Airlines Clash with the EU over Greenwashing Claims

Aviation Fuel/Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF)Belgium Business News/Analysis European Union (EU)Germany Ireland Marketing/Market Forces and Sales Netherlands Opinions Policy Sustainability

May 09, 2024

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Tommaso Lecca (Politico) The Commission has given 20 airlines a 30-day ultimatum to correct their claims. Here’s why. -- ... Twenty airlines now under investigation by the Commission for alleged greenwashing; Brussels launched the action on April 30, following a warning issued by the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) in June. Airlines have 30 days to correct any misleading claims.

The clash has its roots in the climate policy that the EU is forcing on the aviation sector.

Airplanes account for about 2.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, and in a bid to cut that Brussels last year agreed to mandate that the sector gradually transition to sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs) — renewable or waste-derived fuels that can be used in existing engines but have a lower carbon footprint.

By 2025, 2 percent of the fuel powering aircraft in the EU has to be green, rising to 5 percent in 2030, and then increasing every five years to 70 percent in 2050. Airplanes currently use only a tiny amount of SAF, which is much more expensive than kerosene.

Airlines are keen to tout what green progress they’re making.

Lufthansa’s “Green Fares” promises consumers — simply by “selecting one of the Economy Green and Business Green fares” — to slash 20 percent of individual flight-related CO2 emissions through the use of SAFs and to offset the remaining emissions “to an equivalent extent by contributing to high-quality climate protection projects” — a reference to offset credits.

KLM told consumers that they could reduce their carbon footprint thanks to SAF and a “reforestation program.” The Air France-KLM group also confirmed that its airlines Air France, KLM and Transavia Netherlands had received the Commission’s notice for alleged greenwashing.

Ryanair, which on Tuesday confirmed it’s also facing EU scrutiny, said it is “one of the greenest and cleanest airlines in Europe, which is statistically true” because the airline flies with high load factors and uses environmentally efficient aircraft, Ryanair Group CEO Michael O’Leary told a press conference at Brussels Airport.

Ryanair includes a “Carbon Calculator” and an additional paid service that supposedly allows passengers to “compensate your estimated CO2 emissions.”

...

Lufthansa confirmed that its airlines: Lufthansa, Brussels Airlines, Swiss, Austrian Airlines, Air Dolomiti and Eurowings, had received the EU complaint, but also continued to insist that flying can be compatible with climate policies.

“Already by 2030, the Lufthansa Group wants to halve its net CO2 emissions compared to 2019 through reduction and compensation measures,” a plan that was “validated by the independent Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) in August 2022,” the airline group said in a statement.

Lufthansa noted that it is also focusing on “accelerated fleet modernization, the continuous optimization of flight operations, [and] the use of Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF).”

...

BEUC looked at Ryanair’s website and noted that when a consumer clicks on “more info,” the following disclaimer appears: “While offering a contribution towards emissions compensation will not make the flight itself ‘greener,’ our carbon calculator enables you to participate in a number of great environmental projects.”

The consumer organization called this disclaimer “unclear” and “highly ambiguous” because it includes words like “contribution towards” which “could refer to anything from 1 percent to 99 percent” of the emissions considered.

KLM’s fine print is also more nuanced.

Planting trees, of course, “doesn’t impact the direct emissions of the flight itself,” the Dutch airline admitted in its claim, “but your contribution will help restore forests that absorb CO2.” READ MORE

Related articles

European Commission and national consumer authorities accuse 20 airlines of greenwashing (GreenAir)

Excerpt from GreenAir: The Commission and CPC authorities say they have identified six types of what they consider are misleading practices among the airlines involved:

Creating the false impression that CO2 emissions of a flight can be reduced or fully counterbalanced by paying an additional fee to finance climate projects with less certain environmental impact or the use of alternative aviation fuels;
Using the term ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ without clearly justifying the environmental impact;
Using the terms ‘green’, ‘sustainable’ or ‘responsible’ in an absolute way or use other implicit green claims that can mislead consumers on the environmental impact of the “highly polluting” aviation industry;
Claiming that the airline is moving towards net zero greenhouse gas emissions 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 information regarding the elements used for the calculation; and
Presenting consumers with a comparison of flights as regards their CO2 emissions without providing sufficient and accurate information on the elements of the comparison.

“This action aims at aligning the commercial practices of all companies in the air travel sector with EU consumer legislation, by attaining the required level of substantiation and communication of voluntary environmental claims,” say the consumer authorities, which coordinate their investigation and enforcement actions with the Commission. Under the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation, they can take action to address cross-border issues at EU level.

Consumer protection against misleading green claims can also be found in the Directive on empowering consumers for the green transition, which the Commission says explicitly bans claims, based on the offsetting of GHG emissions, that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment in terms of GHG emissions, as well as claims based on future environmental performance.

...

Responding to the action, a statement by Airlines for Europe (A4E) said that although proposed EU legislation on green claims aimed to establish a clear legal framework for sustainability communications across all sectors, the current regulations varied significantly between countries and were still evolving.

“We recognise the importance of clear, transparent information about sustainability and our efforts towards achieving net zero carbon emissions. This clarity benefits consumers, regulators, fuel suppliers, NGOs and other key stakeholders involved in our transition,” it said. “A4E is engaged in ongoing discussions fostered by EU bodies to develop a common methodology for airlines to effectively communicate our sustainability efforts and progress.”

The trade body said it had already outlined an independently-produced roadmap to achieving net zero, with many airlines’ interim targets verified by SBTi. It added that it was, however, “particularly concerned” over the complaint concerning sustainable aviation fuels and the requirement for a clear justification of their environmental impact. “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.”

The Commission has not named the 20 airlines it has written to, although BEUC listed 17 in its submission: Air Baltic, Air Dolomiti, Air France, Austrian, Brussels Airlines, Eurowings, Finnair, KLM, Lufthansa, Norwegian, Ryanair, SAS, SWISS, TAP, Volotea, Vueling and Wizz Air.

Following a greenwashing lawsuit brought by German environmental group Deutsche Umwelthilfe in March, the Cologne Regional Court found against Eurowings on claims that passengers could neutralise their flight emissions through paying a small sum towards forestry protection and cookstove projects. That same month, a group of environmental NGOs similarly won a lawsuit against KLM in a Dutch court after alleging the airline’s sustainability marketing breached the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. READ MORE