Is it time to talk about the environmental impact of mountain biking?

Mountain bikers, and cyclists in general, often like to think of ourselves as somewhat green, or at least environmentally aware. Part of the reason many of us ride in the first place is some sense of connection to nature or enjoyment derived from being outdoors, whether that’s deep in the woods or simply riding a bike outside. But how green is cycling, really? Both on the consumer side and the producer side, questions are slowly starting to be asked about the hidden, unacknowledged, or uninterrogated environmental impact of the cycling industry. A recent announcement by prominent snowboarding company, Burton, has brought the outdoor industry’s impact on the environment back into question and expanded the scope they, as a company, are willing to consider. With Burton’s announcement, detailed below, is it time to start looking closer at the impact mountain biking industry has? Or could it be time to start looking at it differently?

Burton’s not the only, or first outdoor-recreation company to consider environmental impact of its products. Patagonia has made a name for itself as an outdoor industry leader in looking at its own environmental impact and as a vocal environmental advocate. They’re currently engaged in a legal battle south of the border over the fate of Bears Ears National Monument in Utah. Salomon’s 2016 film, Guilt Trip looked at the environmental cost of a ski expedition to Greenland, a use-oriented focus outside the scope of Burton’s initiative. Surfing seems further along in addressing the materials used to make boards and wetsuits. In mountain biking, Pole Bicycles made headlines most recently when it announced it was abandoning its expansion into carbon production partially for environmental reasons. Trek, Specialized, Santa Cruz, Commencal and Sick! Bike Co. have all engaged with environmental aspects of bike production at some point, to varying degrees. Curiously, for a user group that claims close ties to the environment, one reason that comes up for the lack of such initiatives is the lack of consumer interest. Far from absolving companies, this indicates that both consumers and producers could be more engaged with the environmental cost of cycling.

Full details of Burton’s 2020 initiative are included in their announcement. Highlights relevant to the mountain bike industry from Burton’s list, which ranges from raw materials to recycling and the CO2 footprint of Burton global headquarters include:

• Packaging will be 100% recyclable or compostable (containing 80% recycled content)
• Softgoods will use 100% bluesign®-approved materials, 100% sustainable cotton, 50% recycled polyester, and will use only 100% PFC-free durable water repellency.
• Use zero biocides, and less (and cleaner) water in the manufacturing of softgoods
• 100% of Tier I (finished good) suppliers will meet Fair Labor Association standards and achieve silver or higher internal standards on sustainability, quality, performance, and delivery.
• 100% of Tier II (raw material) suppliers will be known and tracked. The top 80% of volume suppliers will meet sustainability and quality standards.
• 40% of all warranty claims will be repaired.
• An end-of-life program will be established at retail so everything is diverted from landfill.
• The CO2 footprint at global headquarters will be reduced by 20%.
• 75% of waste from landfill at global headquarters will be diverted.

While snow sports and cycling are obviously different, a number of these objectives, from packaging to clothing, corporate CO2 footprint and clearly end of life material processing of high tech carbon and materials, could either apply directly to cycling, or be useful models for cycling. Going into 2018 Canadian Cycling Magazine will be looking at different ways cyclists have an environmental impact, and ways for riders and companies to engage with that impact. From basic steps, like carpooling when you drive to ride, to more comprehensive, large scale concerns like raw materials, end-of-life recycling, and the environmental impact of the production process using Burton’s corporate initiative as a starting point. If there’s anything you think needs attention, whether that is a positive initiative already underway or something you think is being overlooked, we’d like to hear about it. Let us know in the comments below.