What are NFTs and how can we determine their environmental impact? Additionally, how can we mitigate this in the age of digitalisation?
Source: What Are NFTs, And What is Their Environmental Impact? | Earth.Org – Past | Present | Future
When I lived in San Diego, I’d pick certain days to go to Pacific Beach and run the boardwalk. Early in the morning I’d see surfers drifting out into the ocean. They waited to catch a wave. Sometimes they’d paddle so much, I was out of range and couldn’t see them surf, but every so often I’d witness the surfers swimming harder with the tide and standing on their boards. I was too afraid to get out and try it. I didn’t like the way the sand shifted under my feet when I waded away from the land. I was afraid to get turned around in a spot where I couldn’t tell which direction I should go. It didn’t matter that there were protective measures in place; I avoided catching the big waves and settled for paddle and boogie boards. Catching the wave is special. It’s a moment that looks like floating on air and water simultaneously. Today, catching a wave is something totally different. When something is popular, people want to be in on it, but some things aren’t meant for everyone and as Nike is celebrated for plucking off RTFKT, all I can think of are the articles I’ve been reading about NFTs and mining digital currencies.
The production of footwear and the problems with waste are well noted. There is a Swedish paper available for consideration, among other sources discussing the problems created by the shoe industry. Nike moves over 100,000 sneakers a day. When you factor in that only a fraction of their shoes utilize Nike Grind and sustainable methods of make, the production of Nike footwear and the end of the life cycle of Nike’s shoes contributes to a considerable amount of waste and harmful carbon emissions.
Nike recently wrote that they were taking a company focus on sustainability:
By 2025, Nike has pledged to reduce its carbon emissions in owned and operated facilities by 65 percent, to recycle or donate 10 times the amount of post-consumer waste through new circular business models, and to increase the use of environmentally preferred materials to 50 percent of all key product materials (which would cut half a million tons of greenhouse gas emissions).
Counter this comment with research from Earth.org and a comparison to physical art:
It is difficult to estimate the carbon footprint of minting an NFT because many steps in the process do not have a known carbon footprint, and there are few scientific peer-reviewed studies on this topic. Digiconomist estimates a single Ethereum transaction’s carbon footprint at 33.4kg CO2, while artist and programmer Memo Akten estimates that an average transaction specifically for NFTs has a carbon footprint of about 48kg CO2. Bear in mind that each time an NFT is minted or sold, that’s another transaction. These estimates tell us that one NFT transaction is likely to have a carbon footprint more than 14 times that of mailing an art print, which Quartz estimates at 2.3kg CO2. Despite uncertainties in the calculations, this is enough for one to judge whether a carbon footprint of this scale is acceptable for the act of selling art.
In the recent months ASICS launched an NFT collection. It didn’t perform well and the company seems to have moved away from attempting to ride the wave. Nike, by acquisition, has added an entire division that will contribute to their carbon footprint considerably, possibly negating any positive effects from their own environmental plans. adidas partnered with a competitor, Allbirds, to create a more sustainable shoe and to share ideas around better methods of make. On Running is launching a circular running shoe in their CloudNeo and Cyclon rental program. Puma is introducing Re/Mix, a Suede shoe that will have a shorter life cycle and be recyclable. Nike just garnered more coverage and hype for adding to their carbon footprint. On the Make Fashion Better site, they quote an MIT study showing, “Sneaker production is exceptionally carbon intensive, accounting for 1.4% of the global greenhouse gas emissions, which is significant given that air travel is responsible for 2.5 percent of all emissions. A study conducted by MIT in 2013 found that a typical pair of running shoes generates approximately 13.6 kilograms of CO₂ emissions.”
Using the quote from Earth.org and the MIT research, Nike will erase their progression towards being a more sustainable company. If each sneaker is 13.6 kg of carbon emissions and mining an NFT is 48 kg, Nike just tripled its carbon emissions. What’s worse is that when Nike adopts a strategy, other sneaker companies follow. This is compounded by Nike’s ability to generate hype beyond what RTFKT has done for itself. Nike will be building an entire digital economy around NFTs because that’s just what Nike does. I’m not in any way a sustainability expert. I’m learning to be more responsible. I welcome the input of anyone more adept at explaining this. In my eyes, I would hope that other brands don’t follow suit. I hope that Nike helps to speed up the process of NFTs moving to a Proof of Stake blockchain (read the Earth.org article) if they are going to ride this wave. To be honest, from what I’ve gathered, maybe this time Nike Just Doesn’t Do It.
Note: I realize it’s too late for Nike not to do it. The brand will have to recoup their investment. I hope that they immediately develop an addition to what Noel Kinder has stated is the Swoosh’s goal.
