Ryanair has said to be the “lowest carbon emissions of any major airline”. In 2011. However, they claimed to do so in 2019 as well. Cheeky, isn’t it? The title was earned in 2011 based on CO2 emissions per passenger per kilometre flown, because it has the youngest fleet, highest proportion of seats filled on flights and newest, most fuel-efficient engines.
The airline company was accused of greenwashing after running the low-emissions ad campaign after five months that they were assigned for being the first non-coal company the be named in the EU top carbon emitters list. While the world grapples with global environmental change, an equally threatening disease in the form of an ‘infodemic’ has been quietly unfolding at an accelerated speed across the globe. Must we accept the fact that multinational companies sacrifice mother earth to become even more profitable than before? Shouldn’t they be our role model in fighting environmental issues?
The answer? No, we should not accept misinformation in order to earn more money.
Average European citizens carbon footprint was 7.0 tons of CO2 per year in 2018. It is not a sustainable amount of emission to win battle against climate change and everyone knows it. Regardless of the fact that airlines’ soaring pollution, the aviation sector is not paying any tax on its fuel and moreover have no constraint on starting newer and cleaner fuels like synthetic kerosene. Surprisingly, Ryanair increase Co2 emissions by half in five years. This resulting in the top 10 EU emitters.
Nowadays greenwashing is an uprising phenomenon because of awareness of climate change. Companies has multiple ways to distort information about total pollution of their products and services. And just because a business supports a brand image as environmentally friendly does not mean they have a true interest in caring for the environment.
You might say the motivation of a company doesn’t matter as long as their actions are productive. Is it permissible if businesses do the right thing for the wrong reason? Or what if corporations only occur to do what’s right? Then people are being misled into acting unsustainable.
Brand marketing tactis to avoid from Futerra's 2015 Selling Sustainability Report:
Fluffy language: Words or terms with no clear meaning (e.g., "eco-friendly")
Green products vs. dirty company: For example, efficient light bulbs made in a factory that pollutes rivers
Suggestive pictures: Images that give an (unjustified) green impression (e.g., flowers blooming from exhaust pipes)
Irrelevant claims: Emphasis on one tiny green attribute when everything else is anti-green
"Best-in-class" boasts: Declaration that you are slightly greener than the rest, even if the rest are pretty terrible
Designations that are just not credible: For instance, the "greening" of a dangerous product to make it seem safe ("eco-friendly" cigarettes, anyone?)
Gobbledygook: Jargon and information that only a scientist could check or understand
Imaginary friends: A label that looks like a third-party endorsement … except it's made up
No proof: A claim that could be right but has no evidence
Outright lies: Totally fabricated claims or data
Luckily, small and large business doesn’t use greenwashing very often. Part of the solution are advertising standard authorities. A group that verifies the validity of a business’ sustainability claims. Another answer on the problem is to be a criticism of greenwashing yourself. A culture of skepticisms can prompt companies to take active measures to decrease their carbon footprints.
Bibliography
Sweney, M. (2020, 02 05). Ryanair accused of greenwash over carbon emissions claim.
Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/feb/05/ryanair-accused-of-greenwash-over-carbon-emissions-claim
(2015). Selling Sustainability. the Sustainable Lifestyles Frontier Group.
Retrieved from https://www.wearefuterra.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/FuterraBSR_SellingSustainability2015.pdf
Comments