‘We Stole Lululemon’s Designs and Made Them Less Terrible for the Environment’

‘We Stole Lululemon’s Designs and Made Them Less Terrible for the Environment’

Fast Company  Retail
Fast Company  RetailApr 13, 2026

Companies Mentioned

Why It Matters

The stunt puts corporate climate commitments under public scrutiny, urging a major apparel player to fast‑track decarbonization, which could reshape supply‑chain standards across the fashion industry.

Key Takeaways

  • Action Speaks Louder launched “Mumumelon” to expose Lululemon’s carbon footprint
  • Lululemon’s 2024 report shows it’s off track for 25% renewable electricity
  • Most Lululemon emissions come from fossil‑fuel‑powered process heat
  • Campaign sells replica gear to push brand toward electrified heat pumps

Pulse Analysis

Fashion’s sustainability narrative has long been dominated by glossy pledges, but concrete action remains uneven. Lululemon, a $11 billion‑strong athleisure leader, has publicly committed to sourcing 25 % of its electricity from renewable sources by fiscal year 2025. Yet recent nonprofit monitoring shows the brand is off‑track, and the bulk of its carbon footprint stems from process heat generated by coal‑fired boilers. This gap between ambition and execution creates fertile ground for activist groups to intervene, especially as consumers increasingly demand transparent, climate‑positive products.

Enter “Mumumelon,” a guerrilla campaign by Action Speaks Louder that set up a mock London storefront selling identical Lululemon staples manufactured with renewable power and low‑emission processes. By mirroring the design language of the original apparel, the stunt forces a direct comparison: identical style, greener production. The campaign underscores that the technology to electrify heat—such as heat pumps and electric boilers—already exists, but scaling it across the fashion supply chain has been sluggish. Highlighting the emissions data, the group points out that process heat, not electricity, accounts for the majority of Lululemon’s carbon output, a nuance often missed in broader sustainability reporting.

The broader implication is a potential shift in how apparel brands address climate risk. If high‑visibility actions like Mumumelon gain traction among influencers and shoppers, they could accelerate investor pressure and regulatory attention on supply‑chain decarbonization. Brands may be compelled to invest in electrified manufacturing infrastructure sooner rather than later, turning sustainability from a marketing tagline into an operational imperative. For the industry, the campaign serves as a reminder that credible climate leadership requires measurable progress on hard‑to‑abate emissions, not just headline‑friendly renewable electricity targets.

‘We stole Lululemon’s designs and made them less terrible for the environment’

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Loading comments...