Adverts for Air France, Lufthansa and Etihad banned by ASA for misleading environmental claims

Adverts for Air France, Lufthansa and Etihad have been banned, by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), for misleading consumers about the airlines’ environmental impact. Air France’s ad said it was “committed to protecting the environment” and Lufthansa urged passengers to “fly more sustainably”. Etihad’s ad used the words “environmental advocacy”.  The ASA said the ads did not show the impact airlines have on climate change.   Lufthansa and Etihad removed the ads. The ASA said Air France did not provide a “substantive response” to its investigations, and that by claiming Air France enabled people to “travel better and sustainably”, customers would think the airline offered a sustainable and environmentally friendly way to travel by air, which was not true.  Lufthansa told the BBC it aimed to be carbon neutral by 2050. It said it had taken the decision to remove “fly more sustainably” from future ads.  The ASA had picked up the adverts using an artificial intelligence (AI) system, which uses the technology to search for possible rule breakers. This has been just the latest in a string of upheld ASA decisions over greenwashing.
.

 

Airline adverts banned over ‘greenwashing’ claims

By Sam Gruet, Business reporter, BBC News

6.12.2023

Adverts for Air France, Lufthansa and Etihad have been banned for misleading consumers about the airlines’ environmental impact.

Air France’s ad said it was “committed to protecting the environment” and Lufthansa urged passengers to “fly more sustainably”. Etihad’s ad used the words “environmental advocacy”.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said the ads did not show the impact airlines have on climate change.

Lufthansa and Etihad removed the ads.

The ASA said Air France did not provide a “substantive response” to its investigations. It did not respond to the BBC’s request to comment.

The advertising watchdog said by claiming Air France enabled people to “travel better and sustainably”, customers would think the airline offered a sustainable and environmentally friendly way to travel by air, which was not true.

The ASA investigates adverts by companies it suspects of overstating their environmental friendliness, known as “corporate greenwashing”.

Advertising regulator to target greenwashing ads

Lufthansa said the words “fly more sustainably” were a reference to its “Green Fares” option for passengers on European flights. It said this used some sustainable aviation fuel and made a contribution to climate protection projects.

Lufthansa told the BBC it aimed to be carbon neutral by 2050. It said it had taken the decision to remove “fly more sustainably” from future ads.

Etihad Airways said it had immediately removed all references to “environmental advocacy” from its paid-for Google search ads, after receiving the complaint. It told the BBC sustainability was a “key priority”.

The advertising watchdog said it had picked up the adverts using an artificial intelligence (AI) system, which uses the technology to search for possible rule breakers.

Wednesday’s

ruling is not the first time Lufthansa has been pulled up by the ASA for greenwashing.

In March, the airline’s Make Change Fly campaign was found to have misled consumers into thinking the airline had already taken steps to make sure the environmental impact of its business was not harmful.

Lufthansa responded that the purpose of the ad was to address the need to reduce the impact of flying on the environment and make consumers aware, but the ASA upheld the decision. It said that air travel produced high levels of both CO2 and non-CO2 emissions, which were making a substantial contribution to climate change, a statement it repeated on Wednesday in its latest ruling.

Wednesday’s decision is the latest in a string of upheld decisions by the advertising watchdog over greenwashing. Since 2021, a slew of firms including PersilHSBC and Shell, drinks companies Innocent and Oatly – and even two funeral providers Golden Leaves and JC Atkinson & Son – have had adverts banned.

Companies are receiving greater scrutiny than ever to lower carbon emissions, with airlines under particular pressure to reduce their footprint.

In November, the first transatlantic flight by a large passenger plane powered only by so-called sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) flew from London to New York.

It was seen as a demonstration that a greener way of flying is possible. But SAF accounts for less than 0.1% of the aviation fuel consumed around the world and there are currently no dedicated commercial plants in the UK.

The UK government plans to require 10% of aviation fuel to be SAF by 2030.

Correction: This article has been updated after an earlier version suggested Emirates airlines was affected by the ASA ruling.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67625200

.


See earlier:

Climate charity Possible and law firm Leigh Day have made formal complaints to Virgin Atlantic and BA, over false sustainability claims

Virgin Atlantic and British Airways are facing formal complaints over their sustainable flight claims, after being accused of misleading potential customers about the environmental credentials of aviation and so-called “sustainable aviation fuels” SAF. Virgin Atlantic flew a plane, as a commercial PR stunt, powered by allegedly low carbon fuel, consisting largely of “used” cooking oil. This was partly funded by the UK government. Now the climate charity Possible and the law firm Leigh Day have filed formal complaints against the airlines, over their claims about reducing emissions from flights by use of SAF in future. There cannot ever be enough genuinely low carbon fuels, that do not cause other environmental harms, for more than a few flights. The airlines are misleading consumers over their claims on reducing carbon emissions from flights, as lay-people do not have the expertise to discern the limits of decarbonisation technology. There are unsupported claims that some SAF can give up to 70% carbon savings. But when burned in a jet engine, SAF produces almost the same CO2 emissions as kerosene, which then stays in the atmosphere. It also produces contrails and other non-CO2 effects.

Click here to view full story…

Dutch legal action against KLM misleading adverts

In April 2022, the Dutch advertising watchdog (like the UK’s ASA) ruled that a KLM promotion telling customers they could fly carbon-emission free was misleading.  Then in July 2022 the Dutch environmental group “Go Fossil Free” filed a lawsuit against KLM at the court in Amsterdam. Their aim is to end KLM’s misleading advertisements about ‘sustainable flying’. KLM’s marketing leads people to believe that that flying won’t worsen the climate emergency. But carbon offsets, biofuels and promises of future technologies are false solutions – there’s no such thing as sustainable flying.  The group have a petition that people are invited to sign.  KLM is planning to expand its business with more flights – like all airlines worldwide – while aggressively lobbying against climate action. But the truth is that the number of flights overall have to be reduced. The campaigners believe it is time for KLM to tell the truth about their fossil-fueled product: flying is one of the fastest ways to heat up the planet. They want KLM to stop misleading claims that carbon offsetting and alternative fuels can make flying sustainable.  It was hoped there would be a ruling in 2023.

Click here to view full story…

.

.

.