue harm. The perfluro- line of chemicals are quite amazing.. if it werent for them being completely obnoxious and stay in the body like lead.
- contravariant 4y agoWhat is it that makes fluorine added to carbon chains so much more versatile? I kind of get why carbon is so versatile, but what is that makes fluorine so special and why can't some other potentially less harmful halogen do the job? Edit: Ah adding chlorine destroys the ozon layer, what's why.
- comicjk 4y agoFluorine forms the strongest bonds to carbon that are available (much stronger than a carbon-carbon or carbon-hydrogen bond, also stronger than carbon-chlorine). It acts like an immovable stub preventing further reactions, which is great for materials like nonstick coatings, but also prevents natural breakdown in the environment.
- scythe 4y agoFluorocarbons have a low London dispersion (induced dipole) force due to the high polarization of the C-F bond. This is responsible for many of the unusual properties of fluorocarbon solvents, particularly high gas solubility and extreme hydrophobicity. It's also just inert, much moreso than chlorocarbons (which tend to be quite toxic). My undergraduate research project at involved identifying poly-tert-butyl-methacrylate as a polymer with similar hydrophobicity (as measured by the wetting angle) to the fluorocarbons, but I don't think anything ever really came of it. It may be unfavorable for other reasons; I don't remember.
- zymhan 4y agoThis is a surprisingly in-depth article, I found it very informative.
- stevespang 4y ago
- hashtag-til 4y agoSince I watched the movie “Dark Waters”, I’m trying to avoid those PFO(A|E) as much as I can. Threw all non-stick pans away and learnt how to cook with just cast iron or inox pans. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Waters_(2019_film) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Waters_(2019_film)
- blindriver 4y agoI ditched them a while ago as well. I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before.
- bushbaba 4y agoBecause in the early 2000s there was a war on natural fats. Nutritionists declared all fat bad. We now know that to not be the case. Your stainless steel, high carbon steel, and cast iron pans require using a small amount of oil/butter to have nonstick cooking properties.
- alostpuppy 4y agoI have trouble with stainless. What’s the trick? Do you use cast iron for skillets and stainless for slice pans?
- Our_Benefactors 4y agoThe trick is get the pan hot (not smoking hot, you’ve preheated too much), then put 1-2tbsp butter or cooking oil in the pan and spread it around. It should sizzle a bit and then mostly disappear, leaving behind a nonstick coating.
- devadvance 4y agoFor stainless, I've found it to be a combination of making sure there's enough heat before adding food, being OK with using a bit more fat (e.g., oil, butter) than I initially expect, using the right utensil while cooking, and deglazing as necessary.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sgt101 4y agoWell, not my waxed jacket..
- qbasic_forever 4y agoWow there's definitely a money making opportunity to hang on to and resell any goretex shakedry (single layer goretex, Columbia had a similar thing called out-dri). There's really nothing else like it that's as light weight and water proof yet breathable as it was. People paid a premium for it when it was in production. The value is going to skyrocket if it's not available new anymore.
- Jolter 4y agoI don’t think the material lasts long enough to have multiple users. My experience of ptfe and related chemicals is that they wash out and the material degrades over time worth wear, so they don’t stay water-repellent very long. If they didn’t degrade quickly, they wouldn’t be such a threat to the environment. Edit: Sorry, I didn’t mean PTFE above but PFC.
- qbasic_forever 4y agoGoretex isn't a coating though, at least with their membrane stuff like shakedry. The fibers themselves are PTFE. It doesn't wash away over time. As I understand it the environmental risk with these jackets is from the production process and PTFE use there. Once it's a membrane it's inert and stable.
- Jolter 4y agoSorry, I meant PFC. I’ve edited the comment.
- qbasic_forever 4y agoYeah you're thinking of older style goretex membrane laminants. They'd have 2 or 3 layers with a goretex membrane inside and an outer shell of non-waterproof fabric to protect the goretex. The outer shell would be treated with a PFC spray to make it water resistant and keep from soaking up and holding water (which makes the inner goretex layer not breathe). Goretex shakedry came out a few years ago and changed things dramatically, it's just one layer of the unprotected raw goretex membrane. No need for coating with PFC and much, much lighter than the laminants. It's not as durable so there are some trade-offs but for people that can work with its limitations it is incredible waterproof tech. It's what we always wished rain gear was--light, breathable, waterproof.
- josephcsible 4y agoI wish that we'd come up with a replacement that's just as good first, and only then phase out the original. As an example of the right way to do things, consider that nobody banned leaded avgas before the FAA found and approved a safe unleaded formulation.
- Jolter 4y agoYou realize this stuff is actually /toxic/, right? Can you come up with a single incentive that would make the industry invent non-toxic alternatives faster than a ban on the toxic substances would?
- josephcsible 4y agoTetraethyl lead was actually toxic too. What incentive led the avgas industry to replace it before it was banned?
- Jolter 4y agoNot sure what point you’re trying to make with that. I don’t know this stuff but I know how too look it up on Wikipedia, and it looks to me like it was phased out because regulators threatened a ban: “In November 2008, National Air Transportation Association president Jim Coyne indicated that the environmental impact of aviation is expected to be a big issue over the next few years and will result in the phasing out of 100LL because of its lead content.[45] By May 2012, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA Unleaded Avgas Transition rulemaking committee) had put together a plan in conjunction with industry to replace leaded avgas with an unleaded alternative within 11 years.”
- josephcsible 4y agoYes, they threatened a ban and set a timeline to phase it out, but unleaded avgas became available before leaded avgas became unavailable.
- 4y ago
- bsimpson 4y agoI recently learned that the thing that makes saranwrap cling to things is a derivative of PVC that might not be foodsafe. There's a newer formulation that uses a different chemical, but apparently doesn't work as well.
- stephen_g 4y agoAccording to Wikipedia, Saran wrap switched from PVDC to polyethylene (which is still considered safe) was in 2004. PVC and PVDC have lower oxygen permeability so keep food better, but both environmental and food safety concerns in food contact applications.
- devoutsalsa 4y agoSciShow did a video on this. “Why Isn’t Cling Wrap As Good As It Used To Be?” https://youtu.be/CXsE6SlLa58 https://youtu.be/CXsE6SlLa58
- bsimpson 4y agoThe massive Costco brand rolls that everyone I know uses seem to still be PVDC (or at least were when I bought the one in my pantry).
- jkqwzsoo 4y agoThinking about it for a minute, I’m not sure why we need fluoropolymers for waterproof technical fabrics. Unless I’m very much mistaken, PDMS rubber, polypropylene, polyethylene, and other materials provide similar levels of water resistance, without requiring the use of fluorine-containing compounds. Most explanations I read for Gor-Tex-type materials using PTFE (e.g., [0]) reference the hydrophobicity of the material, which is (IMO) similar to explaining why cars are powered by rockets because rockets are very fast. Cars are, of course, not typically powered by rockets because it is not necessary. PDMS rubber, polypropylene, polyethylene, and PTFE all have very high water contact angles (a measure of the strength of interaction of water and the surface) and low water uptake [1]. I work with a stretched polypropylene film (Celgard — a material that is often used as a support/spacer material in Li-ion batteries) and it’s extremely hydrophobic. I used a piece of this film to build a bubble trap ([2]), for example (bubble traps typically use PTFE membranes…). It is not optimized for water resistance, so it does wet eventually, but it’s pretty good for “not trying”. Surfaces coated with PDMS (or glass coated with short PDMS chains — i.e., silanized glass [3]) are extremely hydrophobic. The only time I personally use PTFE (or PFA, MFA, FEP, or ETFE) is when I need materials to be resistant (including both resistance to chemical degradation as well as swelling) to strong organic solvents (like NMP, THF, etc.) or strong acids and bases (like piranha, aqua regia, or a nitrating solution). These conditions are unlikely to be encountered while cycling. This all said, I’m not an expert on the design of Gor-Tex type materials. However, I assume it is highly related to the pore structure of the materials to prevent liquid water intrusion (the same as for membranes designed for membrane distillation). Given the similar hydrophobicity of these materials, it seems like it should be possible to produce similar results with PP, PE, etc. And this is all before introducing the ability of nanomaterials and nanopatterning (perhaps transferred with imprint lithography [4]) to produce metastable ultrahydrophobicity [5] on the surface of materials. [0] https://www.sungodtech.com/how-much-do-you-know-about-ptfe-waterproof-breathable-membrane.html https://www.sungodtech.com/how-much-do-you-know-about-ptfe-w..., https://outdoorguru.com/how-to-en/how-does-waterproof-and-breathable-rainwear-work/ https://outdoorguru.com/how-to-en/how-does-waterproof-and-br... [1] https://www.accudynetest.com/polytable_03.html https://www.accudynetest.com/polytable_03.html, https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/properties/water-absorption-24-hours https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/propertie... [2] https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ec0ae9_aacc723ea77d46619d0eb271296516c5~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_831,h_469,al_c,q_85,enc_auto/bubble_trap_diagram_JPG.jpg https://static.wixstatic.com/media/ec0ae9_aacc723ea77d46619d... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silanization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silanization [4] https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.8b03138 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.8b03138 [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetting#Cassie–Baxter_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetting#Cassie–Baxter_model
- rc_mob 4y agoWell ... good
- numpad0 4y ago> "Introducing New Gore-Tex Products with Innovative Expanded Polyethylene (ePE) Membrane for AW22" didn't exactly catch my eye. I sent an email out to Gorewear and asked about it, but there was nothing to test and it fell off my radar. > As it turns out, that press release was a big deal. Expanded polyethylene is the future of the Gore product line. That sounds reasonable, and by the way, today I learned we were so casually wearing Teflon clothing all the time just to be comfortable in rainy days. That's atomic.
- kccqzy 4y agoWhy is this demonization of Teflon aka PTFE? I mean yes PFOA and PFOS are pretty bad, but PTFE should be pretty safe if you don't overheat it. I mean I just purchased a non-stick cooking pan and it contained PTFE coating; should I be worried now?
- s0rce 4y agoI think the issue is more in manufacturing and disposal not use. Don't overheat your pan and you are fine. The garments also used PFAS based coatings for water repellent coatings which are also bad.
- throwaway5959 4y agoDon’t overheat the pan you use to cook food with heat?
- topaz0 4y agoYes. i.e. 400-500F is much more likely to be harmful to health than 300F. This is why teflon pans are not a good choice for things like searing meat, where you really want the surface to be very hot. Of course, you can still do plenty of cooking at 300F.
- californical 4y agoOr just preheating oil — you can easily get a pan within that range in just a couple of minutes if you put oil on the bottom and turn the stove on high
- schappim 4y agoThe amount of ads on this page is nuts.
- throwaway892238 4y agoI must be a weirdo.... I just wear lots of wool, and a thin windproof/rainproof jacket with armpit zips. I get sweaty but I stay warm (as long as I'm moving)
- jmull 4y agoWool + wind shield is actually pretty hard to beat. The modern materials can be effective while being very light weight and take up little space. But I think these are much more niche concerns than most people like to acknowledge. I think the real reason the modern materials are more popular than wool+ is that they are more profitable when marketed, and hence are heavily marketed.
- halpmeh 4y agoWearing a waterproof shell gets you pretty steamy. Apparently this ShakeDry fabric is actually breathable. I wear wool + shell (note, waterproof shells likely contain PFCs), but I hate how humid it gets. I’m very intrigued by ShakeDry after reading this thread.
- SkyPuncher 4y agoThe problem is most wind shields are equivalent to wearing a plastic bag. The moment you start sweating, it creates a terrible, sticky, humid environment.
- senderista 4y agoFor active use, you’ll often stay drier under a water-repellent treated breathable fabric that doesn’t pretend to be waterproof. With most “waterproof/breathable” fabrics, you’ll get soaked from the inside long before you get soaked from the outside.
- idontwantthis 4y agoWhat exactly is the treatment? I was spraying some boots last week and I wondered if I'm directly applying PFAS to my clothes and breathing it in.
- jakecopp 4y ago> Depending on who you ask, it may also be a product that marks the end of an era and a standard we never reach again in the outdoor industry. Sounds reminiscent of asbestos.
- fomine3 4y agoMaybe like studded tires, for some region
- krolden 4y agoWhere are studded tires banned?
- beeboop 4y agoThey destroy roads
- krolden 4y agoSo does salt and heavy plows. Also not what I asked
- fomine3 4y agoIt's banned (at least for regular vehicles) here in Japan. Stud powder dust is a problem. Since then, better studless tires being developed. Edit: TIL it's not banned for bicycle/motorcycle
- nkurz 4y agoThere are number of US states that ban them. There's a map near the bottom of the page here: https://www.tirebuyer.com/education/studded-winter-tires https://www.tirebuyer.com/education/studded-winter-tires I'd call attention to the "Upper Midwest": Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Illinois. These are all states with severe winters and frequent snowfall, and all ban the use of studded snow tires.
- senderista 4y agoNot sure if use of recycled materials is responsible, but I bought a new Patagonia R1 fleece pullover a few years ago and it was utter garbage compared to its 20-year old predecessor (technically, same model). Probably the worst-fitting item of clothing I own, and the fabric is incredibly uncomfortable. Meanwhile, chest zipper on the original has gone out, but it fits as well and is just as comfy as the day I bought it.
- postmeta 4y agodoesnt patagonia have some repair/lifetime warranty? might be possible to save the old one
- YLE118 4y agoIt might be better to find a tailor/repair shop. I lost a favorite pair of ski pants when I sent them in for azipper replacement. Not sure if something got mixed up in the paperwork but I requested they be returned, not replaced if the repair was too expensive/difficult. The pants I got lasted many more years but the others would have too. Unfortunately zippers are just hard to replace if the teeth get damaged. They tend to be sewn in early in the assembly process.
- bamboozled 4y agoI have one and I can't compare it to your 20 year old model, but I wear it skiing everday in winter, maybe 140 days of the year, I have fo 3 years and so far it's fine.
- meristem 4y agoSki-related followup: What do you wear over it?
- MarcelOlsz 4y agoGeneric clothing follow up: Is there some sort of guide to materials and fabrics within a weather context? Like a diagram of a guy and you click "-20C + biking" and it dresses him up and you can see all the layers and recommendations. There has to be something out there.
- bamboozled 4y agoHas anyone tried wax cotton? https://www.fjallraven.com/us/en-us/about/our-materials/g1000 https://www.fjallraven.com/us/en-us/about/our-materials/g100... I have some items from Fjallraven which is made from a cotton/pollyester blend and I find it to be amazingly breathable and water resistant (when waxed). The thing is, I own so much waterproof gear but I hardly do a great amount of anything in the actual rain, even if hiking or camping, I usually avoid wet weather, I suspect a log of people do? I spend a lot of time in the snow but the was cotton works fine for snow.
- fingerlocks 4y agoCotton retains water. It’s the worst possible fabric for wet weather. Many people have died from hypothermia caused by their own sweat freezing in cotton garments. It could be argued that the entire motivation for creating synthetic fabrics is to eliminate the water soaking property of cotton.
- RandallBrown 4y agoWaxed cotton doesn't retain water and has been used for waterproof clothing for centuries. It's heavier than other options, so it's not going to be popular for a lot of people in the outdoors.
- jimnotgym 4y agoWhat about Ventile cotton? That absorbs water and turns waterproof. It was used for immersion suits in the war! It was a long time favourite with hunters and special forces due to it not rustling. It was also very durable. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventile https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventile
- bamboozled 4y agoIt's cotton impregnated with wax, and it's a mix of cotton and polyester.
- lnauta 4y agoI have a jacket from that brand and you can put the greenland wax on it. This fall, when it got rainy I started applying it layer by layer to find how much you need and for vertical parts one or two is good enough. For elbows, shoulders and such, places that get really wet, at least five layers made it that being in the rain for 30 minutes is fine. This is about 1/4 of the wax bar. I hope I'm doing it right though!
- fncivivue7 4y agoAnd thank fuck for that. DWR is disgusting, horrible stuff. Stop using DWR. Buy frogtoggs or Columbia outdry and leave this stuff behind. Outdry is lighter stronger, doesn't wear off after three outings, and the material breathes better than a wetted out goretex jacket ever will. Unless you're in snow, goretex is next to useless.
- loeg 4y agoShakedrys don't use DWRs, and not all DWRs use PFCs. "Wetted out jacket" also isn't a thing that happens to shakedry apparel. By all means, criticize use of PFCs for environmental reasons, but there's no need to fabricate criticisms.
- qbasic_forever 4y agoOutdry extreme is exactly the same as shakedry, it's just one layer goretex (or equivalent PTFE membrane). The non-extreme versions laminate on extra fabric layers for durability--just like other more traditional 2 and 3 layer goretex gear. Outdry is the same as goretex just not licensed from the company.
- mozman 4y agoWhat PFC garments can I buy before ban goes into effect ?
- mensetmanusman 4y agoGarments are the least of it. You can’t make computer chips without pfcs.
- drewm1980 4y agoIs there any non-petrochemical tech on the horizon for this? There many natural surfaces that seem to magically shed water; it seems a shame to me that gore fabrics is replacing petro-plastic with another petro-plastic instead of going straight to a sustainable option.
- Bayart 4y agoBeeswax is the traditional way.
- DebtDeflation 4y agoHistorically Gore has made their membranes from ePTFE. Other companies have made their membranes from electrospun PU due to Gore's patents. My understanding is that PU is widely viewed as inferior to ePTFE for performance and durability. So if Gore plans to switch from ePTFE to PU, it's a step backwards in terms of performance. This at the same time that the industry has switched DWR coatings from C8 to C6 and soon C4, which while more environmentally friendly are significantly less effective and durable. At some point we're going to just move away from WPB rain gear and go back to waterproof but nonbreathable gear (e.g., silnylon and silpoly) and rely on mechanical ventilation (pit zips, 2 way front zips, wrist and waist cinches) for breathability.
- int_19h 4y agoIt really depends on the products. E.g. I'm not sure quite what PolarTec NeoShell is, but I can confirm that it's noticeably more breathable than regular Gore-Tex.
- rawgabbit 4y agoI love Columbia pocketable rain jackets. The website says it's made of "Omni-tech waterproof" fabric. Does anyone know what this means? A bunch of chemicals that will eventually hurt me?