Companies relying on carbon offsets to make customers feel less guilty about unsustainable habits are in for a wake-up call.
Lawmakers in the European Parliament on Thursday agreed to push for a ban on businesses saying their products are carbon neutral thanks to offsetting schemes — like planting trees to compensate for CO2 emissions — amid concerns that the programs are inefficient and lack transparency.
The vote cements the Parliament’s position as it heads into negotiations with EU countries on the proposed legislation, which was put forward by the European Commission last year in a bid to rein in greenwashing.
Although it is still non-binding, the Parliament’s position could spell trouble for a host of businesses that employ offsetting schemes to green their image.
Airlines famously make use of them to help massage consumers’ green consciences: One Ryanair flight from Brussels to Liverpool, for example, offers passengers the chance to “compensate your estimated share of CO2 emissions for this flight” for the convenient price of 96 cents.
Even the organizers of the 2024 Paris Olympic Games have been subject to criticism from campaigners for claiming to be “climate positive” by “offsetting even more CO2 emissions than those we are going to emit.”
Parliament’s final text also suggests banning claims such as “environmentally friendly,” “natural,” “biodegradable,” “climate neutral” or “eco” if they are not substantiated or accompanied by detailed evidence or information.
Critics say banning these types of claims creates the risk that companies won’t invest in sustainable activities if they can’t boast about doing so.
But campaigners say businesses are using them to avoid taking painful but necessary steps to lower their carbon footprint.
“It’s one thing to be able to promote the good that you’re doing — it’s another to lie to the consumer,” said Margaux Le Gallou of the Environmental Coalition on Standards (ECOS).
A Guardian investigation earlier this year also revealed that more than 90 percent of the forest carbon offsets approved by the world’s leading certifier, Verra, were “worthless” and did not represent real carbon reductions. Verra disagreed with that conclusion.
The investigation, and other NGO reports, have raised doubts about the value of the schemes.
Last year, environmentalists in the Netherlands sued KLM over an advertising campaign they said amounted to greenwashing. The airline encouraged passengers to contribute to a “sustainable future” for aviation by paying toward reforestation projects or for greener plane fuels.
“These offset promotions do not limit the damage the airline industry causes to the climate, and marketing them risks undermining the urgent action needed to minimise climate catastrophe,” one of the groups supporting the action, Client Earth, said at the time.
There’s also a question around how popular these schemes are with consumers. According to Ryanair chief Michael O’Leary, only around 1 percent of his passengers pay into the voluntary offsetting scheme that his airline offers.
The proposed ban is likely to be one of the more contentious issues in negotiations between the Parliament and the Council over the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition file, which are slated to start in the coming weeks.
In its position, the Council of the EU, representing the 27 EU countries, isn’t pushing to completely ban the practice but rather wants these claims to be backed “by clear, objective, publicly accessible and verifiable commitments and targets.”
