Amid the automotive industry’s shift towards sustainability and synthetic materials, a trade group called One 4 Leather is advocating for the continued use of real leather upholstery in vehicles. One 4 Leather contends that leather made from cow hides has a lower carbon footprint compared to synthetic alternatives. The group argues that utilizing hides from cattle, already reared for meat and milk production, constitutes upcycling, as it repurposes material that would otherwise go to waste.
One of the key assumptions underlying this argument is the continuation of cattle farming at its current scale. While acknowledging that cattle rearing contributes to 6% of global greenhouse gas emissions, One 4 Leather downplays the impact of one of the main emissions from the industry—methane, characterizing it as a “short-lived gas.” The group includes Bridge of Weir, a leather supplier to luxury automakers like Lucid, and highlights the durability of real leather, claiming it is more likely to last the lifetime of a car, requiring less cleaning and reducing potential environmental contamination from cleaning products.
However, the leather industry itself faces environmental challenges. Cattle farming demands substantial resources, including feed, pastureland, and fossil fuels. Animal rights group PETA points out the environmental hazards associated with leather, citing the significant amounts of resources required for raising cattle and the potential environmental impact of factory farm excrement and tanning industry chemicals.
Automakers have been responding to sustainability concerns by shifting away from traditional leather. Tesla, under pressure from fans, introduced synthetic alternatives years ago. More recently, Volvo has announced plans to eliminate leather from all its electric vehicles by 2030, while Kia aims to phase out leather at an unspecified future point.
The debate over the carbon footprint of leather versus synthetic materials requires further analysis, but the leather industry’s argument emphasizes the potential for reducing global carbon emissions by consuming fewer beef and dairy products. As automakers navigate the sustainability landscape, the broader implications of material choices extend beyond the automotive sector, raising questions about resource usage, environmental impact, and potential alternative uses for by-products from industries such as cattle farming.