On 30 April, the European Commission officially notified 20 airlines that they had been found to make unsupported or ambiguous green claims, in other words, greenwash, giving them 30 days to either prove the claims are based on scientific evidence or present a plan to redress the issues.
1. Background
In June 2023, the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) filed a complaint with the European Consumer Protection Cooperation network (CPC) about 17 airlines making misleading statements about their sustainability. The airlines flagged last year were Air Baltic, Air Dolomiti, Air France, Austrian, Brussels Airlines, Eurowings, Finnair, KLM, Lufthansa, Norwegian, Ryanair, SAS, SWISS, TAP, Volotea, Vueling and Wizz Air.
At the time, BEUC condemned the companies for making factually incorrect claims about paying extra for credits that can “offset”, “neutralise” or “compensate” the CO2 emissions of a flight, as well as misleadingly charging customers more for the development of SAF. Moreover, BEUC called the airlines deceptive for suggesting that flying can be “sustainable”, “responsible” or “green”.
2. 3 more airlines
Following up in that complaint, the European Commission has found that the greenwashing accusations are grounded and has added 3 more, yet undisclosed airlines, to the list. The investigation focused on claims made by airlines that the CO2 emissions caused by a flight could be offset by climate projects or through the use of sustainable fuels, to which the consumers could contribute by paying additional fees.
The authorities are concerned that the identified practices can be considered as misleading actions/omissions, prohibited under Articles 5, 6 and 7 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. Among identified practices are:
- creating the incorrect impression that paying an additional fee to finance climate projects with less environmental impact or to support the use of alternative aviation fuels can reduce or fully counterbalance the CO2 emissions;
- using the term “sustainable aviation fuels” (SAF) without clearly justifying the environmental impact of such fuels;
- using the terms “green”, “sustainable” or “responsible” in an absolute way or use other implicit green claims;
- claiming that the airline is moving towards net-zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) or any future environmental performance, without clear and verifiable commitments, targets and an independent monitoring system;
- presenting consumers with a “calculator” for the CO2 emissions of a specific flight, without providing sufficient scientific proof on whether such calculation is reliable and without the information on the elements used for such calculation;
- presenting consumers with a comparison of flights regarding their CO2 emissions, without providing sufficient and accurate information on the elements the comparison is based on.
The European Commission and CPC authorities invited the companies to provide a response within 30 days, outlining their proposed measures to address the concerns arising from their environmental marketing claims under EU consumer law. After receiving replies from the companies, the European Commission will organise meetings with the CPC network and the airlines, to discuss the solutions proposed by the companies. Furthermore, the Commission will monitor the implementation of the agreed-upon changes. If the airlines involved do not take the necessary steps to solve concerns raised in the letter, CPC authorities can decide to take further enforcement actions, including sanctions.
3. Airlines and SAF
While recognising the “importance of clear, transparent information about sustainability” and that “the proposed EU legislation on green claims aims to establish a clear legal framework for sustainability communications across all sectors”, Airlines for Europe (A4E), the Europe’s largest airline association, noted that “the current regulations vary significantly between countries and are still evolving”.
“We are particularly concerned about the remarks on Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) and the requirement for a clear justification of their environmental impact”, A4E added. “The EU has implemented an ambitious SAF mandate, supported and endorsed by the European Commission, and the science supports that this is a more sustainable alternative to regular jet fuel.”
In April 2023, the EU approved the world’s largest SAF mandate. require aviation fuel suppliers to supply a minimum share of SAF at EU airports, starting at 2% of overall fuel supplied by 2025, rising to 6% by 2030 and reaching 70% by 2050. The blending mandate covers biofuels, recycled carbon fuels and synthetic aviation fuels (e-fuels) in line with the Renewable Energy Directive, but excludes food and feed crops, supporting sustainability objectives.
The aviation industry welcomed the mandate and airlines have repeatedly acknowledged the importance of SAF in reaching climate goals, at least in the short and medium term. On the other hand, they are also flagging that the production of SAF is not supported enough to meet demand.
4. Offsets
While it could be debated that airlines are required to use minimum amounts of SAF, but do not receive enough support in their transition, offsets have long been regarded as misleading and a favoured greenwashing practice. In a front-page lead in 2020, the Daily Telegraph warned that “Consumers trying to offset their emissions risk being deceived in a “Wild West” unregulated carbon market”, showing that consumers resist buying them. International non-governmental organisations like Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund-UK have also criticised carbon offset projects, arguing that these schemes encourage a culture of climate pollution and are often misleading.
A 2021 paper published by the University of Queensland and University of Surrey studied 37 airlines’ communications on carbon offsets and concluded that more than 44% of airlines’ green claims mislead consumers – with some airlines, such as Air Canada and Swiss Airlines, making as many as 100% of their claims misleading.
Another study published in October 2022 and commissioned by Carbon Market Watch revealed deep holes in the effectiveness of voluntary climate action taken by eight major European airlines. Misleading claims of “carbon neutral” flying, a dependence on poor quality carbon offsets and the low cost of a tonne of CO2 that customers can pay to offset are just a few of the problems highlighted in the report.
Even amid the industry, while groups like Lufthansa proudly present their “green fares” and offsetting schemes, United Airlines CEO, Scott Kirby, called the practiced a “fraud” in July 2023. “We believe carbon offsets simply don’t go far enough to address the emissions caused by our operations”, he said, adding that “most of the eco-initiatives used by airlines “are either forests that were never going to be cut down or trees that were going to be planted anyway”.